User talk:Frank/Archive 4 - Knowledge (XXG)

319:

Knowledge (XXG) itself, is really not good at all. Instead of clarifying, you went on the offensive and let the original interpretations stand via your offensive attitude. Even in your statement above, merely emphasizing you does not take away that you think that someone expressing their dislike to something is inappropriate. That is really, really troubling. That is 100% the problem with here and the mindset of so many admin that are rightfully desysopped. The mere hint that you would think that disliking blocking in any way could be wrong is enough to sound some of the loudest alarms. I would oppose you in every possible away, because people who respond in such a manner are only defending the worse possible behavior. -No- admin should like blocking. -No- admin should like deleting. Anything to the contrary is the basis for abuse. The fact that you can't understand is utterly disturbing. We can forget about how disrespectful you are to modesty, or how you don't like people mentioning reality. This, this core value, is something that is enough to be completely troubling. It is responses like yours that makes me feel disgusted. You aren't involved with content that often nor do you slave at adding to the encyclopedia. That means that you have time to be out there in areas where you can delete and where you can block, and I strongly feel that you lack the appropriate attitude for that. I feel sorry for anyone who is ever on the wrong end, because they will just end up being chased out, having good work destroyed, and treated like crap because you seem to not understand that blocking and deleting are not a good thing, that they are not something to be happy about, and that they should be done only in a regretful manner. Editors here are human. They create pages. They deserve to be respected, not gleed over while being destroyed. I'm not going to stick around to see your response. Your attitude in terms of blocking and deleting completely disgusts me.

4402:"It should be noted that User:Neutralhomer is an unapologetic cheerleader for ASE, given this sarcastic comment shortly after the initial block. I have no problem with liking and supporting a contributor; what I disapproved of in that comment was that either there was no attempt to look at the facts of the matter, or the facts were ignored. To his credit, NH did actually look a bit later and allowed as how he must agree with the community on this one. Now he's back on the other side of the fence. (Sorry if this seems like I'm commenting on the contributor rather than the content; I'm merely pointing out that this is a highly-involved user and providing some context.) Also, it should be revealed that we subsequently discovered a content disagreement we have, but again - I'm confining this to ASE, nothing more. I just think that if it is agreed that mentoring is the right way to go, perhaps a better choice would be someone other than a cheerleader." 2906:

changes like this on a talk page to develop consensus before a major change is done. (You need to do more than discuss things with administrators, you need to discuss them with your colleagues here). Thirdly, I have explicitly said here and elsewhere that your communication has been lacking in collegial give-and-take, lacking in an indication that you comprehend the points of your fellow editors and lacking in direct response to them, and I'd like you to acknowledge that. For example, you offer me your links, which of course I read and responded to, in noting the name of the Admin and in linking you to the record of my involvement. You have not indicated that you read, and you have not acknowledged the substance of, the links I have posted for you.

3001:(outdent)I'm a tad astonished by the reaction! For the record, I did not assume that there was consensus to unprotect on the article talk page. I assumed that Frank wanted to see if unprotecting would work (i.e., the level of vandalism would be low) and was sure that he would monitor the article (as I would as well) to reinstate protection if necessary. In general, articles, including BLPs are not automatically semi-protected unless there is a long history of a 'vandalism/blp violation - protection - unprotection' cycle, which is not the case with this article. We value our IP editors and must make every reasonable attempt to allow them to edit. -- 3827:. I'd be curious to know how many people are even aware that such a violation is possible and that said template exists. I've seen many an article split in my 3+ years here and have never seen anyone question a "violation of GFDL" in this manner nor have I ever seen the template used. I may be paranoid but this just seems like now nit-picking towards my every move.. so please help to understand this supposed kind of violation. I just seems to be that GFDL attribution is obvious in the edit history when an article is split. 3723:, which closed 79/3/6, so I'm now another proud bearer of the mop-and-bucket - hopefully I'll wield them with success! I'd also like to say that I found the process to be welcoming, friendly and supportive, with the support comments encouraging and the oppose and neutral comments offering good feedback, so I had a very positive experience, despite the fact that, from all the comments and discussions, I was expecting something much more negative - thanks for helping to make it a worthwile experience! 3873:

almost as willing to bite. For you, as with everyone, I would recommend focusing on the content. If someone has alerted you to something new, look it up, decide if it's something you want to learn about sufficiently to avoid a problem in the future, and act accordingly. Practically speaking (and not a direction from me, but just generic advice I'd give anyone): if you want to split articles, learn what GFDL has to say on the matter. Otherwise, consult with someone else when that situation comes up.

2237: 4374:

regarding Ryulong, I stand by them. His actions have been condemned by the Knowledge (XXG) community, and he did bully me, removing my edits, responding to my requests for clarification with dismissive comments such as "drop it" and then giving me instructions to work on articles rather than raise my concerns. He didn't flush my head down the toilet, but I consider what he did bullying. He was very rude to me and didn't like it when I called him on it.

443: 31: 117:. My standing up for Mattisse and being willing to recognize that they were a user who, although problematic in some regards, is not a horrible person and tried to work with them towards improvement. Even though many people, including many well known admin around here, praised my efforts, that is something that an admin shouldn't do? Other people have brought your statement to me out of concern. I would like to know the answer also. 1100: 108:

the idea of people showing off and claiming things as their own as if it is some kind of award. Are admin supposed to show off pages and articles as if they are awards? In question three, I state that I wont badger opposes in the RfA oppose section as what happens in many RfAs in the past and caused a lot of concern on the RfA talk page. Are admin supposed to badger opposers even if they have made it clear in

3134:. I am truly honored by the trust that the community has placed in me. Whether you supported me, opposed me, or if you only posted questions or commented om my RfA, I thank you for your input and I will be looking at the reasons that people opposed me so I can improve in those areas :). If you ever need anything please feel free to ask me and I would be happy to help you :). All the Best, 4432:, as you noted. I don't question your motives; I was pointing out that you are what is known as an "involved party" - same as I am. Others reading the conversation might not have known that. I mentioned that we had crossed paths later, in the interest of full disclosure. I meant no offense; I'm a drama-free editor. But I did think it was important to keep things straight; there's been a 253:"There's no doubt about it: users must be blocked and pages must be deleted, whether we like it or not." Stating this, combined with me stating I do not like it, implies that you cannot express that you do not like it in order to deserve it. As such, there are only two possibilities - being a silent hypocrite or being happy about it. Neither possibility is one that can be respected. 1332:

participants. One might as well as say that, if one believed Obama performed better than McCain in the presidential debates, that the consensus of the debate participants (Obama and McCain) was in favor of Obama's positions. I think that is a serious distortion of the meaning of consensus. Consensus is not about who has the better argument; it's about whether or not people agree.

514: 262:"Temperament is absolutely central to this question. There's a time, a place, and a manner for joking...and even on April Fools' Day, I find your answer to this question to be an indication of someone who just isn't suited for the tools on en.wikipedia." Because one tiny joke as a last question that -I- added is really awful. That is the only possible interpretation of this. 3714: 1003: 2360: 4272:. It is plainly unacceptable anywhere on Knowledge (XXG) to attack another editor, and it is unacceptable to be disruptive. If you perceive that more than one editor pointing this out to you is the equivalent of "ganging up on you", that is your right, but it does not change the fact that certain behaviors are unacceptable and may result in a block. 1887:

details. I had notes from the doc, including the spellings of the doctors' names. Obviously I made a spelling error with "profusion" instead of "perfusion". When I had clicked the link to "profusion", I realized it wasn't addressing the relevant point, but thought I'd research it today and/or hoped someone else would correct it, as they did.

470: 427: 113:

joke based on the constant throw away support saying "he won't delete the main page" and is marked as a joke. As being the only thing that is "silly" for April 1st, are admin not supposed to be so limiting in that way? Or just not have any sense of humor? In question six, I showed where I advocated for other users and performed actions like

1282: 2361:

http://www.takdin.co.il/searchgl/%D7%98%D7%91%D7%99%D7%A2%D7%AA%20%D7%90%D7%A6%D7%91%D7%A2%20%D7%9C%D7%AA%D7%9E%D7%95%D7%A0%D7%94:%20Corrigon%20%D7%9E%D7%A4%D7%AA%D7%97%D7%AA%20%D7%9E%D7%A0%D7%95%D7%A2%20%D7%97%D7%99%D7%A4%D7%95%D7%A9%20%D7%95%D7%99%D7%96%D7%95%D7%90%D7%9C%D7%99_h_hd_2L34sCpKsCLmnC30mD30sDZWuBcXqRMm0.html

4227:

the balance here? Why don't you expcet Ryulong to just let these slights drop? Why does he need you to step in, gang up on me, and start throwing your weight around? Have I said anything that is not untrue? Surely you have to admit that the Knowledge (XXG) community has passed judgment on his conduct, and condemned it.

1462:) without any explanation beyond a simple rollback. From what I've gleaned and been told in the past, rollbacks without further explanation are for blatant vandalism only; while I agree that harej's comment was uncalled for and in poor taste, I don't see how it's blatant vandalism. Nothing major, I was just curious. 3113: 146:"I don't really like this question. I never had, and I never will." - you're clearly aware this question is in every RfA. Whether you like it or not, people expect an answer, and your lead-in shows a disdain for the entire process, which I don't think would bode well for the project if you were an administrator. 194:

their feelings on blocking, nor do I find it comfortable that you think that saying you "dislike" something means that you shouldn't be allowed to block. Instead, it would seem that you suggest that you like to block people. There are 1,600 admin, and if they all liked to block this would be a scary place.

4457:

I guess being an "involved party" that probably limits me from being a mentor anyway, they are normally uninvolved parties. Oh well, that was worth a shot :) I do hope that ASE continues with his cleanup activities as he is doing. I gave a look in at his contribs and he seems to be helping in some

4192:

is one of the quickest routes to a block on this site. I'm assuming you understand that and won't need any further warnings. More to the point, however, is that continually asking a single editor a single question and harping on closed issues from an editor's past actions may not be an attack, but it

3531:

to have an article in the project, a wikilink is sufficient. If not, it's questionable whether they should be mentioned at all, but if they are, there's no reason to then add a description of them. A reference is enough. This is how it works elsewhere on Knowledge (XXG); I cannot fathom a reason that

1374:

Hi Frank, I would like to know your reason for deleting the Brothers of the Forum wikipage. Are you an authoritative figure in wikipedia or are you simply another user of it? Knowledge (XXG) is an encyclopedia that is open to the public to either add or edit. I strongly disagree with your actions and

659:

I don't think it is correct to say that because a site is not notable enough for its own article on Knowledge (XXG), that should mean that no external links to the site can exist either. If it gets out of hand and looks entirely promotional instead of informative, that would be a different story, but

230:

You are attributing thoughts to me that I neither stated nor implied. You are welcome to disagree with me, and of course you're welcome to your own interpretations, but you are drawing inferences that I have not implied at all. I have no idea about what RfC you're referring to; nor is it important. I

208:

The community finds it appropriate that everyone is treated with respect, that everyone is treated as if they are here to help, and that everyone is able to contribute. Regardless of what you state, the creator of that RfC, Casliber, an Arbitrator, supported my view there. I think I would side by his

193:

Mettle? I have had admin tools at Wikiversity for 6 months and was involved in Moulton's WMF wide ban. Obviously, if I would work ArbCom enforcement it would come up. But I find your comment in regards to that a tad off, as I have never seen you make any oppose to any RfA based on someone not stating

4172:

Before you start lecturing me, do you think that perhaps Ryulong's comments and accusations towards me damaged the community and detered my involvement? The community's recent judgement on Ryulong conduct seems pretty clear and yet, with his track record, you still seem to default to lecturing me on

2027:

did rather admonish me without substantiated rationale over my usage of 'rollback'; which I did not think was fair, particularly helpful or even handed. However, I have no wish to get involved in the ongoing arbitration process. Could I ask you to look at the recent Brian Hyland edits, based on my

1890:

I don't know if you saw the documentary, but a great deal of it involves her German doctors and their treatments, following her into treatment rooms and actually showing those treatments, from scans to the insertion of the laser needle through her ribcage and into her liver. It was harrowing stuff,

1886:

Hi Frank, most of your edits this morning at Fawcett's bio were great. I wanted to restore two things and thought it best to discuss it with you. First, I was wondering why you removed the details of the course of her German treatment in your final edit. I had referenced the documentary for these

757:

The name of the team was Black Hawks until 1986. We generally leave the article names to be the name of the team -at the time-. So the article stubs I've been creating prior to that time use Black Hawks, and Blackhawks after. Hope this helps. We also generally keep both names around, pointing to the

568:

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

197:

Yes, so saying that I don't feel like bragging about how great I am shows I shouldn't be an admin? Once again, it seems that you are promoting the very people who shouldn't be an admin over a corps of people who respect that this is an encyclopedia and not myspace. We are not here to collect awards,

156:

Temperament is absolutely central to this question. There's a time, a place, and a manner for joking...and even on April Fools' Day, I find your answer to this question to be an indication of someone who just isn't suited for the tools on en.wikipedia. Sarcasm just doesn't work in this medium; if we

4303:

which deals with vandalism, therefore suggesting that my edits were vandalism. When I refuted this, he just told me to drop it. Now, are you accusing me of personal attacks, if so, which ones? If you are, instead accusing me of being rude then we are back where we started. Why can he be rude to me,

4294:

I didn't say that he attacked me. You said to let any perceived slights drop, and I asked you why don't expect him to allow slights to drop. In other words he was rude to me and I am meant to ignore it, but when you perceive that I am being rude to him you step in and start talking about blocks. If

3860:

I'm the wrong person to ask, but I'll try. My understanding is that once something is submitted under a GFDL license (as Knowledge (XXG) is), it is licensed for "free" as long as it is attributed. Basically "open source text". So if something is copied from one place to another without attribution,

3558:

That is why I am saying consensus should be reached, this way a discussion on references can be made as well. Undertaking a project that would remove information from 400+ pages needs to be discussed before done. If enough people feel that it isn't necessary to have the information, I will let it

2653:

published in reliable sources that it was "walking distance to Yankee Stadium", which is apparently not supportable by facts. However...the correct way to deal with that is to write something to the effect of "some sources report this" and "some sources report that". It is definitely not our job as

1679:

him; I doubt that will be sufficient as an only source. I've been wrong about this before, and there are many, many articles in this project that I think it would be better off without; this isn't necessarily anywhere near the top of that list. Again - if you want me to restore the deleted article,

4611:

What exactly does Ryulong's last edit on my talk page have to do with the encyclopedia. The issue was over, I said that I would not contact him again and he leaves and aggressive comment on my talk page starting it again. How can you justify attacking my comments but not his. Just because he edits

4373:

Fair enough, I did use the word attack, although in response to your use of it, without realising its specific meaning on Knowledge (XXG). In other words, if my words are considered and attack, then so should Ryulong's (in fact, they should probably both be classified as rude). As for the comments

4226:

Why are you so interested in this, and why did you not say the same thing to Ryulong when he was attacking me? You tell me to drop perceived slights, but when I make a comment towards Ryulong that you consider a slight, you start removing them, lecturing me and threatening me with blocks. Where is

3959:

the copied version is made available on the same terms to others and acknowledgment of the authors of the Knowledge (XXG) article used is included (a link back to the article is generally thought to satisfy the attribution requirement)." Knowledge (XXG)'s contributors do not release their material

3872:

As to whether or not you've seen it before, there is much I could say, but I'll settle on the neutral "neither have I". However, there are many things I haven't seen or worked with, and I try to tread carefully in such cases. When I ask, people are quite willing to instruct. When I don't, they are

2813:

Frank, you're supposed to discuss major issues like undoing a Semi-Protect on the article's talk page. I didn't say I was an administrator, I said I was an editor. RegentsPark didn't up and decide to protect the page of his own volition, he was courteously approving my request. A mere two weeks

1922:

and with edits to the page itself. I did watch most of the documentary; I do not think it is an appropriate reliable source until and unless a written transcript is made available. That doesn't mean the info can't be used to lead elsewhere. Regarding your discussion of holistic and high-tech: it's

1894:

She also makes a point of contrasting erroneous published reports with what was really going on. The other issue may seem minor by comparison, but Fawcett never refers to her own treatment as "holistic", this was press conjecture, and my recent edit noted it as such. We like to think we have the

283:

There are often several different interpretations of things; that you believe there exist only one or two is - in itself - sufficient to support my position regarding temperament. As for the RfC, you're right - it is linked above, and you are also right that I didn't read it, which is why I didn't

107:

You stated that my answers to questions 1-6 showed that I shouldn't be an admin. I assume you mean all of the answers. In question one, I state that I don't like blocking people nor do I like deleting pages. Are admin supposed to like these things? In question two, I state that I don't really like

1709:

can you please restore the page i was working on for grammy award winning record producer Mark Howard. i understand there was a paragraph that was copied from his myspace page but i am willing to delete it although i have full permission from him to use that. noone gave me a chance to put that in

1674:

This is not a unilateral decision that cannot be re-visited. It was my judgment at the time. I do stand by it, but if you wish the article to be restored, I will be glad to do so. There are thousands of administrators and millions of editors on this project, and I am perfectly happy to let others

212:

To be honest, I don't care if you support or oppose. However, I find your rationale to be indicative of some of the most dangerous problems among administrators around here. Not only have you verified that you support block happy admin who enjoy hurting people, but you also want them to go around

112:

that it really doesn't matter what I say? In question four, I describe my involvement working with Jimbo over at Wikiversity during a ban of a user. Are admin not supposed to understand what goes into a ban let alone have involvement with those like Jimbo during such things? Question 5 is a small

2939:

article, I'm going to decline to acknowledge that I would discuss such a thing in advance. No harm is being done to the project by unprotecting the page, and it would take very little effort to have any administrator re-protect it if a problem surfaced. I'll do it myself if I see the need, and I

2835:

that I have been constructively contributing to that page for some months, although you address me like a newbie you have to invite to "jump in". Knowledge (XXG) etiquette guidelines dictate that if you're going to settle into a page you do the other active and responsible editors the editorial

1331:

Frank, your vote gives me the impression that you think I oppose the use of consensus. My viewpoint is simple: consensus can only be determined by the agreement of participants in a discussion; it cannot be determined by a single person who looks only at the strength of the arguments among those

4502:

Every single article on Knowledge (XXG) has to indicate why its subject is notable enough for inclusion. Do you have any references that show that for SproutBox? There are literally hundreds of thousands of companies in the US alone that employ 8 people...maybe millions of them. They aren't all

2905:

I am asking you to do three things. Firstly, I'm asking you to reinstate the Temporary Semi-Protect on the page (I'm guessing RegentsPark assumed your request represented consensus among Farrah Fawcett editors). Secondly, I'm asking you to acknowledge that in the future you will discuss major

2514:

change, but it is very unlikely. I might win the lottery on Friday, but it is very unlikely, and so I do not describe myself as "possible a millionaire". The Five Pillars of Knowledge (XXG) require us to write an encyclopedia which normal people will read, not just WP editors, and so to go with

4406:

Was it necessary to bring me into the conversation? I am not on any side of the fence. I want to ASE unblocked (he is) but I also want to see him working on the cleanup of the copyvios (he is). I don't see how that is a bad thing or my wanting to be a mentor to ASE if he or the community so

2214:

I recognise that the process itself was unusual, and the format was generally considered questionable - and I accept that I was mistaken in my perception of how it would be received - but I am particularly grateful for those whose opposes and neutrals were based in perceptions of how I was not

318:

Frank, you stated that my belief that there are only a few interpretations is a problem. However, you ignore that your wording has these interpretations. The fact that you ignored that and allowed the wording to go through, wording that is highly insulting and defies many of the core values of

3812:

edit summary by Moon for me. I have never in my 3+ years seen anyone say anything about "if you split an article, you must give credit or you are violating the GFDL". I've never even seen anyone reprimanded, notified, coached or anything else about such a "violation". I've never even seen the

3166:

My limited knowledge of Yiddish was acquired years after learning German. Due to the large number of cognates between those two languages, I tend to use German phonetic spellings. Most of the people who speak both Yiddish and English have minimal knowledge of German and approximate English

2932:. You may assume what you like regarding RegentsPark's assent; I do not make that assumption at all and I don't represent my request as such. My request simply stated that things seemed to have calmed down at the article, and in fact I stated that in the unprotect. Links to both appear above. 2654:

editors of Knowledge (XXG) to determine what is "right" or "wrong" or a "true fact". For example: does Air France still have a Flight 447 route? The correct answer: it depends where you look. The right answer for Knowledge (XXG): what do the reliable sources say? These aren't the same thing.

4954:

You are single handedly removing the blog reports of Cronkite taking a turn for the worse. This is a noble effort but could violate 3RR. To help you out, I've started a discussion on the talk page so that others who want to say he's dead can discuss it (they may not discuss it, though).

3054:

discourage you. As you may have noticed, it actually is an infringement, simply from a different source. Picking out the mirrors can complicate things immensely, but when a user's history verifies a problem, I often find that continuing to dig deeper will eventually locate the problem.

256:"you're clearly aware this question is in every RfA. Whether you like it or not, people expect an answer" I gave an answer. You didn't like that my answer was that I don't feel like bragging about accomplishments. The only possible meaning is that I -should- brag about accomplishments. 912:

I saw you declined my request to speedy delete Chris Franck under the band criteria. I requested db-band as the article was on a musician of doubtful notability, instead of the more frequent use of db-band as applying to the musical group. I'm not too concerned, though -- under the

1774:

page were similar designed as other contemporary art painter`s page..3 times was reduced and was always deleted by new reasons!...could you explain if the wikipedia has some strange reasoning policy applied for picked pages and the same policy wasn`t applied to others?....Thank you!

4149:

Totally cool with me; thanks for the notice, which wasn't strictly necessary. I gave my input because he seems to need it...whether it will help or not is questionable. Plus, I didn't see your notice about removing his comments until after I left mine. Anyway, thanks again. Cheers!

4093:

Your help is most welcome. Please feel free to jump in and edit existing articles to get a feel for how things work around here. Also, if you start an account, you can create a version of that article in your own userspace and then build it gradually. When it's ready, and you have

4549:

Check out Ryulong's comment on my talk page please Frank. "Contribute to the project for once"? Is that not a personal attack? If you tell Ryulong to stop attacking me, I will stop responding immediately. Otherwise, you are just letting him abuse me, without letting me respond.

2393:? It really explains policy on the matter quite well. Please feel free to recreate the article; I will leave it alone but I am confident others will see it the same way without any input from me. If you can show how the company is notable, that would, of course, change things. 702:

because I wanted to use my real name, but the admin who changed it over said just create the new account, and refused to move my edits. That is why I have to accounts, feel free to delete or remove User:Cody.feilding.nz if you wish, as I am most activate on User:Cody Cooper.

2384:

The links above that relate to Corrigon, that don't time out, and are in English, merely confirm its existence and the fact that it got $ 2M in venture capital. People start companies all the time, and startups get venture funding all the time. That alone does not make them

4344:

I notice that your conduct has recently been reviewed by the other members of the Knowledge (XXG) community, and judgement passed. It is a shame that you still seem to be conducting yourself in a bullying manner, but perhaps as a "newbie" I am just a good target for your

630:

is non-notable, can you please respond to the editor of that page having taken to spamming composer pages. The editor will not respond to mail. Please see the external links sections of the following for links to this non-notable fansite "Square Enix Music Online" -

4201:, which I already linked for you). It's an encyclopedia. Please find something you like and contribute; there is more here to do than can ever be completed. And please let whatever perceived slight you've received from any other editor drop. The encyclopedia awaits. 2644:

Did you read any of those guidelines? "Reliable sources" does not equate to "the press", and indeed, just because it's published in a "reliable source" doesn't make it instantly reliable either. For example, there was some controversy over what part of the Bronx

2296:

I didn't claim it was unlike any other article; I've never looked at the two you mentioned. However, your article was definitely promotional; it did not in any way assert that the company is notable, and it did not provide any references about the company (not

1489:

This was certainly a judgment call, and I agree there's room for interpretation. I admit I gave it none of this thought at the time, but even after the fact, I don't think it's a stretch to classify this particular edit as "crude humor" and/or "nonsense".

2866:

contact the administrator who protected it before I unprotected it. In fact, you can see the answer above as the start of this thread. Unprotecting a page so that other editors may edit it is not "undoing responsible work" - it is allowing more people to

969:

I did see the PROD. Either notability will be established, which is good, or the article will be non-speedily deleted, which gets to the same end point with a more thorough review. And a more thorough review in judgment-call cases is also a good thing.

2028:

message to Mythdon ? Frankly, I do not know where else to turn - most of my Wiki buddies from the past three years, or so, seem to have hibernated, given up or died. Probably says more about me than anything !?! Any help is much appreciated. Regards,

4129:

I had told the user I was removing any further comments from him to my user talk page without comment. But as you replied to him in his last comment, I am just notifying you that I have removed your comment as well, because if I left it it'd be out of

1375:

I expect an apology. Brothers of the Forum is a team of individuals similar to Manchester United, the La Lakers or even Ac/Dc, and it is unfair to simply delete pages on wikipedia especially after a lot of effort has gone into creating the page.

1993:

Sweet; never been part of DYK (yet). We'll see what the community thinks. No sweat on the edits; I figured it was something like that, and you caught on after I put a note in the edit summary. We're all working toward building a better project!

2755:

I'm the editor who protected Farrah Fawcett. Today I log in and see she's been unprotected without any discussion whatsoever. And then, unless I'm misreading it, immediately re-protected? Yet there's no protection tag. So what's the deal?

4019:

I don't think you should have deleted that page. I was in the middle of trying to add to it. I made no endorsements nor did I discredit. Being impartial is hardly grounds to claim advertisement. Many products have pages, as well they should.

1593:

page down? You citing that it was too much of a promotion - but it is biographical information on a person who is an expert in the secruity field? there are many other articles with bios - and I am curious to why you pulled this one down?

345:

before such a rant. In the meantime, if you ever have any problem with any of my actions - either as an editor or as an admin - please feel free to contact me. I remain committed to this project, whether you "stick around" to see it or not.

292:

a lack of required temperament (or "mettle") for adminship. I said nothing about block-happy admins, nor did I refer to hypocrisy or a requirement to be happy about it. And I certainly didn't mention anything about "deserving" adminship, as

1858:

Also, please don't delete others' comments when you add to a talk page. Please create a new section at the bottom of the page and add your question/comment there. If you're responding to an existing comment, please write below it. Thanks!

570: 825:

Noted. While I do think that it was a procedural error, I do support the ultimate outcome. I consider my own tagging borderline. Had the article not had such a promotional tone, I would probably have requested a more thorough discussion.

2836:

courtesy of treating them as a colleague at that page and discuss major issues like undoing their responsible work. If you had any respect for anyone around here or paid any attention whatsoever, you might have caught the fact that

3920:) A note should also be made in the edit summary of the source article, "split content to ]", to protect against the article subsequently being deleted and the history of the new page eradicated. It may also be helpful to place the 259:"See #2. More disdain for the process, before a single opinion was expressed by anyone." You claim that I am disdaining a process by stating a common fact that everyone at RfA knows would happen - people bring diffs about disputes. 4173:

my conduct. All I did was ask him whether he felt his comments towards me were fair and constructive. I didn't cast the first stone. It seems that his recent conduct has been appalling and has been dealt with as a serious matter.

152:

I find some of your comments in this answer agreeable, even if you didn't actually answer the question asked ("what's the difference"). I can strike this question as part of my reasoning if you wish, since it isn't much to oppose

4486:

I didn't realize that I had to include explicitly why this company was notable. It is notable as it has invested in at least 3 companies and directly employs 8 people. It is the first Venture Capitalist company of its kind in

1895:

most modern treatments in the world and anything else must be some flower-child yoga, herbs or voodoo (read: stem cell treatment), but the point of that sentence was that although it was reported as "holistic" (note the article

2627:

you read in the press, and would be willing to pass it on to other people without the slightest doubt? If so, how does Knowledge (XXG) differ from Internet Archive or Google Scholar? Incedentally, and predictably, I think that

3432:

where you will find "information on its personalities, past and present". It is in the rules for the Wikiproject. Now...you need to remove that information from ALL 400+ television stations, not just one....for that you

2974:

Finally, I would add that there is no "standard three months' temporary semi-protection" for pages, BLP or otherwise. The judgment to protect or not, and for what length of time, is at the discretion of the administrator.

1295:

and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing!

2861:

The removal of protection on a page is not in any way an indication that anyone thinks you are not constructively contributing to the page. I'm sorry if you see it that way. I have provided links above that show that I

1899:

links to), it was actually very high technology. Again, what the article stated was referenced in its use of terminology ("holistic", "aggressive") as well as supported by the precise course of treatment as described.

213:

showing off their contributions, waving around their power, and treating others like crap. The encyclopedia doesn't need editors, let alone admin, who feel that way, because it is damaging to the community as a whole.

528:, because the page seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read 160:

I don't see any indication in this question that you accept the position that administrators hold is to uphold what the community finds appropriate, not that you must be an advocate for a particular point of view or

2268:? ) What can I do better to make it less promotional and more informative? I don't see the problem. I also apologize if this is not the appropriate way to contact you - this is the only way I found. Please help. 850:

I'm sorry if I wasn't quick enough with references, but I didn't even have time to insert the "hangon" note before my article was deleted. I think it was a little harsh. I will try to prepare the references.

2212:'s support comment, although a fair majority gave me great pleasure. I would also note those whose opposes or neutral were based in process concerns and who otherwise commented kindly in regard to my record. 201:

And disdain for the process by stating that opposers will link to disputes that I was involved in? I would really like to find a third opinion on that one, because I find it hard to believe that anyone else

2215:

performing to the standards expected of an administrator. As much as the support I received, those comments are hopefully going to allow me to be a better contributor to the project. Thank you. Very much.

4974:

Since we're the only ones talking on the Walter Cronkite talk page, I'll remove the entire thread because we need a united front against the people who want to say he's dead. I hope this is ok with you.

2509:

proof – any decent philosopher will tell you that absolute proof is unattainable. The verifiable facts about AF447 are such that no reasonable person doubts that these people are dead. That information

4797:

They are all reporting based on one blog and "sources" who are unnamed. That's speculation at its worst, and we don't need it. If he's really sick and if it's really newsworthy, it will be reported in

3369:

Did you bother to get consensus before removing those edits? Did you bother to remove them from the 400+ other pages? No, so, I am going to revert...again. All I am asking is you get consensus from

1024:

and hoapfuly thiz one haz made yore day bettr. Spreadd teh WikiLovez by givin sumone else Cheezburgr, whethr it be sumeone youz hav had disagreementz with in teh past or a gud frend. Hapy munchins!

410:

passed today at 61/5/4. Thanks for participating in my RFA. I appreciate all the comments I received and will endeavor to justify the trust the WP community has placed in me. Have a nice day. :-)

1207:

is the place to request rollback. If you are directly asking me, I would say "not yet", as you have under 30 total edits to the project. Dig around, learn how things work, then make an request.

3167:

pronunciations when writing Yiddish in the Roman alphabet, but German is a much more phonetic language and more closely related. So that's the reasoning behind the somewhat unusual spelling.

4078:

Rather than just deleting please help me with it then or at least flag it as a stub so others can. By deleting it you are destroying it's chances. Yes I'm new here, but I am trying to help.

1978:

with you as the original author. And sorry for messing up some of your edits at one point, I was caught up in an edit conflict and had trouble resolving it without losing what I had done.

2196:. There were issues raised regarding my adminship that I intend to cogitate upon, but I am grateful for the very many supportive comments I received and for the efforts of certain editors ( 132:

I'd be interested in any on-wiki communication regarding my statement on your RfA...just one of 91 opposes currently. However, I will explain my reasoning here; it's a reasonable question:

3687:

Greetings! You added a comment to my talk page about lists of TV personalities in Wiki articles on TV stations. So you probably will be interested in the discussion that's been opened in

149:"I'm sure the opposes will come up with new and exciting things to look at, so, here's to them." - See #2. More disdain for the process, before a single opinion was expressed by anyone. 4626:

His comment was about what this project is all about: please find a way to contribute to the project. That's what we are here for. If you're not here for that reason, please check out

2787:

protect the page before I unprotected it. As for the "re-protect", I made two different changes: one to allow all users to edit the page, and another to disallow anonymous users from

3946: 3909: 3866: 4826:

I'm actually in favor of waiting a while and not updating stuff. Knowledge (XXG) has a lot of sensationalist murders. Not very encyclopedic. This will never come about, though.

3018:

Thanks for your input, which describes exactly my thoughts when I asked your opinion, my intentions going forward, and my view of IP editors. I realize there are other issues that

284:

connect it to your comment. As a single example - taking your first comment only - I did not imply that "you cannot express that you do not like it in order to deserve it." What I

3600:

Which established policy are we talking about? The one Knowledge (XXG) made or the one WP:TVS set up? Cause at the moment, and I will admit, we have two conflicting policies. -

4249:

You have to understand that I perceive you as taking sides here. Is that weren't the case, if I felt you were treating us equally, I would be much more open to your suggestions.

607:. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. 1844:) can't get to everything immediately. Rather than focus on what exists that perhaps doesn't meet guidelines, I highly recommend you determine if the subject actually meets our 383: 379: 4534:

Frank, please stop taking sides, check out my talk page and you will see that Ryulong is continuing this, tell him to stop, don't let him abuse me without my right to respond.

4852:

your idea of waiting a while? It's the same blog report. Schieffer is wishing him well and specifically says he has no current news on his condition. That's not encyclopedic.

2189: 1163:

i was wondering how to get a cool user page and sig if you could point me it would be greatly appreciated. that and is it to soon to request for rollback permission yet ?

3989: 2150:

I watch the page mostly to look out for BLP violations against his son. I helped craft the graf in the son's article that, I think, strikes the proper balance under

4912:

You must be a real Knowledge (XXG) old-timer because of your username, Frank. I kept trying user names that were already used until I gave up and chose a number.

407: 3559:

go....but I feel a discussion on it and possibly a discussion on referencing the information (if people feel it should stay) should come first before deletion. -

3720: 944:

and I haven't removed that tag myself. I figure if sources aren't found by the time the PROD expires, the article probably doesn't belong. I just thought it had

2956:, that would certainly warrant discussion and consensus beforehand (although that doesn't always happen either). This article doesn't fall into that category. 4559: 4258: 375: 368: 2415:

Is there a way that I can reach to the content you deleted? I put quite an effort into to it and it looks like the history is also lost with the deletion.

1943:

reported that she received holistic treatment in Germany, and that's what our article says. Nothing more, nothing less (at least on that point). There are

3494:

were taken into effect. Also, these are EXTREMELY easy to reference. Just go to that station's website, find the reporter's bio and link it. Simple. -

143:

that the mettle required for adminship isn't there. There's no doubt about it: users must be blocked and pages must be deleted, whether we like it or not.

1891:

but her inclusion of these details in her documentary make it both clear that she wanted people to know about this and also make it notable and citable.

3119: 4352:

These comments (and, indeed, this entire thread) have nothing to do with building an encyclopedia. That's why I've encouraged you to focus elsewhere.

3641:

Then what do we do? Remove information that has been allowed for a few years now with no issue from 400+ pages? Cause we aren't just talking about

3401:

I asked for you to show me where it is said that adding spammy links is withing Knowledge (XXG) policy. I don't need consensus to remove spam; it's

2959:

I acknowledge that you've said here and elsewhere that you don't like my communication style. I further acknowledge I've read the links you provided.

2474:

I wouldn't trust IMDb as it's user submitted. I've added a couple print sources, including another that verifies his birth name as Alvis Alan Owens.

1903:

For both of these edits, my purpose is to present what Fawcett presented in her documentary, which came from the mouths of her doctors themselves.

3215: 1840:", which are rarely useful around here. This is a constantly-evolving project, and it's also run completely by volunteers. We (and that includes 2527:

and numerous other policies and guidelines). Please stop pretending that these people might reasonably be expected to be alive: it is indecent.

1675:

weigh in on the fate of the article. Having said that, the article you provide above is an interview with the subject, not substantial coverage

1625: 4621: 4383: 4313: 4236: 2121:

Thanks for noticing. Lewis seems like a really interesting guy. (In case you're interested, I ran across him while going through the series of

157:

want it to be a serious project, taken seriously...we have to treat it that way. I'm in the "serious project" camp. I realize not everyone is.

800:

Some may disagree, but I really deleted it under A7; I saw it as an article about something that simply didn't make any claim of notability.

172:

community, your temperament is in line with what is expected of administrators in general, and how I personally feel admins should behave.

4079: 3381:

where you will find "information on its personalities, past and present"), which were created within the policies of Knowledge (XXG). -

1616:. In addition, although it's not a reason to speedily delete an article, I am not sure that Mr. Falkenberg would meet Knowledge (XXG)'s 1304: 3287:

Thanks; it's a neat tool. Maybe I'll write a similar one for Knowledge (XXG). (When I don't have 400 other things on my to-do list...)

1347:

There might be room for discussion, but I don't think I'm the only one that has this impression from what you've answered in your RfA.

1726: 4895:

The first part can be fairly included. The striken out parts is the blog parts. My idea would be just to put the non-striken parts.

3653:(market 210)....and all the stations in between. Which is why I am asking for consensus....I don't think that is too much to ask. - 1483:

Common types of vandalism are the addition of obscenities or crude humor, page blanking, and the insertion of nonsense into articles.

4182: 3848: 3774: 3461:

about former personalities? I missed that. There is a very long precedent for providing links (OK), not long descriptions (NOT OK).

1541: 1130:|border=dark-green|bg=gold|image=David holding mustard.JPG|article=some|item=mustard }} to their talk page with a friendly message. 4268:

Show me the diffs where you were attacked; I didn't see that. As for taking sides, you are quite correct; I am on the side of the

4197:

and may also lead to a block. Knowledge (XXG) is not a social network and it's not a democracy (among many other things listed at

2940:

don't/won't see the need to ask a whole bunch of people what they think of that routine action. I have seen people complain about

4036: 3981: 1791: 4326:

software that runs this site is that previous entries are preserved more or less forever (unless deleted by an administrator or

2154:. I've lived in and around D.C. for nearly 30 years. You're absolutely right, the elder Lewis is a fascinating person. Cheers, 1680:

let me know, or if you wish to recreate it yourself, feel free. I will watch (and maybe comment) but will not delete it again.

1400: 3980:

has been around slightly longer. I have myself instructed enough people on this that I have a "form" letter for the purpose,

3211: 2840: 1110: 1088: 1078: 1013: 989: 975: 922: 450: 2049:

and watchlisted it. No need to get involved in the arb case; I just thought you might want to know you're not alone. :-)

382:. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, 4295:

you are talking about attacks, I guess you are talking about "Accusations about personal behavior that lack evidence" on

4543: 4002:

which also notes that separating a page from its history is undesirable, in part because of the need for attribution. --

2352: 2284: 560: 600: 2087: 2035: 1459:

Hi, Frank. I'm just curious as to why you reverted harej's edit to Frank Melton's talk page (diff can be found here:

4612:

more than me? That gives him the right to make rude comments towards me, about a subject that I said I had dropped?

4617: 4555: 4539: 4379: 4330:

for a very limited set of reasons). This enables me to show you two things you wrote that support what I'm saying:

4309: 4254: 4232: 4178: 3695: 2490: 554: 521: 507: 94: 38: 3527:

I don't object on the basis of referencing; I object on the basis that it's simply not necessary. If a subject is

2831:

Though you repeatedly failed to acknowledge it there, I've tried to point out to you on your own talk page and on

1657:

and there are a number of media outlets such as CNN, CNBC and Fox that use him as a professional security source.

139:

to take a particular action. However, an up-front statement that one does not like blocking or deleting indicates

1297: 1106: 1084: 1074: 1009: 985: 971: 918: 86: 81: 69: 64: 59: 4658: 4606: 4368: 4217: 1814:

Request that NawlinWiki undelete it (you can ask, but after five deletions, I think the likely answer is clear).

574: 533: 2220: 1117:

and hopefully this has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else some mustard! Enjoy!

1073:{{subst:Mustard}}; {{subst:Pickle}} -- Nope, doesn't look like it. And I'm not the one to make new artwork. -- 4771:

Legendary CBS anchorman Walter Cronkite, 92, long known as the "Most Trusted Man in America," is gravely ill,

4613: 4551: 4535: 4375: 4336:

Why are you so interested in this, and why did you not say the same thing to Ryulong when he was attacking me?

4305: 4250: 4228: 4174: 627: 265:

And the RfC is clearly linked above. That only suggests that you didn't bother to actually read what I wrote.

4083: 1654: 231:

did not hunt around looking for evidence in writing my oppose; I found it right on the RfA page and said so.

168:

I'm aware that you hold the bit on another project, but as I stated in my oppose, I just don't feel that for

1983: 1800:

I didn't look at the content; I merely answered your question as to why the page was deleted. I am aware of

4778:

I hope Cronkite gets over the hump and lasts many more years. Living to the late 90's is not unusual now.

4194: 4024: 3688: 2775:

I am quite confused. I do not see any indication that you are an administrator; nor do I see that you were

2272: 1923:

not for us to judge that something can be only one or the other, it is merely for us to report what can be

1779: 1714: 1388: 727: 4466: 4415: 3996: 3661: 3608: 3567: 3502: 3445: 3389: 3323: 3226: 2083: 2031: 1722: 1590: 1127: 4327: 4269: 4098:

that it belongs, you can move it to the main article space. Finally, it's possible that topic just isn't

4095: 3902: 1739:. In the meantime, you can create the page in your user space to work on it. Please work on establishing 1478: 4721: 4299:. What exactly have I said that is not backed up by evidence? Ryulong reverted my edits on the basis of 3691: 3007: 2823: 2697: 2159: 2111: 1804:

work and I didn't need to look to be reasonably confident of my answer there. You have several choices:

1545: 1239: 984:

And to show how much I respect admins' judgment, efforts, and volunteered time, Here's some WikiFood. --

714: 699: 688: 611: 415: 324: 270: 218: 122: 3491: 3458: 3402: 2344: 1718: 1292: 1114: 1113:) has given you some mustard, for as a topping on ur cheezburgr! You see, these things somehow promote 1021: 3960:

into public domain, but liberally license it under GFDL, which reserves the right to attribution. The

3336:

Not necessary; there's plenty of precedent for not putting extraneous information in an article, so I

2236: 1235: 1178:

Find whatever page or sig you think is cool and go ahead and incorporate parts you like for yourself.

882:

so that a wider community consensus can be established. Just let me know if you'd like me to do that.

4032: 4028: 3750: 3732: 2948:. (Not that it hasn't happened; I've not seen it before now, though.) Now, if the article were, say, 2636: 2581: 2531: 2505:

are dead? I'm sure you've never seen any judicial proof of it! As if judicial proof was some sort of

2430: 2336: 1821:, which is unlikely to change anything because that's usually for articles that were deleted after a 1787: 1783: 1703: 1168: 878:

for a company to be included in the project. Also, if you disagree, I can undelete the page and then

4099: 3345: 2921: 2356: 2046: 1660: 1598: 1392: 773: 114: 4980: 4960: 4917: 4900: 4831: 4783: 4728: 4003: 3862: 3090: 3056: 3019: 2907: 2844: 2832: 2757: 2709: 2498: 2216: 1919: 1904: 1664: 1602: 1396: 1337: 1042: 1033: 582: 2151: 1947:

as well, but really not that many. "Alternative treatment" seems to be a more common description.

1556: 1429: 4488: 3974: 3924: 2911: 2848: 2761: 2713: 2456: 2416: 2370: 2332: 2276: 1979: 1908: 833: 790: 763: 652: 4188:

I'm not lecturing you. I'm telling you about some of Knowledge (XXG)'s core policies; violating

4053: 2524: 2520: 1808: 1123: 5021:

I had articles, I had information, I had everything. Why did you delete my article on Garneau?

539:

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

4639: 4460: 4409: 4137: 3964: 3940: 3913: 3817: 3655: 3602: 3561: 3496: 3486:

that when the rules for WP:TVS were created that all of Knowledge (XXG)'s policies, including

3439: 3383: 3317: 3220: 856: 378:. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, 4685: 4504: 4300: 4049: 3970:

template is relatively new, but a helpful way to credit in addition to the edit summary. The

3528: 3239: 2593: 2548:

in both articles to support the statement that they are dead. On the other hand, since we do

2390: 2386: 2348: 2340: 2306: 2125:

presidents, three of which I created, and all of which I added a succession box to.) Cheers!

1924: 1845: 1736: 1617: 1425: 1417: 941: 914: 871: 529: 4889:

The 92-year-old former anchor of "The CBS Evening News," who has been ailing for some time,

4664: 4492: 3831: 3757: 3152: 3139: 3002: 2692: 2460: 2420: 2374: 2280: 2261: 2155: 2107: 1555:

Funny, but not appropriate. You will get yourself blocked in short order if you continue to

1046: 708: 695: 684: 640: 608: 411: 320: 266: 214: 118: 4768:

About Cronkite, if it's a blog, I agree with you. However, the Chicago Sun Times reports

4296: 4198: 4189: 3533: 3483: 3429: 3378: 3374: 3370: 3341: 3312: 1837: 1826: 1822: 1818: 1613: 1487:

For example, adding a controversial personal opinion to an article once is not vandalism...

1413: 1250: 1204: 879: 867: 780: 525: 342: 5003: 4936: 4861: 4810: 4750: 4697: 4651: 4599: 4572: 4564:

No, that's not a personal attack. Let it go. You are continuing, not Ryulong. Ryulong has

4516: 4458:

of the articles. Not sure to what extent, but it his helping and that is a good start. -

4445: 4361: 4281: 4210: 4159: 4111: 4065: 3885: 3795: 3728: 3629: 3588: 3545: 3470: 3414: 3357: 3296: 3250: 3192: 3077: 3031: 2984: 2885: 2800: 2735: 2663: 2646: 2633: 2609: 2578: 2565: 2528: 2502: 2442: 2402: 2318: 2134: 2058: 2003: 1956: 1868: 1801: 1752: 1689: 1640: 1568: 1499: 1441: 1356: 1262: 1216: 1187: 1164: 1145: 1058: 957: 891: 809: 739: 669: 544: 492: 355: 306: 240: 181: 47: 17: 4798: 3579:

You're asking for consensus on established policy. That's extra work for no good reason.

3487: 2589: 2545: 1928: 1424:

that indicate it is indeed similar to the groups you mention above, that might establish

1421: 4891:

has reportedly taken a turn for the worse, according to TVNewser and other online sites.

3022:

has with my actions, but I appreciate you taking the time to clarify on this one point.

524:, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Knowledge (XXG). This has been done under 442: 4976: 4956: 4913: 4896: 4827: 4779: 4288: 4143: 3279: 2949: 2208:

especially) in responding to some issues. I wish to note how humbled I was when I read

1944: 1333: 1317: 632: 578: 109: 3952: 3930:

template on the talk page of the source article to further safeguard against deletion.

3753:, the last paragraph written by me and verify whether or not it is a copyvio. Thanks. 2597: 2516: 1740: 1099: 917:, I expect the article to be deleted soon enough if sources don't suddenly show up. -- 875: 726:

Can you provide a link to the discussion you are referring to? (It should have been a

4668: 3861:

it's not a copyright violation, but apparently violates GFDL. I think you should ask

2685: 2353:

http://www.globes.co.il/news/article.aspx?QUID=1056,U1229242278974&did=1000406688

1520: 1467: 828: 785: 759: 648: 636: 558:(just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on 454: 390: 339: 4885:

CBS isn't commenting on reports that veteran newsman Walter Cronkite is gravely ill.

3988:. This is an off-branch of the "cut & paste move", which has its own repair pen 205:

And sarcasm? No, it was a fun answer. It even states "(I kept this in for fun :) )."

4333:

Accusing Ryūlóng of attacking you (it's just a couple of paragraphs up from here):

4131: 3936: 2953: 2944:

of an article; this is the first time I've seen a complaint about an article being

2629: 2553: 2209: 2201: 2100: 2024: 2017: 1771: 1534: 1017: 906: 852: 474: 4990:

I don't think that's appropriate, because you are among those putting the reports

3268: 2928:

of the page, I decline to reinstate the protection. It can always be re-protected

3168: 3148: 3135: 3051: 2632:

is very far from what waht we should be promoting as "our very best articles".

644: 46:

If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the

5010: 4984: 4964: 4943: 4921: 4904: 4868: 4835: 4817: 4787: 4757: 4731: 4704: 4680: 4523: 4496: 4472: 4452: 4421: 4166: 4118: 4087: 4072: 4040: 4006: 3892: 3854: 3802: 3780: 3736: 3699: 3667: 3636: 3614: 3595: 3573: 3552: 3508: 3477: 3451: 3421: 3395: 3364: 3329: 3281: 3257: 3232: 3199: 3173: 3156: 3093: 3084: 3059: 3038: 3012: 2991: 2915: 2892: 2852: 2807: 2765: 2742: 2717: 2702: 2670: 2639: 2616: 2584: 2572: 2534: 2479: 2464: 2449: 2424: 2409: 2378: 2325: 2288: 2224: 2163: 2141: 2115: 2091: 2065: 2039: 2010: 1987: 1963: 1912: 1875: 1807:

Recreate the page in your userspace and work on it until it meets criteria for

1759: 1696: 1668: 1647: 1606: 1575: 1549: 1524: 1506: 1471: 1448: 1404: 1363: 1341: 1310: 1269: 1243: 1223: 1194: 1172: 1152: 1092: 1065: 993: 979: 964: 926: 898: 860: 837: 816: 794: 767: 746: 720: 676: 616: 586: 513: 499: 477: 457: 419: 393: 362: 328: 313: 274: 247: 222: 188: 126: 4997: 4930: 4855: 4804: 4744: 4691: 4645: 4593: 4510: 4439: 4355: 4275: 4204: 4153: 4105: 4059: 3901:

I still have Frank's page on my watchlist. Perhaps this will be helpful: from

3879: 3789: 3623: 3582: 3539: 3464: 3408: 3351: 3290: 3244: 3186: 3071: 3025: 2978: 2879: 2794: 2729: 2657: 2603: 2559: 2436: 2396: 2312: 2265: 2197: 2128: 2052: 1997: 1950: 1940: 1931:. I don't know if she received holistic treatment or not, and I probably will 1862: 1746: 1683: 1634: 1562: 1493: 1435: 1350: 1256: 1210: 1181: 1139: 1052: 951: 885: 803: 733: 663: 604: 593: 486: 467:

Curse you, Frank! You stole my last-support position! Vengeance will be mine.

349: 300: 234: 175: 1836:

Note that none of these options includes discussing "strange reasoning" and "

4565: 4323: 4304:

but I can't be rude to him, and why do you step in to stop me, but not him?

3272: 3180: 453:, I just wanted to wish my fellow Wikipedians a Happy Easter! Sincerely, -- 3713: 660:

a few links to pages that add to the encyclopedia's content seem OK to me.

374:

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located

4994:, and because there are others as well. The conversation should be there. 2780: 1655:

http://www.businessweek.com/managing/content/apr2009/ca20090429_288478.htm

1002: 4635: 2364: 2257: 2250: 2205: 1848:

guidelines, and if so, creating an article that is in line with policies.

1516: 1463: 3344:

somehow supports adding spammy, extra information to an article, please

4627: 3650: 3646: 3642: 3620:

There's no conflict; Knowledge (XXG) policy trumps Wikiproject policy.

3482:

I think we can dispense with the sarcasm. I also think that we should

2493:. I am honestly frightened by the policy quotes you are making. Do you 4507:. If you've got something to work with, I'll be glad to help you out. 3955:: "Knowledge (XXG) content can be copied, modified, and redistributed 3112: 2256:

Hi Frank! I saw that you deleted an article I added about my company,

426: 4398:

I draw your attention to your comments on the ASE post I started....

1975: 1029: 3210:

Let me know if I can be of assistance in editing (up to policy) the

2876:

Just to be clear, are you asking me to do (or undo) something here?

2556:, the article does not state that he is dead. We simply don't know. 2345:

http://www.ivc-online.com/G_info.asp?objectType=1&fObjectID=9832

870:

because it is merely a promotional page about a company. Please see

469: 1378:

This is disappointing As I mentioned earlier i expect an apology.

940:

fourth band (Zeep). I'm poking around; you may note that it's been

4675: 2822:

the standard three months' temporary semi-protection, for which I

2515:

normal standards of proof/refutation of hypotheses (also found in

2337:

http://www.startupisrael.com/lab-one-incubator-invests-2m-corrigon

1710:

writing and it was deleted straight away. please restore my page.

1281: 441: 2357:

http://www.globes.co.il/serveen/globes/DocView.asp?did=1000377412

936:

three bands that have articles here, and sources exist for the

932:

Well, it was a judgment call, certainly. He's been a member of

4738:

The original probably needs to be fixed too. I'll take a look.

4631: 2333:

http://www.tradingmarkets.com/.site/news/Stock%20News/1855044/

2122: 25: 3183:...no sweat. I'm trying to keep things light around here :-) 2838:

I've already told you I was the editor who protected the page

4773:

according to multiple CBS News sources and published reports

1280: 1098: 1001: 626:

Agreeing with your consensus and that of the community that

564:

explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for

512: 4582:

of them have been to articles. As I've told you before, I

3179:

Hey, I was just going with what I have heard...and I even

2489:

There's obviously no point in continuing this argument at

2349:

http://www.ivc-online.com/ivcWeeklyItem.asp?articleID=7559

2341:

http://www.babylon.com/definition/Corrigon_Ltd._(PicMole)/

1735:

Permission to use copyrighted material is handled through

1540:

I cited it and everything...what's the problem with that?

3373:

before going off and deleting information that is in the

1612:

The article was unambiguously promotional in nature; see

1485:

However, reading further, the second paragraph includes:

1291:, Gaia Octavia Agrippa has smiled at you! Smiles promote 3945:

This step is required in order to conform with §4(I) of

2309:. Please let me know if I can answer further questions. 1620:, given that there seem to be very few (or no) articles 384:

Knowledge (XXG):Requests for arbitration/Aitias/Workshop

380:

Knowledge (XXG):Requests for arbitration/Aitias/Evidence

135:

Deskana pointed out - correctly - that no admin is ever

4849: 4642:, which may be more compatible with your online goals. 4571:, and 64% of them have been to articles. You have made 4429: 4343: 4335: 3985: 3824: 3809: 3337: 2819: 2815: 2776: 1460: 1234:

why did you delete my page was it too lite on content?

1653:

With respect Frank...what about an article like this?

209:

understanding of what people here should strive to do.

3311:

If you think it needs to be removed, take it up with

2552:

have sources that claim that regarding, for example,

1853:

The best way to do that is to go with option 1 above.

1200:

thanks man will do what about the rollback thing???

3823:before and only became aware of it by see her edit 3050:Please don't let the identification of a mirror at 1036:}} to their talk puj with friendly messuj to all. 288:- very clearly, I thought - was that it indicates 2691:Go ahead. Unprotection is always worth a shot! -- 1627:; being quoted in an article does not constitute 758:same article, so I doubt there's any problems... 403: 2175: 4407:choose. Maybe you could explain this to me. - 3906: 1414:didn't indicate any reason the group is notable 1159:hello i was just wondering if you could help me 647:, among others. Can someone please intervene? 526:section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion 369:Knowledge (XXG):Requests for arbitration/Aitias 4566:made 500 edits to Knowledge (XXG) in the last 2935:Since I don't see this as a "major" change to 1320:}} to their talk page with a friendly message. 2260:. You claim that this is promotional (unlike 555:the page that has been nominated for deletion 8: 4795:According to Mediabistro's blog, TVNewser... 3918:Do not omit this step or omit the page name. 3719:I'd like to thank everyone who took part in 2544:those two people are dead or not. There are 2106:Kudos. Very nice work. Thank you. Cheers, 1432:so you can work on it further, let me know. 948:enough claim of notability to avoid speedy. 730:you were conversing with on a user rename.) 3536:should make up its own rules that digress. 3068:mean? I'm not familiar with this word. :-) 1477:It seemed pretty blatant to me. Looking at 1122:Spread the goodness of mustard by adding {{ 1028:Spredd teh goudnesz of Cheezburgerz to all 4740:It was fine. One little <noinclude: --> 4428:I didn't bring you into the conversation; 3708: 3107: 2577:What level of "knowledge" do you require? 577:the page or have a copy emailed to you. 4727:Thanks. I'm rubbish with templates. :) -- 4578:(with this account, anyway), and exactly 3949:. Do not omit it nor omit the page name. 3912:, the new page should be created with an 3271:may be of use in your current efforts. // 3216:Southwest Mississippi Community College‎ 2235: 1481:; the first paragraph states (in part): 1253:. I also left a note on your talk page. 389:On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, 2023:Thank you very much for your message. 779:Hi! I assume you meant to delete under 569:page does get deleted, you can contact 3939:: "Save the destination page, with an 2365:http://www.incubators.org.il/30014.htm 2331:Some external, independent citations: 1136:OK, I definitely laughed at that one! 44:Do not edit the contents of this page. 2791:it, which its own form of vandalism. 2305:it). The best thing to do is to read 2192:, which passed with a final tally of 7: 4590:, which is what this site is about. 1817:Request a review of the deletion at 622:Deletion of Square Enix Music Online 3749:Please have a look at this section 3405:. A Wikiproject cannot trump that. 2179: 2777:involved in protection of the page 2188:Thank you for participating in my 1430:restore the page in your userspace 24: 2726:I don't understand the question. 2240:Well, back to the office it is... 4793:Read further into the articles: 3982:User:Moonriddengirl/form letters 3916:noting "split content from ]". ( 3712: 3428:I showed you were it was....see 3111: 1589:Wondering why you just took the 874:for details on what establishes 783:? Since "flags" do not meet A7. 468: 425: 29: 3943:noting "merge content from ]" ( 3683:Comments about TV personalities 3118:Thank you for participating in 2478:, his otters and a clue-bat • 1305: 1298: 4927:Nah, not really; a few years. 4669: 4586:taking sides: I'm siding with 3212:East Central Community College 3206:East Central Community College 866:The article was deleted under 198:prizes, or anything like that. 1: 522:User:Samenus/Remy Corporation 508:User:Samenus/Remy Corporation 4676: 4341:Personal attack on Ryūlóng: 4138: 4132: 3718: 3117: 3045:Moonriddengirl, collected :) 1316:Smile at others by adding {{ 534:Knowledge (XXG):FAQ/Business 4573:69 edits to Knowledge (XXG) 3089:I like that attitude. :D -- 2649:grew up in, even though it 2433:it is, in your user space. 846:Speedy deletion of Temption 483:Thanks for the warning :-) 5038: 4873:No, read it carefully..... 4436:of traffic on this issue. 4394:Was This Really Necessary? 4322:The great thing about the 3751:Jackson, Mississippi#Crime 3711: 3110: 2491:Talk:Air France Flight 447 2181: 1276:Thank you for your opinion 617:21:13, 26 April 2009 (UTC) 599:An editor has asked for a 587:07:51, 14 April 2009 (UTC) 500:16:43, 13 April 2009 (UTC) 478:13:05, 13 April 2009 (UTC) 458:07:46, 12 April 2009 (UTC) 420:21:32, 11 April 2009 (UTC) 338:It would probably help to 5011:20:43, 19 June 2009 (UTC) 4985:20:42, 19 June 2009 (UTC) 4965:20:30, 19 June 2009 (UTC) 4944:16:20, 19 June 2009 (UTC) 4922:16:15, 19 June 2009 (UTC) 4905:20:37, 19 June 2009 (UTC) 4869:20:28, 19 June 2009 (UTC) 4836:16:33, 19 June 2009 (UTC) 4818:16:20, 19 June 2009 (UTC) 4788:16:13, 19 June 2009 (UTC) 4758:15:37, 18 June 2009 (UTC) 4732:15:32, 18 June 2009 (UTC) 4705:23:41, 16 June 2009 (UTC) 4681:23:40, 16 June 2009 (UTC) 4659:23:33, 16 June 2009 (UTC) 4622:23:28, 16 June 2009 (UTC) 4607:23:25, 16 June 2009 (UTC) 4560:23:21, 16 June 2009 (UTC) 4544:23:19, 16 June 2009 (UTC) 4524:22:13, 16 June 2009 (UTC) 4497:22:03, 16 June 2009 (UTC) 4473:04:09, 14 June 2009 (UTC) 4453:04:05, 14 June 2009 (UTC) 4422:03:57, 14 June 2009 (UTC) 4384:15:27, 14 June 2009 (UTC) 4369:15:16, 14 June 2009 (UTC) 4314:15:04, 14 June 2009 (UTC) 4289:14:41, 14 June 2009 (UTC) 4259:13:51, 14 June 2009 (UTC) 4237:13:49, 14 June 2009 (UTC) 4218:13:45, 14 June 2009 (UTC) 4183:13:38, 14 June 2009 (UTC) 4167:23:21, 13 June 2009 (UTC) 4144:22:51, 13 June 2009 (UTC) 4119:20:13, 13 June 2009 (UTC) 4088:20:04, 13 June 2009 (UTC) 4073:19:06, 13 June 2009 (UTC) 4041:18:57, 13 June 2009 (UTC) 4007:00:08, 14 June 2009 (UTC) 3908:To conform with §4(I) of 3903:Knowledge (XXG):Splitting 3893:23:45, 13 June 2009 (UTC) 3855:23:36, 13 June 2009 (UTC) 3803:15:43, 13 June 2009 (UTC) 3781:15:10, 13 June 2009 (UTC) 3737:13:01, 10 June 2009 (UTC) 3705:Some shameless thankspam! 3700:12:23, 12 June 2009 (UTC) 3668:01:36, 11 June 2009 (UTC) 3637:01:33, 11 June 2009 (UTC) 3615:01:31, 11 June 2009 (UTC) 3596:01:01, 11 June 2009 (UTC) 3574:00:53, 11 June 2009 (UTC) 3553:00:47, 11 June 2009 (UTC) 3509:00:44, 11 June 2009 (UTC) 3478:00:40, 11 June 2009 (UTC) 3452:00:37, 11 June 2009 (UTC) 3422:00:30, 11 June 2009 (UTC) 3396:00:27, 11 June 2009 (UTC) 3365:00:25, 11 June 2009 (UTC) 3330:23:47, 10 June 2009 (UTC) 2708:Frank, what's the deal? 2540:It matters not whether I 2233: 2178: 1081:) 17:13, 5 May 2009 (UTC) 520:A tag has been placed on 423: 406: 394:22:10, 9 April 2009 (UTC) 363:23:14, 4 April 2009 (UTC) 329:22:53, 4 April 2009 (UTC) 314:22:36, 4 April 2009 (UTC) 275:22:16, 4 April 2009 (UTC) 248:21:59, 4 April 2009 (UTC) 223:21:49, 4 April 2009 (UTC) 189:21:34, 4 April 2009 (UTC) 127:21:10, 4 April 2009 (UTC) 3282:15:12, 7 June 2009 (UTC) 3258:03:53, 7 June 2009 (UTC) 3233:03:44, 7 June 2009 (UTC) 3214:as I have done with the 3200:01:23, 7 June 2009 (UTC) 3174:01:22, 7 June 2009 (UTC) 3157:23:40, 6 June 2009 (UTC) 3094:14:29, 5 June 2009 (UTC) 3085:14:27, 5 June 2009 (UTC) 3060:14:14, 5 June 2009 (UTC) 3039:21:51, 2 June 2009 (UTC) 3013:21:30, 2 June 2009 (UTC) 2992:21:07, 2 June 2009 (UTC) 2916:20:30, 2 June 2009 (UTC) 2893:20:05, 2 June 2009 (UTC) 2853:19:57, 2 June 2009 (UTC) 2808:19:20, 2 June 2009 (UTC) 2766:19:15, 2 June 2009 (UTC) 2743:19:07, 2 June 2009 (UTC) 2718:19:05, 2 June 2009 (UTC) 2703:17:51, 2 June 2009 (UTC) 2671:18:21, 2 June 2009 (UTC) 2640:18:14, 2 June 2009 (UTC) 2617:16:09, 2 June 2009 (UTC) 2585:16:04, 2 June 2009 (UTC) 2573:15:52, 2 June 2009 (UTC) 2535:15:38, 2 June 2009 (UTC) 2480:03:19, 26 May 2009 (UTC) 2465:09:37, 26 May 2009 (UTC) 2450:09:33, 26 May 2009 (UTC) 2425:07:13, 26 May 2009 (UTC) 2410:14:29, 25 May 2009 (UTC) 2379:13:57, 25 May 2009 (UTC) 2326:13:23, 25 May 2009 (UTC) 2289:13:16, 25 May 2009 (UTC) 2225:12:58, 24 May 2009 (UTC) 2164:14:50, 25 May 2009 (UTC) 2142:01:47, 21 May 2009 (UTC) 2116:01:15, 21 May 2009 (UTC) 2092:00:31, 20 May 2009 (UTC) 2066:00:02, 20 May 2009 (UTC) 2040:22:47, 19 May 2009 (UTC) 2011:23:44, 16 May 2009 (UTC) 1988:23:35, 16 May 2009 (UTC) 1974:FYI I've put this up at 1964:20:50, 16 May 2009 (UTC) 1913:19:17, 16 May 2009 (UTC) 1876:14:25, 16 May 2009 (UTC) 1760:02:49, 13 May 2009 (UTC) 1697:14:53, 13 May 2009 (UTC) 1669:14:44, 13 May 2009 (UTC) 1648:21:22, 12 May 2009 (UTC) 1607:21:18, 12 May 2009 (UTC) 1576:20:20, 11 May 2009 (UTC) 1550:20:16, 11 May 2009 (UTC) 1525:20:48, 11 May 2009 (UTC) 1507:16:42, 11 May 2009 (UTC) 1472:16:21, 11 May 2009 (UTC) 1449:13:29, 10 May 2009 (UTC) 1405:13:11, 10 May 2009 (UTC) 880:nominate it for deletion 628:Square Enix Music Online 3726:Many thanks once again, 3122:, which succeeded with 1364:23:08, 8 May 2009 (UTC) 1342:17:45, 8 May 2009 (UTC) 1311:20:21, 7 May 2009 (UTC) 1270:00:15, 6 May 2009 (UTC) 1244:00:10, 6 May 2009 (UTC) 1224:00:22, 6 May 2009 (UTC) 1195:00:15, 6 May 2009 (UTC) 1173:00:09, 6 May 2009 (UTC) 1153:17:43, 5 May 2009 (UTC) 1093:17:25, 5 May 2009 (UTC) 1066:16:33, 5 May 2009 (UTC) 994:16:07, 5 May 2009 (UTC) 980:15:17, 5 May 2009 (UTC) 965:15:12, 5 May 2009 (UTC) 927:15:09, 5 May 2009 (UTC) 899:12:17, 5 May 2009 (UTC) 861:12:07, 5 May 2009 (UTC) 838:12:27, 5 May 2009 (UTC) 817:12:13, 5 May 2009 (UTC) 795:12:04, 5 May 2009 (UTC) 768:01:28, 5 May 2009 (UTC) 747:01:49, 5 May 2009 (UTC) 721:00:53, 5 May 2009 (UTC) 677:10:50, 4 May 2009 (UTC) 536:for more information. 4102:enough for inclusion. 3932: 2920:In the absence of any 2241: 1591:Christopher Falkenberg 1455:Frank Melton reversion 1285: 1103: 1006: 573:to request that they 530:the guidelines on spam 517: 446: 4722:Template:CCBYSASource 4663:Another day, another 4503:notable. Please read 4124: 3813:associated template, 3315:and get consensus. - 2930:should the need arise 2922:evidence of need for 2239: 1618:notability guidelines 1416:. If you can provide 1284: 1102: 1049:for that burger? ;-) 1020:! Cheezburgrs promot 1005: 700:User:Cody.feilding.nz 689:User:Cody.feilding.nz 516: 451:the Kindness campaign 445: 42:of past discussions. 2074:Many thanks - again, 1918:I've replied on the 1704:Mark Howard producer 1629:substantial coverage 1428:. If you wish me to 1299:Gaia Octavia Agrippa 1107:A More Perfect Onion 1085:A More Perfect Onion 1075:A More Perfect Onion 1010:A More Perfect Onion 986:A More Perfect Onion 972:A More Perfect Onion 919:A More Perfect Onion 592:Deletion review for 4614:Frank Bruno's Laugh 4552:Frank Bruno's Laugh 4536:Frank Bruno's Laugh 4376:Frank Bruno's Laugh 4306:Frank Bruno's Laugh 4251:Frank Bruno's Laugh 4229:Frank Bruno's Laugh 4175:Frank Bruno's Laugh 4125:Frank Bruno's Laugh 3863:User:Moonriddengirl 3645:....this goes from 2833:Talk:Farrah Fawcett 1823:deletion discussion 1412:I'm sorry the page 1032:buddiez by addin {{ 655:) 4 May 2009 (UTC) 571:one of these admins 506:Speedy deletion of 4054:your first article 3437:need consensus. - 2779:. I did, however, 2243: 2242: 2186: 2045:I've reverted the 1809:your first article 1286: 1104: 1007: 518: 447: 435: 430: 5009: 4950:more about Walter 4942: 4867: 4816: 4756: 4703: 4657: 4640:World of Warcraft 4605: 4522: 4475: 4451: 4424: 4367: 4287: 4216: 4165: 4117: 4071: 4044: 4027:comment added by 3891: 3869:for more details. 3801: 3742: 3741: 3670: 3635: 3617: 3594: 3576: 3551: 3511: 3484:assume good faith 3476: 3454: 3430:Article Structure 3420: 3398: 3379:Article Structure 3363: 3332: 3302: 3256: 3235: 3198: 3181:looked it up here 3146: 3145: 3083: 3037: 3011: 2990: 2891: 2806: 2781:contact the admin 2741: 2701: 2669: 2615: 2571: 2448: 2408: 2324: 2301:the company, but 2292: 2275:comment added by 2247: 2246: 2234: 2180: 2140: 2084:Derek R Bullamore 2064: 2032:Derek R Bullamore 2009: 1962: 1935:know. However, I 1874: 1796: 1782:comment added by 1758: 1743:for the subject. 1731: 1717:comment added by 1695: 1646: 1574: 1505: 1447: 1408: 1391:comment added by 1362: 1322: 1268: 1222: 1193: 1151: 1131: 1064: 963: 897: 815: 745: 719: 675: 498: 434: 433: 424: 402: 361: 312: 246: 187: 100: 99: 54: 53: 48:current talk page 5029: 5008: 5006: 5000: 4995: 4941: 4939: 4933: 4928: 4866: 4864: 4858: 4853: 4815: 4813: 4807: 4802: 4799:reliable sources 4755: 4753: 4747: 4742: 4702: 4700: 4694: 4689: 4678: 4673: 4656: 4654: 4648: 4643: 4604: 4602: 4596: 4591: 4588:the encyclopedia 4521: 4519: 4513: 4508: 4469: 4463: 4459: 4450: 4448: 4442: 4437: 4418: 4412: 4408: 4366: 4364: 4358: 4353: 4286: 4284: 4278: 4273: 4215: 4213: 4207: 4202: 4164: 4162: 4156: 4151: 4140: 4134: 4116: 4114: 4108: 4103: 4070: 4068: 4062: 4057: 4043: 4021: 4001: 3995: 3979: 3973: 3969: 3963: 3929: 3923: 3890: 3888: 3882: 3877: 3843: 3822: 3816: 3800: 3798: 3792: 3787: 3769: 3716: 3709: 3692:Piano non troppo 3690:. Best Regards, 3664: 3658: 3654: 3634: 3632: 3626: 3621: 3611: 3605: 3601: 3593: 3591: 3585: 3580: 3570: 3564: 3560: 3550: 3548: 3542: 3537: 3505: 3499: 3495: 3475: 3473: 3467: 3462: 3448: 3442: 3438: 3419: 3417: 3411: 3406: 3392: 3386: 3382: 3362: 3360: 3354: 3349: 3326: 3320: 3316: 3301: 3299: 3293: 3288: 3277: 3255: 3253: 3247: 3242: 3229: 3223: 3219: 3197: 3195: 3189: 3184: 3171: 3128:12 in opposition 3115: 3108: 3082: 3080: 3074: 3069: 3036: 3034: 3028: 3023: 3005: 2989: 2987: 2981: 2976: 2890: 2888: 2882: 2877: 2805: 2803: 2797: 2792: 2740: 2738: 2732: 2727: 2695: 2668: 2666: 2660: 2655: 2614: 2612: 2606: 2601: 2570: 2568: 2562: 2557: 2546:reliable sources 2477: 2476:Ten Pound Hammer 2447: 2445: 2439: 2434: 2407: 2405: 2399: 2394: 2323: 2321: 2315: 2310: 2291: 2269: 2231: 2185: 2176: 2139: 2137: 2131: 2126: 2063: 2061: 2055: 2050: 2008: 2006: 2000: 1995: 1961: 1959: 1953: 1948: 1929:reliable sources 1873: 1871: 1865: 1860: 1827:speedily deleted 1795: 1776: 1757: 1755: 1749: 1744: 1730: 1711: 1694: 1692: 1686: 1681: 1645: 1643: 1637: 1632: 1573: 1571: 1565: 1560: 1504: 1502: 1496: 1491: 1446: 1444: 1438: 1433: 1422:reliable sources 1407: 1385: 1361: 1359: 1353: 1348: 1314: 1307: 1300: 1267: 1265: 1259: 1254: 1221: 1219: 1213: 1208: 1192: 1190: 1184: 1179: 1150: 1148: 1142: 1137: 1121: 1063: 1061: 1055: 1050: 1034:subst:Cheezburgr 962: 960: 954: 949: 896: 894: 888: 883: 831: 814: 812: 806: 801: 788: 744: 742: 736: 731: 718: 717: 706: 696:User:Cody Cooper 694:I am using both 685:User:Cody Cooper 674: 672: 666: 661: 641:Yoshitaka Hirota 614: 550: 549: 543: 497: 495: 489: 484: 472: 429: 404: 360: 358: 352: 347: 311: 309: 303: 298: 245: 243: 237: 232: 186: 184: 178: 173: 110:places like this 78: 56: 55: 33: 32: 26: 5037: 5036: 5032: 5031: 5030: 5028: 5027: 5026: 5025: 5019: 5004: 4998: 4996: 4972: 4952: 4937: 4931: 4929: 4862: 4856: 4854: 4811: 4805: 4803: 4766: 4751: 4745: 4743: 4725: 4698: 4692: 4690: 4652: 4646: 4644: 4600: 4594: 4592: 4532: 4517: 4511: 4509: 4484: 4467: 4461: 4446: 4440: 4438: 4416: 4410: 4396: 4362: 4356: 4354: 4282: 4276: 4274: 4211: 4205: 4203: 4160: 4154: 4152: 4127: 4112: 4106: 4104: 4066: 4060: 4058: 4022: 4017: 3999: 3993: 3977: 3971: 3967: 3961: 3927: 3921: 3886: 3880: 3878: 3853: 3841: 3820: 3814: 3796: 3790: 3788: 3779: 3767: 3747: 3707: 3685: 3662: 3656: 3630: 3624: 3622: 3609: 3603: 3589: 3583: 3581: 3568: 3562: 3546: 3540: 3538: 3503: 3497: 3471: 3465: 3463: 3446: 3440: 3415: 3409: 3407: 3390: 3384: 3358: 3352: 3350: 3340:. If you think 3324: 3318: 3309: 3297: 3291: 3289: 3273: 3266: 3264:May be of use.. 3251: 3245: 3243: 3227: 3221: 3208: 3193: 3187: 3185: 3169: 3164: 3132:3 neutral votes 3106: 3078: 3072: 3070: 3047: 3032: 3026: 3024: 2985: 2979: 2977: 2926:semi-protection 2886: 2880: 2878: 2801: 2795: 2793: 2736: 2730: 2728: 2689: 2664: 2658: 2656: 2647:Sonia Sotomayor 2621:So you believe 2610: 2604: 2602: 2566: 2560: 2558: 2503:Abraham Lincoln 2487: 2475: 2472: 2443: 2437: 2435: 2403: 2397: 2395: 2389:. Did you read 2319: 2313: 2311: 2270: 2254: 2174: 2135: 2129: 2127: 2104: 2059: 2053: 2051: 2021: 2004: 1998: 1996: 1972: 1957: 1951: 1949: 1884: 1869: 1863: 1861: 1819:deletion review 1777: 1768: 1753: 1747: 1745: 1712: 1707: 1690: 1684: 1682: 1641: 1635: 1633: 1584: 1569: 1563: 1561: 1538: 1500: 1494: 1492: 1457: 1442: 1436: 1434: 1386: 1372: 1357: 1351: 1349: 1329: 1324: 1309: 1278: 1263: 1257: 1255: 1232: 1217: 1211: 1209: 1188: 1182: 1180: 1161: 1146: 1140: 1138: 1133: 1083:Here you go. -- 1059: 1053: 1051: 1038: 958: 952: 950: 915:snowball clause 910: 892: 886: 884: 848: 827: 810: 804: 802: 784: 777: 755: 740: 734: 732: 713: 707: 692: 670: 664: 662: 624: 612: 601:deletion review 597: 547: 541: 540: 511: 493: 487: 485: 465: 440: 401: 372: 356: 350: 348: 307: 301: 299: 241: 235: 233: 182: 176: 174: 105: 74: 30: 22: 21: 20: 18:User talk:Frank 12: 11: 5: 5035: 5033: 5023: 5018: 5015: 5014: 5013: 4971: 4968: 4951: 4948: 4947: 4946: 4909: 4881: 4880: 4879: 4878: 4877: 4876: 4875: 4874: 4841: 4840: 4839: 4838: 4821: 4820: 4765: 4762: 4761: 4760: 4729:Moonriddengirl 4724: 4719: 4718: 4717: 4716: 4715: 4714: 4713: 4712: 4711: 4710: 4709: 4708: 4707: 4531: 4528: 4527: 4526: 4487:Bloomington.-- 4483: 4480: 4479: 4478: 4477: 4476: 4430:you started it 4404: 4403: 4395: 4392: 4391: 4390: 4389: 4388: 4387: 4386: 4350: 4349: 4348: 4339: 4328:WP:OVERSIGHTed 4317: 4316: 4266: 4265: 4264: 4263: 4262: 4261: 4242: 4241: 4240: 4239: 4221: 4220: 4170: 4169: 4126: 4123: 4122: 4121: 4076: 4075: 4016: 4013: 4012: 4011: 4010: 4009: 4004:Moonriddengirl 3997:Uw-c&pmove 3986:September 2008 3957:if and only if 3933: 3896: 3895: 3876:My two cents. 3874: 3870: 3846: 3806: 3805: 3786:Works for me. 3772: 3746: 3743: 3740: 3739: 3727: 3725: 3724: 3717: 3706: 3703: 3684: 3681: 3680: 3679: 3678: 3677: 3676: 3675: 3674: 3673: 3672: 3671: 3649:(market 1) to 3529:notable enough 3525: 3524: 3523: 3522: 3521: 3520: 3519: 3518: 3517: 3516: 3515: 3514: 3513: 3512: 3403:already policy 3308: 3305: 3304: 3303: 3265: 3262: 3261: 3260: 3207: 3204: 3203: 3202: 3163: 3160: 3144: 3143: 3116: 3105: 3102: 3101: 3100: 3099: 3098: 3097: 3096: 3091:Moonriddengirl 3057:Moonriddengirl 3046: 3043: 3042: 3041: 2999: 2998: 2997: 2996: 2995: 2994: 2967: 2966: 2965: 2964: 2963: 2962: 2961: 2960: 2957: 2950:George W. Bush 2933: 2898: 2897: 2896: 2895: 2871: 2870: 2869: 2868: 2856: 2855: 2841:in this thread 2828: 2827: 2773: 2772: 2771: 2770: 2769: 2768: 2748: 2747: 2746: 2745: 2721: 2720: 2688: 2683: 2682: 2681: 2680: 2679: 2678: 2677: 2676: 2675: 2674: 2673: 2499:Queen Victoria 2486: 2483: 2471: 2468: 2453: 2452: 2413: 2412: 2367: 2363: 2359: 2355: 2351: 2347: 2343: 2339: 2335: 2329: 2328: 2253: 2248: 2245: 2244: 2232: 2217:LessHeard vanU 2213: 2173: 2170: 2169: 2168: 2167: 2166: 2145: 2144: 2103: 2098: 2097: 2096: 2095: 2094: 2078: 2077: 2076: 2075: 2069: 2068: 2020: 2015: 2014: 2013: 1971: 1968: 1967: 1966: 1939:know that the 1883: 1880: 1879: 1878: 1855: 1854: 1850: 1849: 1833: 1832: 1831: 1830: 1815: 1812: 1767: 1764: 1763: 1762: 1706: 1701: 1700: 1699: 1651: 1650: 1583: 1580: 1579: 1578: 1537: 1531: 1530: 1529: 1528: 1527: 1510: 1509: 1456: 1453: 1452: 1451: 1371: 1368: 1367: 1366: 1328: 1325: 1313: 1303: 1279: 1277: 1274: 1273: 1272: 1231: 1228: 1227: 1226: 1198: 1197: 1165:~~0xRanDomx0~~ 1160: 1157: 1156: 1155: 1118: 1097: 1096: 1095: 1069: 1068: 1025: 1000: 999: 998: 997: 996: 982: 909: 905:My db-band on 903: 902: 901: 847: 844: 843: 842: 841: 840: 820: 819: 776: 774:Flag of pasban 771: 754: 751: 750: 749: 691: 681: 680: 679: 633:Yoko Shimomura 623: 620: 596: 590: 510: 504: 503: 502: 464: 461: 439: 436: 432: 431: 422: 400: 397: 371: 366: 336: 335: 334: 333: 332: 331: 278: 277: 263: 260: 257: 254: 228: 227: 226: 225: 210: 206: 203: 199: 195: 165: 164: 163: 162: 158: 154: 150: 147: 144: 104: 101: 98: 97: 92: 89: 84: 79: 72: 67: 62: 52: 51: 34: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 5034: 5022: 5016: 5012: 5007: 5001: 4993: 4989: 4988: 4987: 4986: 4982: 4978: 4969: 4967: 4966: 4962: 4958: 4949: 4945: 4940: 4934: 4926: 4925: 4924: 4923: 4919: 4915: 4910: 4907: 4906: 4902: 4898: 4893: 4892: 4887: 4886: 4872: 4871: 4870: 4865: 4859: 4851: 4847: 4846: 4845: 4844: 4843: 4842: 4837: 4833: 4829: 4825: 4824: 4823: 4822: 4819: 4814: 4808: 4800: 4796: 4792: 4791: 4790: 4789: 4785: 4781: 4776: 4774: 4769: 4763: 4759: 4754: 4748: 4739: 4736: 4735: 4734: 4733: 4730: 4723: 4720: 4706: 4701: 4695: 4687: 4684: 4683: 4682: 4679: 4674: 4672: 4666: 4662: 4661: 4660: 4655: 4649: 4641: 4637: 4633: 4629: 4625: 4624: 4623: 4619: 4615: 4610: 4609: 4608: 4603: 4597: 4589: 4585: 4581: 4577: 4574: 4570: 4569: 4563: 4562: 4561: 4557: 4553: 4548: 4547: 4546: 4545: 4541: 4537: 4529: 4525: 4520: 4514: 4506: 4501: 4500: 4499: 4498: 4494: 4490: 4481: 4474: 4470: 4464: 4456: 4455: 4454: 4449: 4443: 4435: 4431: 4427: 4426: 4425: 4423: 4419: 4413: 4401: 4400: 4399: 4393: 4385: 4381: 4377: 4372: 4371: 4370: 4365: 4359: 4351: 4347: 4346: 4345:frustrations. 4340: 4338: 4337: 4332: 4331: 4329: 4325: 4321: 4320: 4319: 4318: 4315: 4311: 4307: 4302: 4298: 4293: 4292: 4291: 4290: 4285: 4279: 4271: 4260: 4256: 4252: 4248: 4247: 4246: 4245: 4244: 4243: 4238: 4234: 4230: 4225: 4224: 4223: 4222: 4219: 4214: 4208: 4200: 4196: 4195:WP:DISRUPTIVE 4191: 4187: 4186: 4185: 4184: 4180: 4176: 4168: 4163: 4157: 4148: 4147: 4146: 4145: 4141: 4135: 4120: 4115: 4109: 4101: 4097: 4092: 4091: 4090: 4089: 4085: 4081: 4080:75.181.83.111 4074: 4069: 4063: 4055: 4051: 4047: 4046: 4045: 4042: 4038: 4034: 4030: 4026: 4014: 4008: 4005: 3998: 3992:. There is a 3991: 3987: 3984:, created in 3983: 3976: 3966: 3958: 3954: 3950: 3948: 3942: 3938: 3934: 3931: 3926: 3919: 3915: 3911: 3904: 3900: 3899: 3898: 3897: 3894: 3889: 3883: 3875: 3871: 3868: 3864: 3859: 3858: 3857: 3856: 3852: 3850: 3845: 3840: 3838: 3834: 3830: 3826: 3819: 3811: 3804: 3799: 3793: 3785: 3784: 3783: 3782: 3778: 3776: 3771: 3766: 3764: 3760: 3756: 3752: 3744: 3738: 3734: 3730: 3722: 3715: 3710: 3704: 3702: 3701: 3697: 3693: 3689: 3682: 3669: 3665: 3659: 3652: 3648: 3644: 3640: 3639: 3638: 3633: 3627: 3619: 3618: 3616: 3612: 3606: 3599: 3598: 3597: 3592: 3586: 3578: 3577: 3575: 3571: 3565: 3557: 3556: 3555: 3554: 3549: 3543: 3535: 3530: 3510: 3506: 3500: 3493: 3489: 3485: 3481: 3480: 3479: 3474: 3468: 3460: 3456: 3455: 3453: 3449: 3443: 3436: 3431: 3427: 3426: 3425: 3424: 3423: 3418: 3412: 3404: 3400: 3399: 3397: 3393: 3387: 3380: 3376: 3372: 3368: 3367: 3366: 3361: 3355: 3347: 3346:show me where 3343: 3339: 3335: 3334: 3333: 3331: 3327: 3321: 3314: 3307:WBAL-TV Edits 3306: 3300: 3294: 3286: 3285: 3284: 3283: 3280: 3278: 3276: 3270: 3263: 3259: 3254: 3248: 3241: 3238: 3237: 3236: 3234: 3230: 3224: 3217: 3213: 3205: 3201: 3196: 3190: 3182: 3178: 3177: 3176: 3175: 3172: 3161: 3159: 3158: 3154: 3150: 3141: 3137: 3133: 3129: 3125: 3124:56 in support 3121: 3114: 3109: 3103: 3095: 3092: 3088: 3087: 3086: 3081: 3075: 3067: 3063: 3062: 3061: 3058: 3053: 3049: 3048: 3044: 3040: 3035: 3029: 3021: 3020:User:Abrazame 3017: 3016: 3015: 3014: 3009: 3008:My narrowboat 3004: 2993: 2988: 2982: 2973: 2972: 2971: 2970: 2969: 2968: 2958: 2955: 2951: 2947: 2943: 2938: 2934: 2931: 2927: 2925: 2919: 2918: 2917: 2913: 2909: 2904: 2903: 2902: 2901: 2900: 2899: 2894: 2889: 2883: 2875: 2874: 2873: 2872: 2865: 2860: 2859: 2858: 2857: 2854: 2850: 2846: 2842: 2839: 2834: 2830: 2829: 2825: 2821: 2817: 2812: 2811: 2810: 2809: 2804: 2798: 2790: 2786: 2782: 2778: 2767: 2763: 2759: 2754: 2753: 2752: 2751: 2750: 2749: 2744: 2739: 2733: 2725: 2724: 2723: 2722: 2719: 2715: 2711: 2707: 2706: 2705: 2704: 2699: 2698:My narrowboat 2694: 2687: 2686:Farah Fawcett 2684: 2672: 2667: 2661: 2652: 2648: 2643: 2642: 2641: 2638: 2635: 2631: 2626: 2625: 2620: 2619: 2618: 2613: 2607: 2599: 2595: 2591: 2588: 2587: 2586: 2583: 2580: 2576: 2575: 2574: 2569: 2563: 2555: 2551: 2547: 2543: 2539: 2538: 2537: 2536: 2533: 2530: 2526: 2522: 2518: 2513: 2508: 2504: 2500: 2496: 2492: 2484: 2482: 2481: 2469: 2467: 2466: 2462: 2458: 2451: 2446: 2440: 2432: 2429: 2428: 2427: 2426: 2422: 2418: 2411: 2406: 2400: 2392: 2388: 2383: 2382: 2381: 2380: 2376: 2372: 2368: 2366: 2362: 2358: 2354: 2350: 2346: 2342: 2338: 2334: 2327: 2322: 2316: 2308: 2304: 2300: 2295: 2294: 2293: 2290: 2286: 2282: 2278: 2274: 2267: 2263: 2259: 2252: 2249: 2238: 2230: 2227: 2226: 2222: 2218: 2211: 2207: 2203: 2199: 2195: 2191: 2184: 2177: 2171: 2165: 2161: 2157: 2153: 2149: 2148: 2147: 2146: 2143: 2138: 2132: 2124: 2120: 2119: 2118: 2117: 2113: 2109: 2102: 2099: 2093: 2089: 2085: 2082: 2081: 2080: 2079: 2073: 2072: 2071: 2070: 2067: 2062: 2056: 2048: 2044: 2043: 2042: 2041: 2037: 2033: 2029: 2026: 2019: 2016: 2012: 2007: 2001: 1992: 1991: 1990: 1989: 1985: 1981: 1980:Wasted Time R 1977: 1969: 1965: 1960: 1954: 1946: 1945:other sources 1942: 1938: 1934: 1930: 1926: 1921: 1917: 1916: 1915: 1914: 1910: 1906: 1901: 1898: 1892: 1888: 1881: 1877: 1872: 1866: 1857: 1856: 1852: 1851: 1847: 1843: 1839: 1835: 1834: 1828: 1824: 1820: 1816: 1813: 1810: 1806: 1805: 1803: 1799: 1798: 1797: 1793: 1789: 1785: 1781: 1773: 1765: 1761: 1756: 1750: 1742: 1738: 1734: 1733: 1732: 1728: 1724: 1720: 1716: 1705: 1702: 1698: 1693: 1687: 1678: 1673: 1672: 1671: 1670: 1666: 1662: 1658: 1656: 1649: 1644: 1638: 1630: 1626: 1623: 1619: 1615: 1611: 1610: 1609: 1608: 1604: 1600: 1595: 1592: 1587: 1581: 1577: 1572: 1566: 1559:the project. 1558: 1554: 1553: 1552: 1551: 1547: 1543: 1536: 1532: 1526: 1522: 1518: 1515:Fair enough. 1514: 1513: 1512: 1511: 1508: 1503: 1497: 1488: 1484: 1480: 1476: 1475: 1474: 1473: 1469: 1465: 1461: 1454: 1450: 1445: 1439: 1431: 1427: 1423: 1419: 1415: 1411: 1410: 1409: 1406: 1402: 1398: 1394: 1390: 1382: 1379: 1376: 1369: 1365: 1360: 1354: 1346: 1345: 1344: 1343: 1339: 1335: 1326: 1323: 1321: 1319: 1312: 1308: 1301: 1294: 1290: 1283: 1275: 1271: 1266: 1260: 1252: 1248: 1247: 1246: 1245: 1241: 1237: 1229: 1225: 1220: 1214: 1206: 1203: 1202: 1201: 1196: 1191: 1185: 1177: 1176: 1175: 1174: 1170: 1166: 1158: 1154: 1149: 1143: 1135: 1134: 1132: 1129: 1128:BlankWikiLove 1125: 1119: 1116: 1112: 1108: 1101: 1094: 1090: 1086: 1082: 1080: 1076: 1071: 1070: 1067: 1062: 1056: 1048: 1044: 1040: 1039: 1037: 1035: 1031: 1026: 1023: 1019: 1016:) haz givn u 1015: 1011: 1004: 995: 991: 987: 983: 981: 977: 973: 968: 967: 966: 961: 955: 947: 943: 939: 935: 931: 930: 929: 928: 924: 920: 916: 908: 904: 900: 895: 889: 881: 877: 873: 869: 865: 864: 863: 862: 858: 854: 845: 839: 835: 830: 824: 823: 822: 821: 818: 813: 807: 799: 798: 797: 796: 792: 787: 782: 775: 772: 770: 769: 765: 761: 752: 748: 743: 737: 729: 725: 724: 723: 722: 716: 712: 711: 704: 701: 697: 690: 686: 682: 678: 673: 667: 658: 657: 656: 654: 650: 646: 642: 638: 637:Hiroki Kikuta 634: 629: 621: 619: 618: 615: 610: 606: 602: 595: 591: 589: 588: 584: 580: 576: 572: 567: 563: 562: 561:the talk page 557: 556: 546: 537: 535: 531: 527: 523: 515: 509: 505: 501: 496: 490: 482: 481: 480: 479: 476: 471: 462: 460: 459: 456: 452: 449:On behalf of 444: 438:Happy Easter! 437: 428: 421: 417: 413: 409: 405: 398: 396: 395: 392: 387: 385: 381: 377: 370: 367: 365: 364: 359: 353: 344: 343:contributions 341: 330: 326: 322: 317: 316: 315: 310: 304: 296: 291: 287: 282: 281: 280: 279: 276: 272: 268: 264: 261: 258: 255: 252: 251: 250: 249: 244: 238: 224: 220: 216: 211: 207: 204: 200: 196: 192: 191: 190: 185: 179: 171: 167: 166: 159: 155: 151: 148: 145: 142: 138: 134: 133: 131: 130: 129: 128: 124: 120: 116: 111: 102: 96: 93: 90: 88: 85: 83: 80: 77: 73: 71: 68: 66: 63: 61: 58: 57: 49: 45: 41: 40: 35: 28: 27: 19: 5020: 4991: 4973: 4953: 4911: 4908: 4894: 4890: 4888: 4884: 4882: 4794: 4777: 4772: 4770: 4767: 4737: 4726: 4670: 4587: 4583: 4579: 4575: 4567: 4533: 4485: 4462:NeutralHomer 4433: 4411:NeutralHomer 4405: 4397: 4342: 4334: 4267: 4171: 4128: 4096:WP:CONSENSUS 4077: 4048:Please read 4018: 3956: 3951:)" See also 3944: 3941:edit summary 3937:Help:Merging 3917: 3914:edit summary 3907: 3847: 3844: 3836: 3832: 3828: 3807: 3773: 3770: 3762: 3758: 3754: 3748: 3686: 3657:NeutralHomer 3604:NeutralHomer 3563:NeutralHomer 3526: 3498:NeutralHomer 3441:NeutralHomer 3434: 3385:NeutralHomer 3319:NeutralHomer 3310: 3274: 3267: 3222:NeutralHomer 3209: 3165: 3147: 3131: 3127: 3123: 3065: 3000: 2954:Barack Obama 2945: 2941: 2936: 2929: 2923: 2863: 2837: 2788: 2784: 2774: 2690: 2650: 2630:D. B. Cooper 2623: 2622: 2554:D. B. Cooper 2549: 2541: 2511: 2506: 2494: 2488: 2473: 2454: 2414: 2369: 2330: 2302: 2298: 2255: 2228: 2193: 2187: 2182: 2105: 2101:Delano Lewis 2030: 2025:User:Mythdon 2022: 2018:Brian Hyland 1973: 1970:Jay Weinberg 1936: 1932: 1927:properly in 1902: 1896: 1893: 1889: 1885: 1841: 1825:rather than 1802:NawlinWiki's 1772:Jack Mancino 1769: 1766:Jack Mancino 1719:Charliedylan 1708: 1676: 1659: 1652: 1628: 1621: 1596: 1588: 1585: 1539: 1535:Robert Reich 1486: 1482: 1479:WP:VANDALISM 1458: 1383: 1380: 1377: 1373: 1330: 1315: 1288: 1287: 1233: 1199: 1162: 1120: 1105: 1072: 1027: 1008: 945: 937: 933: 911: 907:Chris Franck 849: 778: 756: 709: 705: 693: 625: 598: 565: 559: 552: 538: 519: 466: 448: 388: 373: 337: 294: 289: 285: 229: 169: 140: 136: 106: 75: 43: 37: 4883:NEW YORK – 4023:—Preceding 3865:or look up 3808:So explain 3492:WP:LINKSPAM 3459:WP:LINKSPAM 3457:Did it say 3377:rules (see 3052:Frank Frost 3003:RegentsPark 2946:unprotected 2867:contribute. 2816:I requested 2693:RegentsPark 2271:—Preceding 2156:David in DC 2108:David in DC 1838:other stuff 1778:—Preceding 1713:—Preceding 1542:199.88.20.8 1387:—Preceding 1384:wikiebotf 1318:subst:Smile 1236:Jetskiimike 710:Cody Cooper 645:Joanne Hogg 609:Computerjoe 553:the top of 532:as well as 412:AdjustShift 321:Ottava Rima 267:Ottava Rima 215:Ottava Rima 119:Ottava Rima 36:This is an 4568:three days 4100:WP:NOTABLE 4029:Mkiker2089 3729:Colds7ream 3338:removed it 3240:Go for it! 3104:RfA thanks 3066:discourage 3064:What does 2942:protection 2634:Physchim62 2624:everything 2579:Physchim62 2529:Physchim62 2470:Buddy Alan 2266:Attributor 1941:Daily Mail 1846:notability 1784:Georgeborg 1741:notability 1614:WP:CSD#G11 1586:Hi there, 1426:notability 1018:Cheezburgr 942:WP:PRODded 876:notability 868:WP:CSD#G11 781:WP:CSD#G11 753:Blackhawks 728:bureaucrat 605:Geekologie 594:Geekologie 399:RFA thanks 103:Temperment 95:Archive 10 4977:User F203 4970:talk page 4957:User F203 4914:User F203 4897:User F203 4828:User F203 4780:User F203 4686:Ya think? 4482:SproutBox 4324:MediaWiki 4270:community 4130:context.— 3975:Splitfrom 3925:Splitfrom 2924:continued 2194:153/39/22 2172:ThankSpam 2152:WP:WEIGHT 1920:talk page 1829:articles. 1661:AGDonohoe 1624:him (see 1599:AGDonohoe 1557:vandalize 1533:Edits to 1418:citations 1393:Wikiebotf 1334:Everyking 1251:WP:CSD#A7 1022:WikiLovez 579:Alexius08 87:Archive 6 82:Archive 5 76:Archive 4 70:Archive 3 65:Archive 2 60:Archive 1 4764:Hi Frank 4667:. :-/ -- 4665:WP:TROLL 4636:Facebook 4037:contribs 4025:unsigned 3965:Split-to 3947:the GFDL 3910:the GFDL 3849:wuz here 3818:Split-to 3775:wuz here 3218:page. - 2908:Abrazame 2845:Abrazame 2820:received 2758:Abrazame 2710:Abrazame 2525:WP:UNDUE 2521:WP:SYNTH 2507:absolute 2455:Thanks! 2285:contribs 2273:unsigned 2258:Corrigon 2251:Corrigon 1905:Abrazame 1792:contribs 1780:unsigned 1727:contribs 1715:unsigned 1597:Thanks. 1582:Question 1401:contribs 1389:unsigned 1381:Thanks, 1370:Hi Frank 1293:WikiLove 1115:WikiLove 1041:Got any 829:decltype 786:decltype 760:Alaney2k 649:Jeriaska 455:A Nobody 297:stated. 137:required 4628:Myspace 4530:Ryulong 4505:WP:CORP 4301:WP:DENY 4133:Ryūlóng 4050:WP:CORP 4015:Zone024 3745:Section 3651:KXGN-TV 3647:WABC-TV 3643:WBAL-TV 2824:thanked 2594:WP:CITE 2391:WP:CORP 2387:notable 2307:WP:CORP 2210:Buster7 2202:Noroton 2190:"RecFA" 2047:copyvio 1882:Details 1737:WP:OTRS 1230:My page 1047:pickles 1043:mustard 872:WP:CORP 853:RickH86 613:'s talk 475:Quadell 463:Support 202:agrees. 161:editor. 39:archive 5024:(UTC) 4999:Frank 4932:Frank 4857:Frank 4806:Frank 4746:Frank 4693:Frank 4647:Frank 4595:Frank 4512:Frank 4489:Zdwiel 4441:Frank 4357:Frank 4297:WP:NPA 4277:Frank 4206:Frank 4199:WP:NOT 4190:WP:NPA 4155:Frank 4107:Frank 4061:Frank 3881:Frank 3791:Frank 3721:my RfA 3625:Frank 3584:Frank 3541:Frank 3534:WP:TVS 3466:Frank 3410:Frank 3375:WP:TVS 3371:WP:TVS 3353:Frank 3342:WP:TVS 3313:WP:TVS 3292:Frank 3246:Frank 3188:Frank 3170:Durova 3149:Mifter 3136:Mifter 3120:my RfA 3073:Frank 3027:Frank 2980:Frank 2881:Frank 2796:Frank 2789:moving 2731:Frank 2659:Frank 2637:(talk) 2605:Frank 2596:, and 2582:(talk) 2561:Frank 2532:(talk) 2457:Thitpx 2438:Frank 2417:Thitpx 2398:Frank 2371:Thitpx 2314:Frank 2277:Thitpx 2262:BayTSP 2229:~~~~~ 2183:My RfA 2130:Frank 2054:Frank 1999:Frank 1976:T:TDYK 1952:Frank 1864:Frank 1770:..the 1748:Frank 1685:Frank 1636:Frank 1564:Frank 1495:Frank 1437:Frank 1352:Frank 1258:Frank 1212:Frank 1205:WP:RFR 1183:Frank 1141:Frank 1054:Frank 1030:lolcat 953:Frank 887:Frank 805:Frank 735:Frank 687:& 683:About 665:Frank 575:userfy 566:speedy 545:hangon 488:Frank 408:My RFA 351:Frank 302:Frank 286:stated 236:Frank 177:Frank 5005:talk 4938:talk 4863:talk 4812:talk 4752:talk 4741:tag. 4699:talk 4653:talk 4638:, or 4601:talk 4518:talk 4447:talk 4363:talk 4283:talk 4212:talk 4161:talk 4113:talk 4067:talk 3935:(Cf. 3887:talk 3797:talk 3631:talk 3590:talk 3547:talk 3488:WP:OR 3472:talk 3416:talk 3359:talk 3298:talk 3252:talk 3194:talk 3079:talk 3033:talk 2986:talk 2887:talk 2802:talk 2737:talk 2665:talk 2611:talk 2590:WP:RS 2567:talk 2512:might 2497:that 2485:WP:5P 2444:talk 2404:talk 2320:talk 2303:about 2198:Ceoil 2136:talk 2060:talk 2005:talk 1958:talk 1933:never 1925:cited 1870:talk 1754:talk 1691:talk 1677:about 1642:talk 1622:about 1570:talk 1501:talk 1443:talk 1420:from 1358:talk 1289:Frank 1264:talk 1218:talk 1189:talk 1147:talk 1124:subst 1060:talk 959:talk 938:third 893:talk 811:talk 741:talk 671:talk 494:talk 357:talk 340:check 308:talk 290:to me 242:talk 183:talk 141:to me 16:< 5017:Why? 4981:talk 4961:talk 4918:talk 4901:talk 4850:this 4832:talk 4784:talk 4688:;-) 4671:Koji 4618:talk 4580:zero 4576:ever 4556:talk 4540:talk 4493:talk 4468:Talk 4417:Talk 4380:talk 4310:talk 4255:talk 4233:talk 4179:talk 4084:talk 4052:and 4033:talk 3990:here 3953:WP:C 3867:GFDL 3835:LLST 3825:here 3810:this 3761:LLST 3733:talk 3696:talk 3663:Talk 3610:Talk 3569:Talk 3504:Talk 3490:and 3447:Talk 3435:will 3391:Talk 3325:Talk 3275:roux 3269:This 3228:Talk 3153:talk 3140:talk 3130:and 2937:this 2912:talk 2849:talk 2826:him. 2818:and 2814:ago 2783:who 2762:talk 2714:talk 2598:WP:V 2542:know 2517:WP:V 2495:know 2461:talk 2431:Here 2421:talk 2375:talk 2281:talk 2221:talk 2204:and 2160:talk 2112:talk 2088:talk 2036:talk 1984:talk 1909:talk 1897:that 1788:talk 1723:talk 1665:talk 1603:talk 1546:talk 1521:talk 1468:talk 1397:talk 1338:talk 1306:Sign 1249:See 1240:talk 1169:talk 1111:talk 1089:talk 1079:talk 1045:and 1014:talk 990:talk 976:talk 946:just 923:talk 857:talk 834:talk 791:talk 764:talk 715:Talk 698:and 653:talk 583:talk 416:talk 376:here 325:talk 271:talk 219:talk 170:this 123:talk 115:this 4848:Is 4775:. 4632:AOL 4434:lot 4193:is 2952:or 2864:did 2843:. 2785:did 2651:was 2550:not 2501:or 2264:or 2206:Lar 2123:NPR 1842:you 1631:). 1517:One 1464:One 1327:RfA 934:two 603:of 551:to 295:you 153:on. 5002:| 4992:in 4983:) 4963:) 4935:| 4920:) 4903:) 4860:| 4834:) 4809:| 4801:. 4786:) 4749:| 4696:| 4650:| 4634:, 4630:, 4620:) 4598:| 4584:am 4558:) 4542:) 4515:| 4495:) 4471:• 4465:• 4444:| 4420:• 4414:• 4382:) 4360:| 4312:) 4280:| 4257:) 4235:) 4209:| 4181:) 4158:| 4142:) 4139:竜龙 4110:| 4086:) 4064:| 4056:. 4039:) 4035:• 4000:}} 3994:{{ 3978:}} 3972:{{ 3968:}} 3962:{{ 3928:}} 3922:{{ 3905:: 3884:| 3821:}} 3815:{{ 3794:| 3735:) 3698:) 3666:• 3660:• 3628:| 3613:• 3607:• 3587:| 3572:• 3566:• 3544:| 3507:• 3501:• 3469:| 3450:• 3444:• 3413:| 3394:• 3388:• 3356:| 3348:. 3328:• 3322:• 3295:| 3249:| 3231:• 3225:• 3191:| 3162:Oy 3155:) 3142:) 3126:, 3076:| 3055:-- 3030:| 2983:| 2914:) 2884:| 2851:) 2799:| 2764:) 2734:| 2716:) 2662:| 2608:| 2600:. 2592:, 2564:| 2523:, 2519:, 2463:) 2441:| 2423:) 2401:| 2377:) 2317:| 2299:by 2287:) 2283:• 2223:) 2200:, 2162:) 2133:| 2114:) 2090:) 2057:| 2038:) 2002:| 1986:) 1955:| 1937:do 1911:) 1867:| 1794:) 1790:• 1751:| 1729:) 1725:• 1688:| 1667:) 1639:| 1605:) 1567:| 1548:) 1523:) 1498:| 1470:) 1440:| 1403:) 1399:• 1355:| 1340:) 1302:| 1261:| 1242:) 1215:| 1186:| 1171:) 1144:| 1091:) 1057:| 992:) 978:) 970:-- 956:| 925:) 890:| 859:) 836:) 808:| 793:) 766:) 738:| 668:| 643:, 639:, 635:, 585:) 548:}} 542:{{ 491:| 473:– 418:) 386:. 354:| 327:) 305:| 273:) 239:| 221:) 180:| 125:) 91:→ 4979:( 4959:( 4916:( 4899:( 4830:( 4782:( 4677:† 4616:( 4554:( 4538:( 4491:( 4378:( 4308:( 4253:( 4231:( 4177:( 4136:( 4082:( 4031:( 3851:@ 3842:▼ 3839:R 3837:✰ 3833:A 3829:- 3777:@ 3768:▼ 3765:R 3763:✰ 3759:A 3755:- 3731:( 3694:( 3151:( 3138:( 3010:) 3006:( 2910:( 2847:( 2760:( 2712:( 2700:) 2696:( 2459:( 2419:( 2373:( 2279:( 2219:( 2158:( 2110:( 2086:( 2034:( 1982:( 1907:( 1811:. 1786:( 1721:( 1663:( 1601:( 1544:( 1519:( 1466:( 1395:( 1336:( 1238:( 1167:( 1126:: 1109:( 1087:( 1077:( 1012:( 988:( 974:( 921:( 855:( 832:( 789:( 762:( 651:( 581:( 414:( 391:] 323:( 269:( 217:( 121:( 50:.

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

Index