User talk:Guettarda/Archive20

2017:) - as I have said many times, you aren't welcome here. I've asked you repeatedly to stay away, and you keep reposting. I'm not sure what you think you're gaining from harassing me, but the point is that anything you post here ends up "revert without reading". If you get some fulfillment out of turning that bar on my page orange - well, you need a better hobby, I think. If your goal is to harass and annoy me - well, sorry...right now all you've succeeding in doing is getting me to ponder what motivates you and your ilk. And having spent years trying to figure out what motivates creationists, climate change "skeptics" aren't all that puzzling. Just need to tweak the model a little to get from one to the other... Anyway, I hope it brought some joy or meaning to your life to use my talk page as a venue to mutter to yourself. But this fact notwithstanding, you're still not welcome here. 4147:. *If you feel that another competitor is breaking the rules or abusing the competition in some way, please let a judge know. Please do not remove entries from the submissions' pages of others yourself. *Don't worry about calculating precisely how many points everything is worth. The bot will do that. The bot may occasionally get something wrong- let a judge know, or post on the WikiCup talk page if that happens. *Please try to be prompt in updating submissions' pages so that they can be double-checked. Overall, however, don't worry, and have fun. It doesn't matter if you make the odd mistake; these things happen. Questions can be asked on 1211:

humans. His immediate response was to call me ignorant and ask to me explain why people of African heredity tend to be better at certain sports at world champion level. My obvious response is that he's simply replaced one physical attribute (skin colour) with another (height and speed in basketball, for example), and only in a minority of individuals, which makes it pretty much meaningless. In other words: Having dark skin does not automatically make you good as basketball. I was wondering if you could help me explain in a better way than that using your knowledge. It would be much appreciated. Thanks very much.

4605: 2588: 4062: 4730: 4647: 1734: 1674: 730: 2950: 579: 3271: 3057: 2841: 3197:, and is attempting to achieve better results by asking a more narrowly-focused, policy-based question of the community. Assumptions based on the previous RFC should be discarded before participation, particularly the assumption that Knowledge (XXG) has or inherently needs to have articles covering generalized perspective on each side of abortion advocacy, and that what we are trying to do is come up with labels for that. Thanks! —chaos5023 20:28, 24 October 2012 (UTC) 4751: 304:

can start making a real world community which is more peaceful and tolerant and much more sustainable, making a real future of hope and opportunity for our grandchildren and their progeny. Be of good cheer and hope. The Knowledge (XXG) is a living example that many people are willing to work together for the betterment of us all for no pay and little enough recognition. Thank you for all your fine contributions to this new tool of knowledge. Keep the faith! Cheers,

3985: 1576:) coming in third, with an impressive 46 did you knows, mostly on the subject of baseball. Casliber and Cwmhiraeth both scored over 600 points. Pools E and H proved our most successful, with each seeing 5 members qualify for round 3, while Pools C and D were the least, with each seeing only 3 reach round 3. However, it was Pool G which saw the lowest scoring, with a little under 400 points combined; Pool H, the highest scoring group, saw over triple that score. 324: 2449: 2094: 4876: 4782: 3530: 3497: 1719: 1693: 1609: 2965: 4626: 4706: 2920: 3862: 3427: 3320: 2799: 2252: 2137: 1565: 3911: 1446: 1580:

points was the 16th highest score, though, statistically, people tend to up their game a little in later rounds. Last year, 76 points secured a place, while in 2010, a massive 250 points were needed. Guessing how many points will be required is not easy. We still have not seen any featured portals or topics this year, but, on the subject of less common content types, a small correction needs to be made to the previous newsletter:

425: 2159:- a one month long competition first run in 2007. While the WikiCup awards points for audited content on any subject, The Core Contest about is raw article improvement, focussing heavily on the most important articles on Knowledge (XXG). As ever, if you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on 3515: 3354: 3337: 2740: 2723: 2267: 4672: 4534: 3371: 3303: 3087: 2820: 2757: 1655: 1550: 4017: 205: 4584: 4562: 2935: 1591: 648: 3444: 3410: 3394: 3287: 3043: 2699: 2238: 2108: 1524: 238: 27: 184: 4548: 1861: 212: 4139:. The competition begins at midnight UTC. The first round will last until the end of February, at which point the top 64 scorers will advance to the second round. We will be in touch at the end of every month, and signups are going to remain open until the end of January; if you know of anyone else who may like to take part, please let them know! A few reminders: *The rules can be found 3556: 3461: 3254: 3216: 3072: 2774: 2220: 2122: 2890: 2875: 1628: 632:(many thanks for that), and I am looking for people to help work on similar bios of ecologists. Are you willing to continue building ecologist stubs? I will be putting together a list of ecologists who need pages and other tasks on this, maybe as a user subpage or something. Please let me know if you can help. If you know other Wikipedians who are good candidates, pass the idea along. 3479: 277: 2905: 2860: 2983:. Come and have your say about the competition, and how you'd like it to run in the future. This brainstorming will go on for some time before more focused discussions/polls are opened. As ever, if you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on 198: 4143:. There have been a few changes from last year, which are listed on that page. *Anything you submit must have been nominated and promoted in 2013, and you need to have completed significant work upon it in 2013. (The articles you review at good article reviews does not need to have been nominated in 2013, but you do need to have started the review in 2013.) We 177: 191: 45: 4182:. The first round will last until the end of February, at which point the top 64 scorers will advance to the second round. We will be in touch at the end of every month, and signups are going to remain open until the end of January; if you know of anyone else who may like to take part, please let them know! A few reminders: 2768:) finished third in Pool B. Casliber is something of a WikiCup veteran, having finished sixth in 2011 and fourth in 2010. Casliber writes on the natural sciences, including ornithology, botany and astronomy. Over half of Casliber's points this round were bonus points from the high-importance articles he has worked on. 2425:. I know this happened just recently but no administrator would close these frequent rm's down, so here we go again. This note is going out to wikipedia members who have participated in Burma/Myanmar name changing polls in the past. It does not include banned members nor those with only ip addresses. Thank you. 3643:

desires. And you're asking that of people who have already advanced their argument over the course of repeated AfDs. When you say something like that, people are likely to get the message that you think your time is valuable (too valuable to sort through the archives and the AfDs) while their time isn't.

3724:

The round-in-circles concern is about past discussions. I'm trying to remain focused upon suggestions from those discussions that appear extremely useful, have some support from others, and have no objections. My mistake then appears to have been keeping the discussion together. Instead I should have

3634:

I've avoided the recent AfDs on that article because I don't know what to think...or rather, I think we'd be better off without that article, but I can't justify it in policy. So sure, I was interested in that topic when you raised it. But after several hundred words, there's nothing new...and if you

2692:

The final is upon us! We are down to our final 8. A massive 573 was our lowest qualifying score; this is higher than the 150 points needed last year and the 430 needed in 2010. Even in 2009, when points were acquired for mainspace edit count in addition to audited content, 417 points secured a place.

1359:

You are welcome. Hey, I am really glad to see you around. So, you weren't around for much of last year. No wonder I did not see much action from you. Last year was a tough one for me. I had a double bypass and while I was recuperating various editors were after my head here, but I stood my ground and

3646:

If you want to move forward with this (and I'd give it a couple months before you do) you need to come up with a convincing argument for why the article failed GNG (or whichever guideline you choose). You need to acknowledge and address the arguments they've made in the past. And you need to make it

2288:

closer to those in 2010 than those in 2011. Let's see what kind of benchmark we can set for future competitions! As ever, if you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on

4440:

Thanks for the suggestions, I've replied on the talk page. As I mention, there is an autobiography for Ganteaume which I do not have access to, so that may contain some answers, but I'm a bit stuck for now. This may mean that it cannot be a GA at the moment, but never mind. On the last points, feel

2148:), with a long list of contibutions, mostly relating to baseball. Of course, with the points resetting every round, the playing field has been levelled. The most successful Pool was Pool D, which saw seven into the final round. Pool B saw four, C saw three and Pool A saw only the two round leaders. 2089:

We are now entering round 4, our semi-finals, and have our final 16. A score of 243 was required to reach this round; significantly more than 2011's 76 points, and only a little behind 2010's 250 points. By comparison, last year, 150 points in round 4 secured a place in the final; in 2010, 430 were

303:

I send all best wishes for a health, happy, joy-filled and productive new year to you and your loved ones from tropical north Queensland, Australia. Let us hope this next decade will be a happier time than the last for the world and that people quickly begin waking up to the fact that they must and

3107:

It is good to see that three-quarters of our finalists have already scored bonus points this round. This shows that, contrary to criticism that the WikiCup has received in the past, the competition does not merely incentivise the writing of trivial articles; instead, our top competitors are still

2287:

Currently, the eighth-place competitor (and so the lowest scorer who would reach the final round right now) has scored 332, more than double the 150 needed to reach the final round last year. In 2010, however, 430 was the lowest qualifying score. In this competition, we have generally seen scores

1162: 4193:

Anything you submit must have been nominated and promoted in 2013, and you need to have completed significant work upon it in 2013. (The articles you review at good article reviews does not need to have been nominated in 2013, but you do need to have started and completed the review in 2013.) We

3642:

The article has been through 7 AfDs. The people you're arguing with have made their case in those AfDs. When you start out by asking "How does this article and its topic meet WP:N" you're putting yourself in the role of judge. You're telling people that they need to spend their time meeting your

3571:

Awards will be handed out in the coming days; please bear with us! This year's competition also saw fantastic contributions in all rounds, from newer Wikipedians contributing their first good or featured articles, right up to highly experienced Wikipedians chasing high scores and contributing to

3386:

Prizes for first, second, third and fourth will be awarded, as will prizes for all those who reached the final eight. Every participant who scored in the competition will receive a ribbon of participation. In addition to the prizes based on placement, the following special prizes will be awarded

1210:

I have noticed your knowledgeable contributions to pages related to genetics and I was hoping you could explain something to me, or rather to someone I'm having a discussion with. I explained to him my layman's understanding of "race" not really existing in any meaningful capacity with regard to

1579:

65 points was the lowest qualifying score for round 3; significantly higher than the 11 required to enter round 2, and also higher than the 41 required to reach round 3 last year. However, in 2010, 100 points were needed to secure a place in round 3. 16 will progress to round 4. In round 3, 150

1457:

until June! One of my goals as resident, is to work with Wikipedians and staff to improve content on Knowledge (XXG) about people who have collections held in the Archives - most of these are scientists who held roles within the Smithsonian and/or federal government. I thought you might like to

589:

Awarded for being the most outstanding editor of Trinidad and Tobago related-pages. You work hard and alway giving a great contributions behalf of WikiProject Trinidad and Tobago and We wish you work hard in the future and create better contribution to all the pages that related to Trinidad and

3098:). However, we have no one resembling a breakaway leader, and so the competition is a long way from over. Next month's newsletter will feature a list of our winners (who are not necessarily only the finalists) and keep your eyes open for an article on the WikiCup in a future edition of 4684: 1230:

Hello, I am involved with a research project for Michigan State University and am wondering if you would be able to answer a few questions regarding tool sets on Knowledge (XXG). If so please let me know and I can post back to you. Here is a link to the project if you are interested

1520:

Round 2 of this year's WikiCup is over, and so we are down to our final 32, in what could be called our quarter-finals. The two highest scorers from each pool, as well as the next 16 highest scorers overall, have entered round 3, while 30 participants have been eliminated. Pool B's

2052:. Even if your first post was an inadvertent mistake, your second post was clear harassment. Anything posted here is reverted unread. You are obviously free to participate in discussions on the talk pages of articles I edit, though given the fact that your battlefield conduct has 1332:

Fellow Spartan! Alright! Anyhow, what were your tool sets you utilized before you became an admin, and what were they afterwords? Those are the only questions I have for you, sorry for the dramatic build up but for the project it is important to be clear and informative. Thanks

3572:

topics outside of their usual comfort zones. It would be impossible to name all of the participants who have achieved things to be proud of, but well done to all of you, and thanks! Knowledge (XXG) has certainly benefited from the work of this year's WikiCup participants.

1232: 4699:. There have been some teething problems as the bot has worked its way around the new system, but issues should mostly be ironed out- please report any problems to the WikiCup talk page. Here are some participants worthy of note with regards to the bonus points: 3618:

I'm quite surprised by your comments. The talk page discussion is about identifying the context of notability, not simply whether or not the topic is notable. I'm happy to explain further. I'd like to find a way to explain it so these problems would end.

2152: 982:

in the spirit of your core contest. Not like I'll ever have the time to make a competitive expansion, but I figured that I should use the excuse of the contest to see if I couldn't improve the article a bit, since it is actually on the core list.

774:

Yeah, to show it's in the public domain we need a source showing the copyright status in Trinidad & Tobago. Unfortunately, I can't find any info on Commons concerning copyright there, but it is a member of the Commonwealth so likely

3583:. There will be no further newsletters this year, although brief notes may be sent out in December to remind everyone about the upcoming competition. It's been a pleasure to work with you all, and we hope to see you all in January! 4441:

free to add the information yourself; I am unsure how significant it is, and am quite happy to go with your view. Finally, I don't suppose you have access to any nice, juicy sources on little-known Trinidadian cricketers such as

3387:

based on high performance in particular areas of content creation. So that the finalists do not have an undue advantage, the prize is awarded to the competitor who scored the highest in any particular field in a single round.

1496:

Hey Guettarda! So happy that you came by the Smithsonian Institution Archives project and signed up to participate! We've got a great list of subjects that need to be improved upon or written about. I do hope you'll visit the

1745:), for continued help behind the scenes. As ever, if you are concerned that your nomination, be it at good article candidates, a featured process or anywhere else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on 3186: 2348:

as we haven't had a plant for over three months and I sometimes feel I should blow my own trumpet less for mainpage requests....We're just trying to find an image. Have a look at how weird the berries look at thumb

684:

Nice to hear from you-- thanks for stopping by. No, I never heard anything, and actually still haven't figured out how to promote the ecologist userbox above. As far as I know, no one's using it yet... Best to you!

4289:

was expanding proteaceae genera and took a nice photo of one of these in our bot. gdns in Sydney......I don't have much in the way of books on neotropical plants though.....expand away and share in the DYK spoils

3757:

So, what do you think of my solution ( 18:12, 10 Dec)? Unless I get some other feedback that I can work from, I think this will be my next step: restart the analysis of the potential sources in a new discussion.

4770:, articles that did not exist on the English Knowledge (XXG) at the start of the year; a first for the WikiCup. The articles were eligible for bonus points because of fact they were both covered on a number of 793:

Ah, thanks for the info. If T&T is like most Commonwealth nations, it's life+70 for copyright, so if the sculptor died before 1942 it's probably OK in that regard even if freedom of panorama doesn't apply.

1715:", was posted at the end of April. This may be of interest to those who are signed up to this newsletter, as well as serving as another way to draw attention to our project. Also, we would again like to thank 977:

Yep, I noticed the GAN...I was just looking at the article, seeing if there was anything I could add to help it along when the orange bar popped up. The syconium stuff looks good. I'm actually trying to buff

4694:

This year, the bonus points system has been reworked, with bonus points on offer for old articles prepared for did you know, and "multiplier" points reworked to become more linear. For details, please see

3639:

for a reason to delete (or at least looking for facts to validate my gut feeling), I don't see any hope for progress. At this stage, with the discussion turning into an argument, the atmosphere has turned

4204:

Don't worry about calculating precisely how many points everything is worth. The bot will do that. The bot may occasionally get something wrong- let a judge know, or post on the WikiCup talk page if that

2284:. Ruby2010, like Grapple X, also claimed a number of good topic points; despite this, not a single point has been claimed for featured topics in the contest so far. The same is true for featured portals. 4530:; we have our final 127 contestants for this year's competition. 64 contestants will make it to the next round at the end of February, but we're already seeing strong scoring compared to previous years. 2868: 4103:

throughout January. Old and new Wikipedians and WikiCup participants are warmly invited to take part in this year's competition. (Though, as a note to the more experienced participants, there have been

4201:

If you feel that another competitor is breaking the rules or abusing the competition in some way, please let a judge know. Please do not remove entries from the submissions' pages of others yourself.

4897: 4892: 2470: 350:

Happened upon this mineral the other day ... so I sez to meself ... get busy and create a stub and present it as a Wikilove thingy to a friend, So I dedicate it to a great wikieditor and friend :

2958: 1599: 4542: 2928: 4476:

Don't worry, the other person who commented is not actually doing a formal GA review either! I was just thinking out loud, but thanks for the helpful comments and feel free to chip in more.

3119:. As ever, if you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on 4680: 3108:

spending their time contributing to high-importance articles, and bringing them to a high standard. This does a great service to the encyclopedia and its readers. Thank you, and good work!

1501:

list and dive in - do let me know if you need anything. And of course, your contributions can earn you the official oh so fancy SIA barnstar :) Thanks again! So happy to have you on board!

3379: 3182: 2828: 2554: 2102: 1663: 2734:) led Pool A this round. Fourth-place finalist last year, Miyagawa writes on a variety of topics, and has reached the final primarily off the back of his massive number of did you knows. 3679:

I know, but the AfDs were about notability. So there's likely to be more than a little fatigue over the topic. Sorry if that wasn't clear - things tend to make more sense in my head :)

4790: 3564: 3469: 3262: 3224: 3080: 2973: 2782: 2228: 2130: 4759: 4613: 4592: 4570: 4555: 4178: 4135: 3538: 3505: 3487: 3451: 3417: 3401: 3294: 3050: 2943: 2898: 2706: 2245: 2115: 1727: 1701: 1617: 1531: 4857:

I'm a big fan of the book, so I follow the article. I want to thank you for your thoughtful but firm defense against the many who try to add inappropriate criticism to the article.

3662:

Thanks for the response. Excellent points, especially "You need to acknowledge and address the arguments they've made in the past. And you need to make it clear that you hear them."

4738: 3523: 3435: 3362: 3345: 3328: 3311: 3095: 2883: 2807: 2765: 2748: 2731: 2371: 2275: 2260: 2145: 1636: 1573: 1558: 4804:

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on

4634: 3707:

Not unrelated. The AfDs have been about notability. But no, the main reason not to continue the discussion at this point is time is that it has been going in circles for weeks.

2913: 2049: 4108:

in the last few months.) If you have already signed up, let this be a reminder; you will receive a message with your submissions' page soon. Please direct any questions to the

3104:. The leaders are already on a par with last year's winners, but a long way from the huge scores seen in 2010. That said, a repeat of the competition from 2010 seems unlikely. 4655: 3279: 3065: 2849: 2504: 1742: 1682: 1042:

up to featured list status! I have nominated the article to go up on the main page in the Today's Featured List section. Some concerns about the article have been raised

3743:

of the AFDs had been based on subject matter notability. I do not know for sure, myself, just observing that the AFD statement above in this thread might be incorrect.

3725:

simply started a new discussion (as a top-level section), so the other discussions could be settled and closed. How does that seem to you? Am I overlooking something? --

4714: 1708:

far enough for a did you know, which was also worth triple points. All of these highly important topics featured on 50 or more Wikipedias at the start of the year.

2345: 1043: 552: 2045: 4659: 3879: 4247: 3665:

You didn't actually respond to what I'm doing, "The talk page discussion is about identifying the context of notability..." I has nothing to do with AfDs. --

1923:

Thanks so much for stopping by my talk and congrats on the very fancy trophy - & the money too! Well done! Btw - I like the pic at the top of your page.

811:. I'm going to copy the image over to Commons with the correct template. If you would like to add any of the authorship info you found, that would be great. 4257: 3830: 1406: 1108: 2587: 4243: 4558:)) had 342 points, while in 2011, the leader had 228 points. We also have a large number of scorers when compared with this stage in previous years. 1621: 4497: 2550: 1546:

and other subjects. He has also gained points for a good topic, a featured list, multiple good article reviews and several did you knows. Pool E's

1067:

Thanks. Good to hear from you, too. Things are well. Hope it's likewise... might start poking my head in here more regularly again, not sure yet.

398: 3820: 2622: 2518: 4253: 3826: 2594: 2496: 1402: 1104: 1039: 542: 3816: 2133:) came second overall, with an impressive list of biological did you knows, good articles and featured articles. Third overall was Pool D's 1874: 4212:

Overall, however, don't worry, and have fun. It doesn't matter if you make the odd mistake; these things happen. Questions can be asked on

1581: 4815: 4092: 3130: 2994: 2299: 2170: 1756: 2500: 1396: 1098: 878: 4745:, now a good article. The biography of such a significant figure to the history of science warrants nearly five times the normal score. 1498: 1463: 2785:) came second in Pool A. Also writing on biology, especially marine biology, Cwmhiraeth received 390 points for one featured article ( 1942: 1459: 3100: 1392: 1094: 4638: 4100: 3580: 3576: 3116: 3112: 2980: 2693:

That leaves this year's WikiCup, by one measure at least, our most competitive ever. Our finalists, ordered by round 4 score, are:

2278:) follows Grapple X, with a variety of contributions including the high-scoring, high-importance featured article on the 2010 film 2151:

A quick note about other competitions taking place on Knowledge (XXG) which may be of interest. There are 13 days remaining in the

2056:

less than two years ago, you really should think twice before jumping into a discussion 'guns blazing'...all the more so given the

1290:

I didn't mean to ignore you - it's just a really hard question that needs some time to frame an answer to. Sorry about the delay.

2546: 2280: 2557:. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the 4520: 4314:

Coming a bit late to the party, but I will definitely look at it in the morning. Since it's a plant I actually know and all...

3206: 3034: 2686: 2210: 2080: 497: 4250:). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. 3823:). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. 1399:). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. 1101:). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. 4420:

BTW, I've gotten it past 5k readable prose...since it hasn't run on DYK yet, I'm guessing it would be worth a WikiCup bonus?

4386: 4358: 4304: 4040: 2532: 2360: 1956: 1896: 1840: 1012: 968: 948: 896: 757: 1471: 1467: 3040:

We're over half way through the final, and so it is less than a month until we know for certain our 2012 WikiCup champion.

2709:) once again finishes the round in first place, leading Pool B. Grapple X writes articles about television, and especially 4604: 145: 141: 137: 133: 129: 125: 121: 117: 113: 109: 2831:) was fourth in Pool A. She writes on a variety of topics, including horses, but this round also saw the high-importance 2156: 1882: 2014: 105: 101: 97: 93: 89: 85: 81: 77: 73: 4805: 4696: 4187: 4140: 4105: 3544:

Finally, for achieving an incredible bonus point total in the final round, and for bringing the top-importance article

3120: 2984: 2289: 2160: 1746: 746:

Xmas from us all down here in Oz (damn, should have 5x expanded that for this Xmas...is there still time I wonder....)

4828: 4454: 3592: 3143: 3007: 2312: 2183: 2041: 1769: 1360:

things have become better. Let's keep in touch, after all you have always been one of my best friends in the project.

3739:

Not long ago, at the article talk page, some other editor (I think it was Kim but am not 100% certain) observed that

2810:) was third in Pool A. Muboshgu writes primarily on baseball, and this round saw Muboshgu's first featured article, 1534:) remains our top scorer with over 700 points; he continues to gain high numbers of points for his good articles on 4840: 4369:

but the source was loading really slowly on JSTOR and looks like a bit of a taxonomic headache. Maybe time to buff

4234:

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Knowledge (XXG) appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited

3807:

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Knowledge (XXG) appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited

3748: 3604: 3155: 3019: 2512: 2324: 2195: 1781: 2751:) was second in Pool B. Ruby2010 writes primarily on television and film, and scores primarily from good articles. 1755:

If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from

1454: 3934: 2105:), who scored 242 points, missing out on a place in the round by a whisker. However, congratulations to Pool B's 1273: 1216: 485: 4809: 4213: 4148: 3124: 2988: 2293: 2164: 1750: 3693:

So because of unrelated discussions and reactions to those discussions, it's best to stop new discussion...? --

743: 374: 2856:

However, we must also say goodbye to the eight who did not make the final, having fallen at the last hurdle:

4596: 4461:, or any others I could mention? I've scoured just about everywhere, but reliable sources are hard to find. 4061: 2864: 2507:. If you think it is necessary to change the main date, you can request it with the featured list directors 2430: 1928: 1474:

page you will receive the SIA barnstar! Thanks for your interest, and I look forward to your participation!

1301: 872: 406: 2675:

is found on at least two of the Bocas Islands: Gaspar Grande and Monos. No venomous snakes inhabit Tobago.

1908:

Wow - thanks so much! I feel a little bit floored by it all. It's great to have that effort appreciated...

4913: 4718: 3890: 3868: 3861: 2621:. Trinidad and Tobago consists of two main islands, Trinidad and Tobago, and several smaller islands. The 2478: 2379: 1542: 1506: 1479: 1365: 4801:

on the grounds that there was no Fucking brewery? The gauntlet has been thrown down; can anyone beat it?

628:

Hello, Guettarda! (I think we know each other in another context?) I see you originated the page/stub on

555:. Maybe you could have a look at it and address those (minor) issues to make it ready for the main page. 4814: