User talk:Jusdafax/Archive 8

3420:

adverse side-effect of saying that is it can leave some of us wondering exactly what you meant. The opening of the thread listed a long series of diffs, some of them mine, and accused them of being disruptive; I subsequently tried to explain that I'm quite sure that the content was not OR, and that the combined efforts of me and several other editors reflected something that was at least approaching consensus, rather than tag teaming or the like. You said, right after I had discussed my role with another editor, that you were concerned that civility can mask deeper issues. I'm reading between the lines that maybe you were arguing that the now-blocked editor actually had a valid point, that some (all?) of the editors in the diffs (including me? not including me?) were actually engaged in some sort of POV-pushing, going beyond the garden-variety differences of opinion between editors, and that it had been overlooked because we had mostly been civil about it, but that there should still be scrutiny that was failing to happen. I hope that you remember that I have said that I, too, am watching very carefully for anyone who displays signs of "shill" editing, and that I am opposed to it, if it actually happens. So I'd like to ask: did I understand the intent of your comment correctly? Do you have any issues with my edits here? Do you think that I misunderstand anything? Did you find my attempted explanation about OR unconvincing or incorrect? --

4054:

is of value, and I agree that this article is being watched with near-obsessive interest. But here is the great thing, all edits are recorded and the history preserved. Consensus can change. With Viriditas blocked, the MAM article is likely to be "scrubbed." I have a great respect for Viriditas that comes from years of interaction, and I think he was making points that deserved consideration. The larger issues are fascinating to me, including the very strong possibility that Monsanto has targeted the MAM article. It is only logical to assume this, given the PR value and Monsanto's power. If this is true, sooner or later a whistle blower may step forward. Clearly the confrontational and arguably uncivil methods Viriditas was using are dangerous, as his three-month block shows. But the issues are much much bigger than this one article. The main Monasanto article, the GMO controversies article where I see you are active, the Glyphosate article where I made two edits that drew reverting, and hundreds if not thousands of others, are places where slant and information inclusion are debatable. I continue to mull over the direction I should take, but I was encouraged by a statement made by Jimmy Wales at the recent Wikimania. My comment to that is at

3436:

have done very little editing in this field, but have started a bit of research. The post just above shows that I recently twice attempted to pull a sentence out of a Monsanto-related article, a sentence I felt was clearly unencyclopedic and slanted the article with undue weight as presented. I feel the results are of interest, though hardly conclusive. To make claims that a Knowledge (XXG) editor is POV-pushing is serious, and to say multiple editors are is obviously dangerous. Aside from his demeanor, Viriditas was fighting hard to make some points. I have known him as a Wikipedian for years, and have tended to respect him on the issues. Now that he is tarnished goods, many editors may dismiss him and move on, but as I say I'd like to cautiously discuss the actual issues with him on his Talk page, assuming he can do so in a civil manner. In my view, further research is needed. Thanks for caring about my concerns, and best wishes.

3621:

COI talk page PR rep (all very wiki legal). This hit the media and wound up on Jimbo's page. It came out during those discussions (or maybe it was on related talk pages at the time, probably SlimVirgin's) that there is a group called CREWE setup to aid company's PR departments to influence their pages on wiki. They organize through a Facebook page that has over 400 members - composed of wiki editors hip to the idea of spreading PR for some odd reason ($ ?). This needs to sink in deeply with every editor interested in saving the project from corporate propaganda. Even with this exposed, and one editor admitting to working for that group, the overall consensus, including Jimmy's, was that this is a good thing for the wiki, resulting in more accurate articles. (Do an Internet search for "CREWE, Knowledge (XXG)"; I believe the article about this group is on "Motherboard"). Thank you for being.

2260:

without offering rationales - or simply by saying that we shouldn't add names now that we're trying to cut down - yet you vote to keep American names like Joan BAez on the list (who is neither known as a musician or a composer but as Bob Dylan's one time girl friend), you even vote to keep even Les paul who is not even known as a folk/Country artist but as an instrument maker. Now I want to ask you: Do you really think that it is possible that there isn't a single artist or folk music tradition from outside of the US that is vital? Who would you add if you had to add one or two folk artists from outside of the US? And finally don't you consider it to be the case that non-Western or non-US musical traditions should expect some kind of representation? I simply don't understand why people are opposed to globalizing the music section. Especially not the folk section. I don't get it.

3556:

so much, this is just an encyclopedia, and we are all just sharing a bit of our free time to help bring info to the People. If editors are entangled in a bunch of BS instead of being allowed to edit as normal, they are going to get upset. We are human beings. I WILL speak my mind and no one has a right to ask me to shut up or to not share articles and information. I won't be intimidated. And seriously, who in the world has time for all these noticeboards and talk page therapy sessions? I mean, i have two jobs, a life to run, and a bit of time in the evenings, sometimes more sometimes much less... So interference with my good faith, good editing is not going to be met with kisses and hugs. I am a human being and I am not interested in dealing with bullshit. That's all there is to it.

3876:

from said group, this group is using cherry-picking, OR and SYNTH with completely straight faces, and i am the only one speaking out, and trying to fix it. It is too much for me, and i don't have the time to edit this page towards NPOV any more. We are stuck trying to get the basic facts on the page, while we are not allowed to add any references about protesters and researchers who question GMOs, but a list of 5 "GMOs are super safe for sure" refs to unrelated websites sits high on the page. I think the violations of the guidelines are very obvious, and since this movement is not a convoluted story, this could be handed over to ArbCom for a quick fix. I guess this is me, begging you or anyone out there, to please help get this article to ArbCom. Thank you very much.

3585:, is disgusting. "And when you take the big picture POV, this appears to have been coordinated by what can only be described as the "fringe cabal", a group of editors who target articles they believe pose a challenge to mainstream science and/or the supporting corporatist-scientific complex. Within this group of editors you have certain personalities who almost seem to be role playing: one plays the hardline extremist who refuses to compromise, the other plays the good cop, while another plays the bad cop, still another plays the curious academic and another plays the GMO proponent." He is thinking of specific people there, and I am likely one of them, as he has accused me directly before. It is ugly. Ugly. And has consequences. There are editors like 1290:

Nevertheless, and at some risk to my working relationships with both of you, I must say that both of you are quickly approaching the threshold of Churchill's definition. It won't be as a result of anything I do, but the two of you are both at risk of being blocked or topic-banned for uncivil and disruptive editing behaviors. When the banhammer falls, it rarely distinguishes between who started it, and who was more responsible than whom. I know I'm not the first third-party to mention this problem to the two of you, so please do yourselves a favor and spend the next week doing your best to kill each other with civility and kindness. Otherwise some passing admin is likely to give you both a timeout. Seriously.

112: 3289:

in fact, asked MM in my second edit summary to take it to the Talk page. Again, that is twice that I edited the article, in total. When MM, instead of discussing as I had requested, merely reverted me again, I was done, but shortly afterward editor II reverted. At that point an admin came in and, in my view, over-reacted by closing the article to all editing for three days or so. I know none of these editors including the admin, and had never edited the article previously. Again, I reject your characterization of my two edits as part of an "edit war" that I "conducted." Your invitation is noted, and I will give it my consideration.

4472:, a very mild case of vandalism from over four years ago by an IP who never edited otherwise. If that IP number has has been assigned to you I wouldn't worry about it, especially as you have registered an account name and are editing under it. If it troubles you I can either delete my message or add a note stating that the warning is moot under the circumstances, but I consider it extremely unlikely that it will ever impact you either way. Welcome to Knowledge (XXG), and I hope, as the saying here goes, that you like the place and decide to stay! And please feel free to contact me if you have any further questions or concerns. 3943:

garden-variety of canvassing about specific article content. I am not even editing or watching the MaM article, as I already was fed up with Viriditas' behavior there. In any case, informing these users that their behavior is outside guidelines is not intimidation - it is fair warning. The next time the behavior happens - if it happens again - I am indeed going to start an ANI. I really have had it. There are appropriate ways to deal with perceived COI and going around on user Talk pages and article Talk pages and making these accusations is not among those ways. I tell you -

2271:

that Baez broke ground for, and help popularize, Dylan. Baez was and is a huge symbol of the peace movement, so much so that popular cartoonist Al Capp caricatured her as "Joanie Phoanie" over her views. Vital? Fits my definition. Fairport Convention, not so much, despite their long history and discography, and though I rarely discuss my personal life here, just so you know I did go so far as to ask my girlfriend, who is not American, if she had ever heard of FC. She had not. As for Les Paul... dude, read the history of the guy. He arguably

2075: 679: 478: 197: 3589:, with whom I have never interacted before, who came out guns blazing at me that I was all COI. Gee, where did that come from? I would say, from all these wild accusations you and V and others are throwing around. You, Petrarchan, are helping build up this conspiracy thing, and I have not done a damn thing wrong. I have seen what you have written about me on various Talk pages. I too am a human being and that felt like shit. I am not paid, I am not a shill. 1656: 4350: 3389:

format of an edit note pretty much demands declarative statements - it is not a format for discussion and reaching consensus - hence yes, limiting 'discussion' to edit notes generally means talking past one another instead of to each other; that was my read of what happened. But this is not a huge deal - the admin stepped in and shut this down before anybody broke 3RR, and I am not accusing you of any violation of policy or pillar (nobody crossed

4925: 31: 2675:, whom I suspect enjoys his numerous swap proposals more than reducing the list to our goal. Also, I very strongly feel that I cannot count on the support of either Carl or PbP, so without their two support !votes and with a recently reduced participation rate, well ... I could really use some help from you in terms of getting this done. Are you willing to work with me to accomplish this task, or should I reconsider my efforts? Cheers! 2691:

edits I made to the VA/E pages since then, I feel they're not only hard to argue with, but they keep the list right-sized. When regions is cut to 100 and some of the other proposals made in the last few weeks come to fruition, we will be pretty close to being around 10,000 articles. Maybe even under. Just because I don't support every single removal doesn't mean I don't support getting it back to 10,000. I just want it to be the

4203: 2147: 1561:

infoboxes or the lack thereof, but the vicious bullying offends me deeply, and I will be looking into this group in the future, as someone who sees civility as a core value to be taken seriously, which is why I assume it is one of the Five Pillars. Hopefully I raised enough dust to put this problem on the map. Thanks again for your note, which further confirms my impression of this problematic group of editors.

4606: 4707:

me being appearing to be "spoiling for a fight," I suppose it does appear that way, but it's a natural and appropriate response to being repeatedly and quite rudely (in my view) accused by multiple editors of acting in bad faith. I value civil debate and I hope more you're not the only editor who will engage in it. I, personally, am trying my hardest despite the baiting by some. --

779:

said you should be "banned for life" but I'm not really understanding her reasoning other than the fact that she was acting like a clueless newbie. Can you give me some insight on her behavior (conduct) on the article when she interacted with you and tell me if there is any relationship to the Tea Party movement set of articles she is currently working on? Thanks.

438:

problem editors. The terrible irony of all this is that I actually agree with some of the positions taken by HiLo, but vehemently disagree with his extremely harsh polemics. In an era where the WMF is expressing increasing concerns about the editing climate being overly confrontational for women and those not schooled in conflict, I believe the community

4014:

ally. You have not engaged in that behavior that I have ever seen. Sorry for the misunderstanding. I did play off your name, saying that there are no facts to support these allegations with respect to me, and I have said explicitly on more than one occasion that I have no relationship with Monsanto or any of the other ag biotech companies. Their

4566: 4891: 4368: 3393:, nobody accused someone else of bad faith, etc). So I don't understand what is at stake for you in this meta-discussion. I just wanted to invite you to discuss the issue in dispute in Talk while the page is in lockdown, in hopes we can resolve it and be ready to move on when the lockdown is over. Thanks again. 4722:

Fair enough. I appreciate your comments, and I thank you for coming here to clarify. My apologies if my manner appears uncivil, even in a backhanded fashion. I do feel that you could be discussed with in a calmer way by others on the talk page. Let's take a deep breath and move on. As it is two areas

4053:

Petrarchan47, as we see Knowledge (XXG) is under considerable pressure, as I see it, from forces that are interested in seeing information presented in the way that they want it perceived. How to safely identify such forces can be problematic, but it seems likely to me that they exist here. Your edit

3781:

After a short Wiki-break I am a bit surprised to find a couple disputatious threads regarding the Monsanto article(s). I will study this all carefully but have nothing to say at the present moment, aside from the fact that I continue, as I have said for years, to feel that paid editing is something I

3674:

An arts and cultural magazine, they'll have all the facts in there. Right? BP was not caught editing their own article, the editor disclosed he was working for BP, it's in his god damn name. Utter nonsense and misinformation. Be wary of the conspiratorial ideation that also plagues the global warming

3620:

Hi there, JustDaFax (love the name), Glanced at your recent notes to Viriditas, about getting the creeps when considering certain observations, and I wanted to share something indeed creepy. BP was caught writing their own article, with 'independent' editors inserting the material for the resident BP

3593:

I am working on Knowledge (XXG) to help the People too. You have no monopoly on wanting to do good. And yes it is another round of McCarthyism. Writ small, for sure. But the same ugly thing, here in our Wiki-world. Please speak your mind on CONTENT and leave me out of it. Otherwise, bring it

3435:

I am attempting to engage Viriditas on his Talk page. I hold you blameless, if it matters, and Viriditas obviously blew it on his overall demeanor, which, given his block record, wasn't too sharp. As to the substance of his claims, I reserve judgment. I am unfamiliar with much of the controversy, and

3345:

Again, I find a disturbing lack of clarity in your characterization. My two edit summaries clearly show that on my second of two edits, I directly asked MM not to revert again, but take it to the article talk page. Instead of doing so, he chose to revert again and mimic my comment back at me. You now

2495:

intended. I was curious as to what type of user you were and found that you have made numerous contributions, been helpful to other users (evident on your talk page), but aren't an administrator. This made me consider the different reasons why you may not be administrator, which lead to my asking you

2259:

The only reason I started taking an interest in the vital list was because of the fact that the list of folk and country musicians doesn't include a single non-American artist. All of the maneuvers I have tried to add any artist or folk tradition from outside of the US has been opposed by you, mostly

1624:

I have been away nearly two weeks, and am trying to get back to speed. We have had our differences, to say the least, but as I have commented elsewhere, the deep irony is that I often agree with your views. The answer to your question is beyond me at the moment. ITN is a real mess though, in my view.

837:

After careful examination of the link you provide to ANI in September, 2009, it appears I was never informed of my name being discussed in such terms, so finding out what Malke2010 was up to in that era is a bit of a shock. I have reviewed my own talk archives as well as the Karl Rove talk page, but

778:

Hi. I was looking into materials related to the current arbcom case involving Malke 2010 when I noticed your name come up. Back in 2009, Malke was very angry at you after some kind of altercation on the Karl Rove article and she was eventually blocked for edit warring. Right after this happened she

4706:

to "the perception that some may have, rightly or wrongly, that you have a hostile POV to Snowden" which strikes me as somewhat validating that perception, as well as being quite similar to, "Whatever you do don't think about a pink elephant!" I felt the need to counter that on the talk page. As for

4438:

Welcome to Knowledge (XXG). The recent edit you made to the page Sole proprietorship has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the

3388:

it is the initial bold editor, who, upon reversion, is supposed to stand down and bring the issue to Talk. That would be you, in this situation. I also wish the other two editors would have stood down and brought the issue to Talk - they didn't either. As for "talking past each other" - the brief

3288:

I frankly take exception your use of the term "edit war" regarding my two edits. I saw a sentence that seemed way out of line as presented in the article lead, and deleted it on the grounds I cited in the edit summary. I was reverted by MM on what seemed to me thin reasoning, so I reverted back and,

3042:

You correctly perceive my reservations. Some deaths that would have been blurbs now struggle to make an RD mention, others fall through the cracks. It seems to be about who cares enough to put a substantial update in the subject's article. I was against the RD concept, but in all candor it sometimes

2855:

On the one hand, it is true that I nominated the article for deletion when it was in very poor shape. On the other hand, after four days, when it was a much better article, I requested early closure that so the AFD could be closed as a speedy keep. I am not trying to get the article deleted again,

1608:

Obviously I'm not going to make any public fuss about this (hence this post), but I do have a question. While I've been away has there been any background discussion as to what constitutes a constructive post on ITN/C? I know that me pointing out what I thought were really crappy posts was one thing

1560:

Thanks for the warning, but I got a clue from just one look at the J.S. Bach Talk page, which is why I filed my first-ever ANI report. For a number of reasons in the "real world" I decided to take a lengthy Wikibreak shortly afterwards. The funny thing here is I don't really care that much about the

4109:

Note: i am very much not involved in any other articles that touch on the GMO issue, by design. I may have made a couple edits months ago, but not since or before. You might be thinking of someone else? Also, i made pretty cryptic remarks on Jimbo's page, do feel free to let me know if you think it

3875:

This is too much for editors to deal with on their own, we have proven that. The very same group who edit warred for months, is the same group in charge of the article now - with the same problems and games. Wholesale reversions, especially right at the 3RR point, and i am told to go get permission

3555:

In all seriousness... to freak out or try and squelch conversations is a giant red light. And that isn't an accusation, i've been holding my tongue on this one for sooooo long. Don't attack the people calling for transparency. Don't use tactics that shills are known to use. Chill out and don't care

2804:

The beauty of the regional articles deletion concept was that it would get us down to, or close to, 10k articles on the list as it is supposed to be. That would reduce the amount of time needed to go through the seemingly endless deletion, swap or even add proposals. I'll take a look in a bit, as I

2690:

chopping ~100 regions and still do, I merely oppose the first draft of the regions that are being kept because it needs work. And I don't know where you're getting the idea that I don't want to get the list down to 10,000. If you look at the proposals I've made since the first of the year and the

2270:

My Knowledge (XXG) brutha, this list can never possibly satisfy everyone, and we have to accept that we will win some and lose some. When I feel there is an injustice, I have learned to just walk away for a while. Now, saying "Dylan's one time girlfriend" shows me you don't know or choose to ignore

1165:

It appears to me that the discussion has degenerated to the point where other, more authoritative voices than mine will be needed here. I truly hope you can both cool it, as I believe you are both dedicated to Knowledge (XXG)'s best interests. As for me, I will back away from this mess and hope for

4013:

No, I am not saying that you are calling me a paid editor!! I am sorry you misunderstood. It is hard to control tone in writing. I am saying that with no basis in fact, P has been canvassing around, calling me and others COI/paid editors -- including here on your page, and trying to make you an

3951:

be because of the positions that P takes in these articles about environmental issues! But I am NOT going there. And neither should P. Otherwise it is wild McCarthyism - slapping people who disagree with you with a label so you can dismiss them. Just the facts indeed! No more of this personal

2879:

as the discussion in the ANI made clear; your closure did not address that. Several editors, including me, said that they were driven off the page by his/her vitriol, and I think it would be useful if you addressed the original concern in your closing. Would you please reconsider the closing to

2022:

I VERY MUCH thank all who have supported me in the recent measures to unblock this account, and wish to assert that I bear no ill will to those who in good conscience have opposed my presence here and elsewhere, in various ways and for various reasons, believing themselves to be supportive of what

2310:

Your definition of Vital is to have been caricatured by Al Capp. That kinds of put the non-American world at a disadvantage. I don't know any folk musicians who could name a single song by Baez, and I move a lot in folk music circles in the US and Europe. Some of them might have heard one of her

2284:

which in some ways made folk music as we know it possible. I prefer not to go into combat on my talk page, which is cluttered enough already, but I am responding here since I sense your concern, and also we are ITN editors. If you insist, please continue this back on the Vital list talk page, but

879:

where they took the most controversial material from Rove's career, then scrubbed out reliably sourced material or added in slanted material like the Moyers material. Virtually every edit there (look at the edit record) is designed to put a positive "spin" on Rove's years in the Bush White House.

577:

It appears I have gotten the directions mixed up, as I don't do this frequently enough to remember it. It already has one !vote for delete. By the way, I notified what seems to be the subject of the article on his talk page; all this started when I noticed the article's tags were removed by him.

409:

I suspect you're right that that editor's disruption is not over, especially judging by the pontificating that has been going on on that editor's talk page. We also learned new things about some of the more extreme commentators there. Apparently it's OK to dehumanize folks someone may disagree

4858:

Not being an admin, I have never actually blocked anyone. A large moral responsibility to get it right! But I felt, as I noted in my comment, that the only alternative was to avoid pushing the problem to the next group of concerned Wikipedians, and I thank you for making the final call. I looked

1356:

I believe that the overall discussion is now far better positioned for likely productive outcomes. Your participation regarding individual topics is solicited, to the extent you feel comfortable participating. The discussions still need more and a greater variety of voices. Yours would help.

1187:

That would be regrettable, JDF. As we have discussed previously, the VA project needs a larger number and a greater variety of voices to make this a more valid exercise. If you're giving up, I may be inclined to do the same, because I have no interest in being caught in the crossfire of two or

915:

if you would like to work on it. If not, please let me know if you have any diffs of recent evidence I could add to it. My own experience with Malke2010 both in the past and present is similar to your own. She comes off as very nice and agreeable, but does not listen to the positions of other

850:

Eventually I was so disgusted with the way Malke2010 was editing that I found it easier to just walk away from the article rather than continue on dealing with someone I had a very bad feeling about. As your link clearly shows, my instinct was 100% correct. Malke2010's subsequent Knowledge (XXG)

3419:

I'm glad that the latest ANI discussion has closed, and I just want to ask you about your last comment there, the one about there being much to ponder. With most users, I wouldn't bother to ask, but I'm asking here. You said very clearly that you weren't criticizing anyone in particular, but an

1289:

Guys, Winston Churchill is purported to have said "A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject." I've worked productively on sports articles with PBP in the past, and recently I've come to respect Gabe's passion and contributions regarding the Vital Articles lists.

1076:

needs more editors who have greater perspective and are well-read in multiple subject areas. I also support your suggestion of structuring the discussion as a rolling article-by-article RfC, with appropriate notices posted throughout Knowledge (XXG). In addition to more voices, the discussion

437:

My pleasure, and thanks for taking the original stand. The ANI thread that got HiLo topic banned, which I posted along with that comment, is a fine example of ANI actually working. Recently I have seen additional evidence of that, so I am much more encouraged than I once was regarding combative

4022:

Again I apologize for the misunderstanding. Really. I have no desire to offend anybody -- I just want the attacks to stop already. I am sorry that you were dragged into this. Your actions have been totally appropriate with respect to your own approach - you have expressed concern about COI

1940:

JDF, what is your reaction to the reorganizaed and reformatted VA/E talk page? I've reworked the top 65-70% of the talk page discussions, and plan to finish the remainder tonight. If you have any suggestions for improvement, I would like to incorporate them. My goal is to make it as simple,

3942:

has been engaging in this behavior - going on the Talk pages of users he/she believes are sympathetic, and making these kinds of unfounded accusations against me and other editors - for quite some time, and I have had it with being bad-mouthed. That is one issue -- the other one is the more

3461:

Thanks. I think that I may have seen one editor who showed up as an SPA and who might have been a "shill" (and not someone on that list of diffs, by the way), and I'm continuing to watch for that very closely – but I really think that most of the users who might be targets of suspicion may be

854:

What drew me to comment at ANI was the similarity of Malke2010's approach to editing the Tea Party Movement article, which I have never edited and had never even read. I noticed the issue when it came up on ANI, ironically, and felt impelled to comment when two editors I have no history with,

3462:

opinionated and sometimes stubborn, but that doesn't make for bad faith. If you come to think that there is something that I have failed to realize, please draw it to my attention. I'm watching the discussion on his talk with an open mind, and I appreciate the way that you framed it there. --

1451:

First off, when you say "Then there are the now-open agenda-pushers pursuing their anti-American or recentism slants", what or whom are you referring to? And in regards to this whole slow-down thing, if we were to take the break you want, most of the people would never come back. I've been

1261:

I don't get why you insist on equating me and Gabe. There's a difference, a BIG difference. Gabe continually claims that I know nothing or next to nothing about certain topics; I don't. Gabe personally attacks me in edit summaries and once called me a "Type-A control freak who can't get a

4135:

Ah, I see I misread you. I read this as "drop by and comment" at Jimbo's talk, but you were suggesting to maybe list concerns in a new section for him. I'm not feeling like getting much more involved, and have really been trying pull away entirely from the matter. But I will ponder this...

1535:

against many users' objections and has fought to control the debate through canvassing, cementing it within their own nonbinding policy, and generally bullying those who disagree with them. If you keep it up they may even try to ban you from discussing the issue, as they have tried with

1910: 401:

in many ways. Most of the folks commenting at the ANI discussion had no concept of the preventative nature of that particular indef block and the condition logged with it. The consensus there, however whacked it was, was in line with TParis' actions. If there was any doubt, the

363:. If the IP continues to disrupt there I will act. Your report was valid but I saw it 3 hours after the fact so action now would not be preventitive. If you see further shenanigans and I don't seem to be around, take your report to the venue you think most appropriate. See ya 3478:

FWIW, Viriditas was right, especially about the very twisted and difficult to spot (understatement) web of role-playing. I appreciate that someone is looking into this and is willing to accept new information however uncomfortable it most likely will be. Thank you, JustDaFax.

1503:

Hi GWH and thanks for your clarification note. My !vote was to oppose both in favor of Options 1, 2 and 3, as I had !voted above. The civility parole and interaction bans were attempts present alternatives to weaken sterner sanctions, which I feel are called for in this case.

1605:" post. No reason was given to support the poster's opinion. Just an opinion. And given the sequence of comments before posting, it seemed to have a significant impact. So a vote, which we're not supposed to do here, rather than a reasoned piece of discussion, swung the day. 442:

act quickly and decisively to make it clear to a relative handful of bad apples that their inflammatory rhetoric will no longer be tolerated, regardless of their contributions. By the way, thanks again for that barnstar you gave me a couple years ago; I value it highly!

2025:

If Kalki is over it, what is your problem? As for not replying, AN is not on my watchlist, and your assumption I deliberately did not answer is what is despicable, in my view. By coming to my Talkpage, and insulting me about a necro-thread in such a fashion, you breach

3314:

Sorry you object! It was an edit war by definition ("An edit war occurs when editors who disagree about the content of a page repeatedly override each other's contributions, rather than trying to resolve the disagreement by discussion."); it is true that nobody broke

1345:

3. I think there is also general acceptance of the evolving organization for individual topic discussions for add, deletes and swaps: discussion, !voting, minimum number of affirmative !votes, keep threads open until critical mass reached, for each topic in question.

3947:. That matters too. Paid editing is an issue but that doesn't mean that everyone who disagrees with you is a paid editor. I could start (and I am not!!) going around and writing everywhere that P is an employee or paid PR person for Greenpeace, right? He/she 3746:

Petrarchan47, if you find a similar link about Monsanto instead of about BP, I'd really like to know about it. But if you (and Jusdafax) will let me give you a bit of sincere advice here, the best approach for you to take is to raise these issues at places like

1995:

there, when I asked you to justify your position, but no, you never bothered to, and that was despicable, in my opinion. You think you can just make whatever comments you like, and never be held accountable. That needs to change. Thanks, and have a nice day. ~

247:

Many thanks! It's been a while since I got one of these. This credit was earned the hard way, as to get the ITN item up, there had to be an article created. Thank goodness a lot of help came along! Now, if this hostage crisis can just be resolved peacefully...

1092:

I am honored by your good opinion. We do seem to see eye-to-eye on many of these big-ticket calls. I have cleared out my next 30 hours or so for Knowledge (XXG), and the VA is on my short list of items I consider, uh, vital. Thanks again, see you there soon.

1341:

2. There appears to be increasing acceptance that there will be no more unilateral BRD changes to the actual lists and sublists. I think an add, delete or swap decision should require at least five affirmative votes for action, with no close split votes.

1349:

4. PBP and others have archived all of the dead-end proposals and other threads (and most of the strum und drang) for the list of 10,000, making the talk page a more welcoming place to new participants. This still needs to be done for the list of 1,000.

1140:

If we do that, how are we ever going to get this list back down to 10,000 articles with any kind of speed? Also, any chance you could tell Gabe to stop saying I lack knowledge and stop changing his votes because he didn't like what I said somewhere else?

3689:

Nicely played (except for the manic feel and misspellings) -- a) slam/discredit message and source; b) pull out the "conspiracy" label (as if they NEVER EVER happen); c) throw the messenger in with climate change deniers or something similar, for good

4859:

seriously at the possibility of a topic ban, but the more I studied the edit history, the more I saw an intractable editor running amok. We will never know how many future editor hours you spared with your block, and it is an honor working with you!

2285:

let's not argue my views and !votes here, thanks. And if you want my advice, try adding Donovan, who was in my view much more influential than FC. Just see if you can nominate something else to delete. Maybe I'll support, maybe not. Best wishes,

4723:

you have pointed to have been deleted, one by each of us, and this improves the article. There are additions that need to be made as well. I am serious about getting this article to GA status. See you on the talk page. Onward, and thanks again.

339:

that it is my responsibility to wikistalk Epeefleche around the encyclopedia and source content that he is too lazy to source himself" (emph. added), as I have repeatedly maintained. I've removed your commentary, leaving just your endorsement.

3323:. I was unhappy to see you all deleting/reverting and talking past each other in edit notes and that none of you came to Talk, which is why I took the time to invite you all. In any case, thanks for considering the invitation. Best regards, 916:

people, and often times seems to be advancing her own personal agenda rather than adhering to the policies and guidelines of Knowledge (XXG). My sense is that she's really not here to build to an encyclopedia but to represent her "clients".

1609:

that annoyed some editors. (No doubt the creators of the crappy posts, at least, but that never bothered me.) Whether such a discussion supports my view here or not doesn't matter. It would help me to know, so that I can do the right thing.

2496:

about your situation in terms of adminship. You seemed good-willed, but I wanted to hear about "the back story," so to speak. Just to make sure (before I do personal research), would you be willing to be a Knowledge (XXG) administrator? --

2311:

Dylan Covers. I also don't know any European folk musicians who wouldn't know Fairport, Planxty or the Dubliners. The Grammy and Rock n Roll hall of fame are American halls of fame - its like winning the World Series - utterly parochial.

2827:

A cursory look down at the bottom of the talk page appears to indicate that most of the issues have been worked out, unless I am mistaken. I would tentatively endorse the regional "keep" list though I have not gone over it carefully.

3383:

What is not clear in my characterization? It indeed happened, that "editors who disagreed about the content of a page repeatedly overrode each other's contribution." 5 deletions/reversions occurred in rapid succession. Btw, under

3165: 2438:

Hello Jusdafax, I'm not sure if you've ever been asked this, but are you interested in becoming an administrator? Have you ever had an RfA in the past? I would need to do further research, but I am considering making an RfA for you.

3804:

JustDaFax, I appreciate your gentle comments here. I noticed that you had said some positive things about one of the main editors of MAM, so i am very confused now. I worked very hard today tending to the MAM article, only to have

846:

article. I felt very strongly in the months of August and September, 2009 that an attempt was being made by Malke2010 to "scrub" the article of well-referenced material that a partisan "fan" of Rove might not be comfortable with.

1337:

1. I think it has become apparent that there is acceptance of the proposed moratorium. The start date remains to be determined. Personally, I think seven days prior to the start of the clean-up (April 8) should be sufficient.

557:

right? Your AFD says "prod", specifically as an alternate to AFD. I think you might have meant it the other way around. No biggie, just thought you might want the chance to clarify before people jump in with comments. Cheers,

1484:

Question - was your !vote on the last section in the WP:AN discussion on Neitmi sanctions an "Oppose" to both an interaction ban and civility parole, or just civility parole? I'm trying to close as accurately as possible.

2634:

Hey Jusdafax, there are currently a couple of dozen removal threads that are one or two !votes away from consensus. I hope you can make the time to go through the threads soon and add your !vote and/or thoughts. Cheers!

2734:

Gabe vs. PbP drama fest. I've already had more than enough arguing with you and would prefer if you just kept a respectful distance. I.e., assuming good-faith is NOT a suicide pact and if you want to cut the list then

4302:

ITNC to needs update. I've added a results table and some prose regarding the post-election. Could you have another look at the article and, if you think it meets the update requirements, change to ready? Cheers!

4058:

currently. You might want to post your concerns at Jimmy's page, and see if he responds. If nothing else, you may find like-minded editors. I will continue to monitor the situation, and contemplate it. I salute you.

3507:

is very useful. Accusations and insinuations like Viriditas and Petrarchan are making is destructive and just plain ugly. Say hello, Joe McCarthy. Were there communist spies in America? You bet. Did he go after

2015:

is a serious problem and must be dealt with. You got what you wanted with your unblock request, so coming here eight weeks later to insult and even arguably threaten me is over the top. As your now-unblocked friend

1808: 1000:

Most welcome. I realized at once what happened. You would think after 176 Rfa !votes (I just used the Rfa counter tool... amazing!) that I'd remember what to do, but it seems I don't comment much at these events.

2275:

the electric guitar and multitrack recording. As for music, he had a big series of smash music hits with three number one songs, with one of them, 'How High the Moon' in the Grammy Hall of Fame. He has his own

2177:

Thank you kindly. So far our summer has been anything but drama-free, at least on some of the pages I edit and/or monitor. Perhaps matters will calm down. My very best wishes to you, where ever you edit here.

4701:

Hey, sorry for the "Fundraising section" discussion getting a little heated. I understand you technically didn't say you believe I have a hostile POV, but in my mind it doesn't make much of a difference. You

949: 941: 888:

So there you have it. I also posted the above on the TPM Talk page but it was removed. I am likely to weigh in at the ArbCom case as it proceeds. If you have any further questions I will be happy to reply.

2380:

My apologies, as your comment was inadvertently removed by accident when I was creating a Wiki-link. I see you reverted so I will recreate the link but more carefully this time. Again, sorry about that.

2898:- thanks for that. Still, it would be useful if your closing mentioned that you did that. I know admin/closings are hard but they should generally address the reason the ANI was opened, yes? Thanks. 812:

Hi Viriditas. I have been on a short wiki-break, but have just returned. Frankly, reading your link leaves me in a state of considerable incredulity. I will comment further as soon as possible. Thanks,

4544:

Might you consider offering an opinion on a content dispute between two editors involving the removal of parts of an article on a group of characters in a fictional novel? The discussion is here:

3198:. We can, I'm sure, agree to disagree over the posting by Secret; in my mind that's secondary to the knee-jerk calls for desysopping which you comment addresses perfectly. At the risk of breaching 1674: 3269:

I hope you come and discuss the reasons for the edits you made during edit war you conducted, so when the lockdown is over we can go back to editing productively and collaboratively. I created a

1670: 2320:

You ignore most of my points to focus on a few, ignore my attempt at advice, and return to argue against my wishes. So be it. My editing time is often limited and I prefer to use it otherwise.

937: 554: 3043:

allows a relative unknown, like Jack Vance, to get on the main page where they might not have at all. So it's not all bad, but I think I preferred the pre-RD era, all things considered.

410:

with because, of course if they weren't fools, they'd have agreed with that person in the first place. Some of the worst behavior I've observed on wiki is evidenced in this episode.

1353:

5. Prior ongoing personalized exchanges seem to have been effectively tamped down by the concerned parties (the only way it was ever going to happen, short of blocks or topic bans).

129: 4166:

Jusdafax, I just wanted to weigh in to say that I saw your comments in the Jimbo talk page and agree. If you have any ideas on dealing with paid editing please keep me in the loop.

1983:

Hi Jusdafax. I have been reading through some old discussions, and I stumbled across one of your comments, to my regret. As I don't think I have ever told you how much your idiotic

2671:

with PbP. My suspicion, though admittedly bad-faith, is that PbP would rather control the content of the list than he would reduce the list to 10,000 or less entries. Same with

2521:

where I had some involvement back in 2010. In brief, I find it a significant failing of the project that the editing community is entrusted to make admins, but not unmake them.

3020:

This is too off topic to post on the ITNC page (and that's saying something!). But in response to your comment about the way RD has evolved, I would simply make the point that

4431:

I would just like to say I'm new to this so please point out if I've done anything wrong here as I may take this up in my spare time :) . I had this come up when I came here:

3024:. You are right: RD appears to have evolved in that way, but there are some notable exceptions. The world's oldest person is generally a full blurb or nothing, for instance. — 417:

if you want to avoid messy fiascoes. Both sides of the issue (assuming there are only 2) bring out some of the most visceral reactions with little to back up the emotions.

4207: 3782:

am strongly against. It's not clear to me what is going on and it appears considerable study will be required to become reasonably informed. My best wishes to all editors.

3693:

CREWE is a fact, and the Knowledge (XXG) community discussed it's existence open, public forums, including Jimbo's talk page. What a strange thing to jump all over me for.

2875:(and me) both thought the discussion was pretty finished, if you read the opening of the ANI, the OP asked for action with respect to the accusations being made, mostly by 2462:

in September 2010, have never requested the tools and currently lean against the idea of an Rfa, but am frankly curious: what led you to me? Thanks again, and best wishes,

625:

Hi Jusdafax. The article is still pretty poor stub, but I think it's better than nothing. I remember your username from before, it's good to see you are still around :) --

2916:, I'm very content with the closing statement just the way it is. I'm going to write a more nuanced and detailed explanation of what I mean by that on my own user talk. -- 2515:

Oppose - per above opposes. I thank the candidate for their work and willingness to serve as an admin, but many of the concerns expressed convince me to oppose this Rfa.

325: 1262:

girlfriend", I don't. Gabe arbitrarily changes positions based on how he feels about me, I don't. Oh, and there's the whole won't-shut-about-Harry-Potter business

3901:

Jtdog, Petrarchan47 is welcome to post on my page any time. Your statement appears to be an attempt at intimidation, which I resent for both Petrarchan and myself.

2280:

in the Rock Hall of Fame. Genres in the late 40's - early 50's were mixed up, so he is termed "country" for lack of a better placement. And to top it off Les Paul

1456:

far between. Which is why I'm making a lot of proposals right now (although it's worth noting that something like 95-97% of the list hasn't been touched by them).

753: 865:

Malke2010's attempt to do the very same thing there that they had at Karl Rove: create a new sub page and scrub out material that reflected poorly on the subject.

1666: 136:

the well wishes extended me were most kind, but I decided to return, re-committed, when another blocked sock was revealed as one of the factors aggravating the

953: 698:, which you substantially updated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the 216:, which you substantially updated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the 644:

Thanks! I seem to have had several stages as a Wikipedian. Others come and go, and here I sit, clicking away on my keyboard. Good fortunes to you and yours!

2228: 1598:

International news. I prefer the blurb rather than the altblurb." And immediately after that, the item was posted, with the blurb rather than the altblurb.

298: 4517:

Thanks, I appreciate it. I hope other editors feel the same way, but as I say, I think this issue needs to be dealt with by the highest levels of the WMF.

497:, which you recently updated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the 3082:

using our tool. We at STiki hope you like using the tool and decide to continue using it in the future. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

143:

Maintaining standards in featured content requires vigilance, dedication and knowledge of people like you, who are needed; reviews are always welcome at

3966:

So, it appears you are saying I am calling you a paid editor and you are mocking my name? Your remarks and demeanor on my page are truly extraordinary.

2218: 3228:

Thanks Pedro. For the record I opposed Secret's request to get the tools back, and now it is this. I appreciate the notice about AN, and am on my way.

2992:, I had no response and an anonymous IP editor took it upon himself to undo my changes on grounds that my proposal did not have a "strong consensus". 3527: 3139:

We hope you enjoy maintaining Knowledge (XXG) with STiki! If you have any questions, problems, or suggestions don't hesitate to drop a note over at

2214: 2730:, right? Anyway, the only reason that I mentioned you here was for the interests of full-disclosure, not because I wanted this thread to turn into 2488: 2096:, which you recently nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the 1384: 1377: 634: 3031: 2667:

have, at this point, decided to remain neutral on the matter, I could really use some leadership from you, since I don't want argue this out

2224: 2165: 294: 1424: 1419:. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see 3719: 3647: 111: 3021: 1548: 288: 4299: 2097: 2042:, becoming only the third such request I have made in my years as a volunteer editor here. Let's just agree to disagree, and let it go. 1956:

My first glance fills me with admiration! I have already added a few !votes and will be making more in the next few days. Many thanks!

699: 498: 217: 4651: 4149: 4123: 4097: 3889: 3826: 3734: 3706: 3662: 3634: 3569: 3543: 3492: 3174: 360: 2605:, but at present am simply not inclined to ask for the tools. Perhaps in the fall I'll reconsider; I thank you for your endorsement! 4291: 2805:

have a few other things I want to work on, and frankly, the amount of time and energy being expended here makes my eyes glaze over.

1531:

It looks like you messed with the Classical Music wikiproject. This insular group of editors has stonewalled the infobox issue for

880:

Additionally, the new sub-article is another "click" away from the reading public, and the controversies sanitized with a summary.

838:

as I say, I never, to my knowledge, was alerted to the kind of abusive tricks Malke2010 was blocked for, in this particular case by

284: 1420: 1072:

Jusdafax, are you going to continue to participate in the talk page discussion? I actively encourage you to do so; the discussion

842:, who later, if I remember correctly, unsuccessfully mentored Malke2010. The period in question involved Malke2010's edits to the 3809:

my work reverted, including the simplest of things like a little intro to the background of the movement, and a proper use of RS.

3512:, recklessly and with no sense of decency? That is the company V and P are keeping. That is where this has already gone. Ugly. 1452:

following this and the Meta one for years; they don't get 15-20 people for any one time, and the times they get 5-10 are few and

764: 4246:

You are welcome. I notified you just because I mentioned you and agree that you are not directly involved. Sorry to trouble you.

2996: 2989: 1410: 3594:

up in a COI noticeboard, where it is appropriate under Wiki policies and leave the personal attacks out of Talk pages already.

967: 2221:). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. 291:). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. 4870: 4819: 4780: 4734: 4685: 4584: 4528: 4483: 4385: 4329: 4236: 4070: 4023:

editing, and written that the issue needs to be handled with thought and care. Again, I apologize for the misunderstanding.

3977: 3912: 3793: 3447: 3361: 3300: 3239: 3079: 3054: 3025: 2839: 2816: 2616: 2572: 2532: 2473: 2392: 2335: 2296: 2189: 2126: 2053: 1967: 1753: 1709: 1636: 1572: 1515: 1493: 1319: 1213: 1177: 1104: 1056: 1012: 900: 824: 733: 655: 589: 537: 454: 259: 4843:--and it was perfectly correct of course. It's really a shame that an indef block is frequently the best we can do. Thanks, 4389: 3350:

must dispute your post to my Talk page. The language of your "apology" above is also of interest... "Sorry you object!" Hm.

3123: 1625:

I will attempt to answer your question incisively in another day or two, I hope. And again, welcome back, quite sincerely.

1383:

As an outside editor, I have moved that this RFC/U be closed. If you wish to comment on the Motion to close, please do so

1237: 795: 4988: 4980: 1308:

I have come to respect DL1 a great deal in these discussions, and once again second him in every word. Take heed, please.

94: 86: 4975: 4963: 4958: 4953: 2074: 1823:. - Did you see the interview on project Germany, with a picture I took, in the last Signpost? (Link on my user page) -- 693: 678: 668: 477: 196: 159:

but here's hoping that 2013 will see a peaceful road ahead and a return to the quality and comaraderie that defines the

81: 69: 64: 59: 2597:

Well now that is mighty kind indeed, Gabe, considering I !voted against yours and DL's as well. Just for laughs I used

630: 403: 211: 2517:

As for a run for adminship for myself, as I say above, I tilt against an Rfa at this time. You might try reviewing

4932: 2702: 2659:

will do his very best to block or stall-out the proposal as he is already showing signs of doing that. Also, since

2205:

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

1463: 1269: 1148: 275:

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

38: 4615: 2355:

If you wish to add your link at the Crats Noticeboard, kindly do so without removing others' comments. Thank you.

414: 2861: 2160: 1772: 1489: 4458: 3262: 2012: 1848: 1775:

on the "hot" topic infobox, smiled a lot when I was faced with my personal history, - I was on both sides ;) --

1245: 2647:

Hey Jusdafax. I just wanted to touch base with you regarding the recent proposal to significantly reduce the

752:

Hi, Jusdafax. As a person who has commented in the above RFC, your input on a possible closure of the RFC at

2707: 1543: 1468: 1274: 1153: 990: 873:

previously "created a new article on the same topic, but excluded all of the negative material" before this:

4442:

Is this down to me randomly having the same IP or something else, as I can't think of any reason for it...

4393: 3850: 3140: 912: 876: 398: 4712: 4647: 4545: 4454: 4171: 4144: 4118: 4092: 3884: 3821: 3729: 3701: 3657: 3629: 3564: 3538: 3487: 3178: 3149: 1856: 1828: 1780: 1729: 1721: 1687: 174: 3111: 2602: 626: 4055: 3526:

Why in the world would you refer to this as an accusation, jtydog? Let me tell you something, pondering

2751: 2697: 2656: 1946: 1820: 1458: 1362: 1295: 1264: 1193: 1143: 1123: 1082: 971: 605: 578:

Thanks for the heads up. UPDATE: I fixed the Afd statement so it corresponds with reality. Thanks again

564: 3720:

http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-57575460-93/bp-accused-of-rewriting-environmental-record-on-wikipedia/

1601:

Now, that post I've quoted is precisely the kind of post that annoys me a lot. It's purely a vote. An "

3346:

characterize me as "talking past" when I was the one who first asked for a Talk page discussion, so I

2997:

Knowledge (XXG) talk:Vital articles#Replacement article: Imperial and US customary measurement systems

1233: 4507: 3760: 3467: 3425: 2921: 2857: 2157: 2083: 1805: 761: 686: 515: 485: 371: 204: 4659: 4630: 3199: 2492: 882:

So Goethean's objections to Malke's similar proposal for the Tea Party article are in fact quite apt

4308: 3680: 2552: 2544: 2501: 2444: 2324:

You are now one of only four editors in my nearly six years here that I have made this request of.

2001: 1925: 963: 921: 839: 803: 784: 4663: 2031: 940:. Evidence that you wish the Arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence sub-page, at 4941: 4865: 4814: 4775: 4729: 4680: 4579: 4523: 4478: 4402: 4397: 4324: 4231: 4186: 4065: 3972: 3907: 3788: 3442: 3356: 3295: 3258: 3234: 3144: 3049: 3006: 2834: 2811: 2611: 2567: 2527: 2468: 2416: 2387: 2365: 2330: 2291: 2184: 2121: 2048: 1962: 1877: 1748: 1704: 1631: 1567: 1538: 1510: 1314: 1208: 1172: 1099: 1051: 1007: 986: 895: 819: 728: 650: 584: 532: 449: 344: 254: 234: 47: 17: 4381: 4358: 3189: 3131: 3102: 3095: 3087: 2964:

I recently tried to make a change to the list of Level 3 Vital Articles by replacing the entry

1914: 1655: 1202:

Our talkpage posts crossed. Not giving up, just stepping away for a moment to gain perspective.

3813:

is the edit, if you want a view of what Viriditas and I have had to deal with at this article.

3135:- Do not hesitate to wear the STiki label with pride by choosing from a selection of userboxes! 2756:"While I think we could shed 40-50, I do feel that Geography is fairly right-sized as a whole". 2543:

Oh well, anyways. Nice talking to you; see you around on Knowledge (XXG). Please contact me on

4908: 4708: 4642: 4388:

to Knowledge (XXG) at-large and your use of the tool. We hope you continue your ascent up the

4349: 4277: 4167: 4139: 4113: 4087: 3939: 3879: 3842: 3816: 3724: 3696: 3652: 3624: 3559: 3533: 3482: 3151: 2244: 2206: 1918: 1852: 1824: 1776: 1725: 1683: 1434: 1392: 1118:

If you have time, you may want to voice your opinion under the section titled "So what now?"

426: 314: 167: 4655: 4018:

basis for these accusations are the consistent positions that I have taken, which are simply

3748: 2652: 2374: 1445: 884:, and North8000 is in fact out of line defending this transparent attempt at obstructionism. 152: 4848: 4799: 4759: 4634: 4251: 4215: 4028: 3957: 3858: 3599: 3517: 3398: 3328: 3278: 2935: 2903: 2885: 2660: 2312: 2261: 1942: 1614: 1358: 1291: 1189: 1119: 1078: 851:

editing career, with numerous blocks despite relatively little activity, speaks for itself.

600: 559: 431: 389: 4376:

Congratulations, Jusdafax! You're receiving this barnstar because you recently crossed the

3390: 3385: 3320: 3316: 2518: 2027: 332: 148: 144: 4503: 3756: 3463: 3421: 3270: 3215: 2917: 2872: 1800: 1409:

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the

758: 509: 364: 4638: 3203: 160: 137: 1594:

Immediately after I made my one an only post in eight months, we got another that said "

1591:

Trouble is, I'm already bothered by the quality of discussion, just from that one post.

4304: 3676: 3586: 2876: 2548: 2497: 2440: 1997: 1921: 1888: 1035: 958: 917: 856: 799: 780: 2146: 4860: 4809: 4770: 4724: 4675: 4574: 4553: 4518: 4473: 4319: 4226: 4182: 4060: 3967: 3902: 3783: 3437: 3351: 3290: 3266: 3229: 3044: 3002: 2829: 2806: 2606: 2562: 2522: 2463: 2409: 2382: 2358: 2325: 2286: 2235:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these

2179: 2116: 2107: 2043: 1957: 1743: 1699: 1626: 1562: 1505: 1423:. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from 1415: 1403: 1309: 1203: 1167: 1094: 1046: 1002: 890: 860: 814: 723: 645: 579: 527: 492: 467: 444: 305:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these

249: 227: 4769:

Man, I had that typo fixed within two minutes... but not much gets past you, I see!

2598: 946:

Please add your evidence by March 20, 2013, which is when the evidence phase closes.

4912: 4904: 4875: 4852: 4824: 4803: 4785: 4763: 4739: 4716: 4690: 4668: 4605: 4589: 4557: 4533: 4511: 4488: 4462: 4414: 4334: 4312: 4285: 4269: 4255: 4241: 4219: 4190: 4175: 4156: 4130: 4104: 4075: 4032: 3982: 3961: 3917: 3896: 3862: 3833: 3798: 3764: 3741: 3713: 3684: 3669: 3641: 3603: 3576: 3550: 3521: 3499: 3471: 3452: 3429: 3402: 3366: 3332: 3305: 3282: 3244: 3222: 3182: 3157: 3059: 3036: 3010: 2939: 2925: 2907: 2889: 2865: 2844: 2821: 2798: 2784: 2763: 2745: 2713: 2681: 2672: 2664: 2641: 2621: 2592: 2577: 2556: 2537: 2505: 2478: 2448: 2425: 2397: 2340: 2315: 2301: 2264: 2248: 2240: 2236: 2194: 2167: 2131: 2110: 2091: 2058: 2005: 1972: 1950: 1929: 1892: 1860: 1832: 1812: 1784: 1758: 1733: 1714: 1691: 1641: 1618: 1577: 1554: 1520: 1497: 1474: 1438: 1430: 1396: 1388: 1366: 1324: 1299: 1280: 1254: 1218: 1197: 1182: 1159: 1127: 1109: 1086: 1061: 1039: 1017: 994: 975: 925: 905: 829: 807: 788: 768: 738: 716: 710: 660: 638: 612: 594: 571: 542: 520: 459: 421: 378: 349: 318: 310: 306: 264: 241: 178: 4619: 911:

Thank you for your detailed reply. I have started a preliminary evidence page at

599:

All good mate - looks like everything was done right either way. Have a good one!

4940:

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

4844: 4795: 4755: 4247: 4211: 4024: 3953: 3854: 3595: 3513: 3394: 3324: 3274: 2931: 2913: 2899: 2881: 2793: 2779: 2758: 2740: 2723: 2676: 2636: 2587: 1816: 1610: 1249: 1241: 331:

Your suggestion that I admit to "agressive Wikistalking" is flat out wrong, and

280: 46:

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

985:..for fixing the indent issue causing the numbers to drop back starting at 1.-- 3251: 3209: 2017: 1906: 1899: 936:

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

156: 4903:

for the holidays and 2014 from a warmer place than where you probably are ;)

4794:

Only because you fixed my typo, which I thought was cute (and nice) of you.

3273:

for the discussion. I am copying this note to all your Talk pages. Thanks!

1883: 1030: 843: 276: 2957:

To all editors displaying the "Vital Articles" template on their User Page.

1188:

three bitterly opposed editors who can't or won't agree on sound process.

863:, interacted harshly: North2000 wanted to censure Goethean's objections to 395:

There are really so many admin truths to be gleaned from the whole fiasco.

157:

Somehow, somehow we never ever seem to do nothin' completely nice and easy,

3173:

Okay, I will stop that now, but you've got to admit it was pretty funny! (

1045:

Good to hear! Me too, actually, and the end of the sniffling is in sight.

4549: 4439:

introduction to editing. Thank you. Jusdafax 20:19, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

3938:

Thanks for your note Jusdafax. As I have mentioned here and elsewhere,

2210: 4890: 4210:

regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

392:. While I don't agree with the outcome, TParis did a very good job. 4367: 3164: 1028:

Thanks for the update. :) I'm doin alright, gettin over a head cold. —

3755:

on article talk pages where editors are discussing article content. --

2871:

Thank you for closing the ANI, however, although the original poster,

2513:

I'm puzzled, how can my oppose be considered "quite harsh?" It reads:

2459: 1334:

Jusdafax, several positive events have occurred in the last few days:

1941:

transparent and welcoming to new participants as possible. Regards,

950:

Knowledge (XXG):Arbitration/Requests/Case/Tea Party movement/Workshop

942:

Knowledge (XXG):Arbitration/Requests/Case/Tea Party movement/Evidence

4808:

Ah! Happy to help, and happy to see a good consensus on that blurb.

2774:

For an example of what I am talking about regarding PbP, please see

2038:

be "dealt with" and "needs to change." Your comments are noted, and

754:

Knowledge (XXG) talk:Requests for comment/Morriswa#Proposal to close

4434:

User talk:78.147.150.105 Jump to: navigation, search October 2009

3143:

and we'll be more than happy to help. Again, welcome, and thanks!

2727: 2115:

Many thanks in return; the acknowledgement is quite appreciated.

1669:, for fighting vandalism, for using your wording skills to raise 126:

Wishing you and yours a joyous, healthful, and productive 2013!

3016:

One of the most random talk page responses you will ever receive

1875:

Thank you for your kind words about my creation of new article,

1588:

Thanks for the welcome back. I wondered if anyone would notice.

2454:

First off, and most importantly, please allow me to thank you.

2011:

I stand by my comment, since socking, especially massive cases

4919: 4225:

I see I am not directly involved, but thanks for this notice.

2069: 673: 472: 191: 128:

Please accept a belated thank you for the well wishes upon my

25: 3581:

The conspiracy-spinning that V engaged in on his Talk page,

2487:

Well, to tell you the truth, I stumbled upon your oppose on

938:

Knowledge (XXG):Arbitration/Requests/Case/Tea Party movement

4546:

Talk:Druids_(Shannara)#BRD_on_recent_large_addition_of_text

4181:

Truly a remarkable thread, in light of later developments.

3718:'Caught" may be the wrong term, but here's what happened: 2739:

don't hinder; actions speak louder than words, etcetera.

4298:

Hey Jusdafax. I see that you changed the status of the

1536:

Pigsonthewing in the past. Good luck dealing with them!

4840: 4703: 4499: 4469: 4318:

I see the article is now posted. Thanks for your help!

3853:, which is disruptive behavior. Please stop. Thanks. 3846: 3810: 3202:

in letter (but not in spirit) this has made its way to

3195: 2895: 2789: 2775: 2755: 2209:, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page 1992: 1984: 690:

was updated with a news item that involved the article

489:

was updated with a news item that involved the article

279:, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page 208:

was updated with a news item that involved the article

133: 4268:

I should have said thanks for your support sooner. ```

2040:

I hereby request you stay off my talk page permanently

4208:

Knowledge (XXG):Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents

1136:"My advice: drop the mass deletion proposals, period" 163:

process, with the help of many dedicated Wikipedians!

326:

Knowledge (XXG) talk:Requests for comment/Epeefleche

3127:- See how you are faring against other STiki users! 2880:address the reason the ANI was opened? Thank you. 2088:was updated with an item that involved the article 867:To quote myself in the recent expanded ANI thread: 4633:, I thank you for your editorial contributions to 2988:Although I have advertised the proposed change on 2894:I just saw that you left a light warning for V in 2856:but would like to get the edit warring to stop. 948:You can contribute to the case workshop sub-page, 3118:Here are some pages which are a little more fun: 2156:I'll drink to that! Have one for yourself amigo! 3319:when the page was locked down. Nobody followed 954:Knowledge (XXG):Arbitration/Guide to arbitration 722:I appreciate the ITN notice, so thanks Spencer! 413:My thoughts are add gun-related politics to the 1799:A year ago, you were the 451st recipient of my 271:Disambiguation link notification for January 24 3845:as per the note I just left for you and Canoe 3112:Information about vandalism on Knowledge (XXG) 1905:You took part in a discussion that dealt with 952:. For a guide to the arbitration process, see 2456:I view your interest as a profound complement 2153:and here's to a summer of drama-free editing. 8: 3849:, these notes approach or perhaps amount to 2201:Disambiguation link notification for June 27 1077:desperately needs more structure. Regards, 2586:FWIW, I would support an RfA for Jusdafax! 2458:, and am honored by your consideration. I 1378:Knowledge (XXG):Requests_for_comment/Niemti 4206:Hello. There is currently a discussion at 1991:you should have had the decency to answer 932:Tea Party movement arbitration case opened 132:, and apologies for the false alarm of my 2406:Thanks for the clarification. Regards -- 1913:. Based on that discussion, I started a 875:at the sub page created at this link for 420:Just my $ 0.02. Thanks for listening. 109: 2995:Will you please look at the discussion 2491:and happened to find it quite harsh, no 1665:Thank you for quality contributions for 1425:Knowledge (XXG):Feedback request service 794:Note, this incident was first discussed 388:I suspect you're right in what you said 4396:. Thank you and keep up the good work! 4110:would be prudent to elaborate at all. 4938:Do not edit the contents of this page. 2322:Please do not post on this page again. 2023:they believe to be fair and just aims. 1987:shocked me back then, I tell you now. 44:Do not edit the contents of this page. 526:Many thanks, and best wishes to you! 7: 4600: 134:first—and hopefully last—retirement; 130:retirement as FAC delegate this year 3952:attack based on 100% speculation. 3022:progress is not always for the best 2990:Knowledge (XXG) talk:Vital articles 1584:ITN - Welcome back - Thanks, but... 756:would be appreciated. Thank you. -- 3591:I just think differently than you. 2013:editing from 15 different accounts 361:List of most viewed YouTube videos 24: 4637:, which recently was promoted to 4300:Australian federal election, 2013 4292:Australian federal election, 2013 2599:SnottyWong's admin candidate tool 1936:Vital Articles/Expanded talk page 1376:You have previously commented on 956:. For the Arbitration Committee, 4923: 4889: 4604: 4564: 4366: 4348: 4201: 3163: 2976:with a new replacement article 2145: 2073: 1654: 748:Proposed closing of Morriswa RFC 677: 476: 359:Hi, Jusdafax. I've watchlisted 195: 110: 29: 4445:Any insight much appreciated! 4380:classification threshold using 2655:. My concern here is that IMO, 4839:I hate seeing an edit summary 4674:Wow, my first... many thanks! 4084:A deep bow to you, my friend. 1720:You are invited to share some 1667:project R&B and Soul Music 415:list of shit to stay away from 1: 4913:12:12, 21 December 2013 (UTC) 4876:21:06, 12 December 2013 (UTC) 4853:18:29, 12 December 2013 (UTC) 4691:23:59, 27 November 2013 (UTC) 4669:19:04, 26 November 2013 (UTC) 4611:This user has contributed to 4590:08:48, 19 November 2013 (UTC) 4558:02:24, 16 November 2013 (UTC) 4534:21:40, 10 November 2013 (UTC) 4512:21:17, 10 November 2013 (UTC) 4335:02:36, 9 September 2013 (UTC) 4313:16:41, 8 September 2013 (UTC) 1024:Reply to your friendly update 739:23:55, 17 February 2013 (UTC) 717:23:28, 17 February 2013 (UTC) 661:08:06, 19 February 2013 (UTC) 120:Best wishes for the New Year! 4825:04:49, 8 December 2013 (UTC) 4804:04:43, 8 December 2013 (UTC) 4786:04:36, 8 December 2013 (UTC) 4764:03:47, 8 December 2013 (UTC) 4740:22:26, 2 December 2013 (UTC) 4717:21:50, 2 December 2013 (UTC) 4548:. Thanks for considering. 4489:22:10, 9 November 2013 (UTC) 4463:15:31, 9 November 2013 (UTC) 4415:05:47, 4 November 2013 (UTC) 2930:Thanks, I'll respond there. 694:February 2013 Quetta bombing 669:February 2013 Quetta bombing 639:09:06, 8 February 2013 (UTC) 613:09:01, 8 February 2013 (UTC) 595:08:52, 8 February 2013 (UTC) 572:08:46, 8 February 2013 (UTC) 543:09:01, 8 February 2013 (UTC) 521:08:52, 7 February 2013 (UTC) 460:00:32, 6 February 2013 (UTC) 432:00:17, 6 February 2013 (UTC) 379:04:57, 3 February 2013 (UTC) 350:08:50, 27 January 2013 (UTC) 319:11:17, 24 January 2013 (UTC) 265:07:55, 17 January 2013 (UTC) 242:05:47, 17 January 2013 (UTC) 4341:Congratulations from STiki! 4286:03:38, 27 August 2013 (UTC) 4256:23:01, 18 August 2013 (UTC) 4242:19:50, 18 August 2013 (UTC) 4220:18:59, 18 August 2013 (UTC) 4176:16:16, 13 August 2013 (UTC) 4157:08:29, 12 August 2013 (UTC) 4131:05:03, 12 August 2013 (UTC) 4105:02:02, 12 August 2013 (UTC) 4076:00:24, 12 August 2013 (UTC) 4033:01:36, 12 August 2013 (UTC) 3983:00:51, 12 August 2013 (UTC) 3962:00:43, 12 August 2013 (UTC) 3918:00:24, 12 August 2013 (UTC) 3897:00:06, 12 August 2013 (UTC) 3863:23:59, 11 August 2013 (UTC) 3834:23:10, 11 August 2013 (UTC) 3799:09:28, 10 August 2013 (UTC) 3103:Comparison with other tools 3096:Using STiki and its hotkeys 2313:User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 2282:invented the harmonica rack 2262:User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 179:21:24, 3 January 2013 (UTC) 5007: 3777:Re: Recent commentary here 3765:14:44, 9 August 2013 (UTC) 3742:02:39, 9 August 2013 (UTC) 3714:02:31, 9 August 2013 (UTC) 3685:00:22, 9 August 2013 (UTC) 3670:00:06, 9 August 2013 (UTC) 3642:22:53, 8 August 2013 (UTC) 3604:05:44, 9 August 2013 (UTC) 3577:03:06, 9 August 2013 (UTC) 3551:02:56, 9 August 2013 (UTC) 3522:02:13, 9 August 2013 (UTC) 3500:23:00, 8 August 2013 (UTC) 3472:23:23, 7 August 2013 (UTC) 3453:23:14, 7 August 2013 (UTC) 3430:17:01, 7 August 2013 (UTC) 3403:16:06, 6 August 2013 (UTC) 3367:15:40, 6 August 2013 (UTC) 3333:15:15, 6 August 2013 (UTC) 3306:15:00, 6 August 2013 (UTC) 3283:14:27, 6 August 2013 (UTC) 3245:11:02, 6 August 2013 (UTC) 3223:10:57, 6 August 2013 (UTC) 3183:10:33, 1 August 2013 (UTC) 2940:18:58, 4 August 2013 (UTC) 2926:17:25, 4 August 2013 (UTC) 2908:15:40, 4 August 2013 (UTC) 2890:15:34, 4 August 2013 (UTC) 1861:08:06, 10 April 2015 (UTC) 1833:11:08, 10 April 2014 (UTC) 1715:08:41, 16 April 2013 (UTC) 1692:06:11, 10 April 2013 (UTC) 1673:, - repeating: you are an 1642:09:05, 16 April 2013 (UTC) 1578:08:40, 16 April 2013 (UTC) 1475:05:56, 29 March 2013 (UTC) 1439:00:15, 29 March 2013 (UTC) 1421:suggestions for responding 1397:14:34, 28 March 2013 (UTC) 1325:02:57, 26 March 2013 (UTC) 1300:23:49, 25 March 2013 (UTC) 1281:15:21, 25 March 2013 (UTC) 1255:06:20, 25 March 2013 (UTC) 1219:05:37, 25 March 2013 (UTC) 1198:05:31, 25 March 2013 (UTC) 1183:04:31, 25 March 2013 (UTC) 1160:04:21, 25 March 2013 (UTC) 1128:22:30, 22 March 2013 (UTC) 1110:00:03, 17 March 2013 (UTC) 1087:23:44, 16 March 2013 (UTC) 1062:00:16, 17 March 2013 (UTC) 1040:22:47, 16 March 2013 (UTC) 1018:05:52, 16 March 2013 (UTC) 995:05:43, 16 March 2013 (UTC) 335:. My actual comment was: " 4888: 4424:Could you help me please? 4392:and stay in touch at the 4365: 4347: 4191:19:08, 11 June 2020 (UTC) 3415:Asking about your comment 3162: 3158:05:12, 29 July 2013 (UTC) 3080:your recent contributions 3060:22:23, 27 July 2013 (UTC) 3037:19:56, 27 July 2013 (UTC) 3011:20:32, 25 July 2013 (UTC) 2866:22:53, 24 July 2013 (UTC) 2845:22:57, 20 July 2013 (UTC) 2822:04:17, 19 July 2013 (UTC) 2799:02:29, 19 July 2013 (UTC) 2785:00:11, 19 July 2013 (UTC) 2764:20:30, 18 July 2013 (UTC) 2746:20:07, 18 July 2013 (UTC) 2714:19:58, 18 July 2013 (UTC) 2682:19:26, 18 July 2013 (UTC) 2642:22:01, 15 July 2013 (UTC) 2622:03:44, 17 July 2013 (UTC) 2603:a surprisingly high score 2593:21:59, 15 July 2013 (UTC) 2578:07:36, 15 July 2013 (UTC) 2557:02:41, 15 July 2013 (UTC) 2538:02:25, 15 July 2013 (UTC) 2506:01:37, 15 July 2013 (UTC) 2479:23:40, 14 July 2013 (UTC) 2449:20:01, 14 July 2013 (UTC) 2426:23:15, 13 July 2013 (UTC) 2398:23:09, 13 July 2013 (UTC) 2375:22:50, 13 July 2013 (UTC) 2351:removing others' comments 2249:11:31, 27 June 2013 (UTC) 2195:19:29, 26 June 2013 (UTC) 2168:18:10, 24 June 2013 (UTC) 1785:19:45, 26 June 2013 (UTC) 1759:19:22, 26 June 2013 (UTC) 1734:07:00, 21 June 2013 (UTC) 1619:21:53, 3 April 2013 (UTC) 1555:17:03, 3 April 2013 (UTC) 1521:01:32, 3 April 2013 (UTC) 1498:21:53, 2 April 2013 (UTC) 1367:02:36, 3 April 2013 (UTC) 976:23:45, 6 March 2013 (UTC) 926:01:49, 9 March 2013 (UTC) 906:05:23, 8 March 2013 (UTC) 830:07:56, 7 March 2013 (UTC) 808:00:54, 7 March 2013 (UTC) 789:23:40, 6 March 2013 (UTC) 769:05:11, 2 March 2013 (UTC) 116: 4437:<Information.png: --> 4384:. We thank you both for 3263:User:ImperfectlyInformed 2547:if you need anything. -- 2341:23:56, 7 July 2013 (UTC) 2316:23:36, 7 July 2013 (UTC) 2302:23:28, 7 July 2013 (UTC) 2265:22:13, 7 July 2013 (UTC) 2138:A cup of coffee for you! 2132:23:41, 22 May 2013 (UTC) 2111:23:37, 22 May 2013 (UTC) 2059:23:10, 20 May 2013 (UTC) 2034:. That is probably what 2006:22:16, 20 May 2013 (UTC) 1973:22:40, 17 May 2013 (UTC) 1951:14:50, 17 May 2013 (UTC) 1930:02:55, 13 May 2013 (UTC) 1847:Two years ago ... - and 212:In Aménas hostage crisis 4596:November 2013 GA Thanks 3088:Information about STiki 2350: 1893:06:14, 8 May 2013 (UTC) 4020:different than theirs. 3583:which you praised here 3530:might be a good idea. 2999:and add your opinion. 2851:March Against Monsanto 2030:and show a desire for 1881:. Much appreciated, — 1811:. - Last year we sang 1671:"fresh eyes" awareness 384:I suspect you're right 383: 4936:of past discussions. 4357:The Anti-Vandalism + 4056:User talk:Jimbo Wales 3510:everyone not like him 3124:The STiki leaderboard 3074:Hello, Jusdafax, and 2912:For what it's worth, 2752:User:Purplebackpack89 2657:User:Purplebackpack89 2460:declined a nomination 1849:what we sang recently 1372:Motion to close RFC/U 913:User:Viriditas/Arbcom 871:Malke2010 has indeed 684:On 17 February 2013, 42:of past discussions. 2237:opt-out instructions 1742:Thanks again Gerda! 1490:Georgewilliamherbert 483:On 7 February 2013, 307:opt-out instructions 202:On 17 January 2013, 3147:(developer) and -- 3141:the STiki talk page 2219:fix with Dab solver 1909:, which took place 1678:(9 September 2010)! 1411:request for comment 1068:Vital articles list 406:is alive and well. 337:I completely reject 289:fix with Dab solver 4451:"justpassingtime" 4386:your contributions 3259:User:Mark Marathon 2561:Thanks, likewise! 2227:• Join us at the 1878:Urofsky v. Gilmore 1698:Thank you, Gerda! 1675:awesome Wikipedian 1402:Please comment on 553:Sup! You know you 297:• Join us at the 140:pages this year. 18:User talk:Jusdafax 4994: 4993: 4948: 4947: 4942:current talk page 4918: 4917: 4667: 4626: 4625: 4421: 4420: 4284: 3945:I feel persecuted 3940:User:Petrarchan47 3843:User:Petrarchan47 3221: 3171: 3170: 3066:Welcome to STiki! 2695:10,000 articles. 2601:and came up with 2424: 2373: 2278:permanent exhibit 2232: 2207:Burleigh Drummond 2174: 2173: 2162:(Report findings) 2104: 2103: 706: 705: 505: 504: 430: 404:WP:DOUBLESTANDARD 302: 224: 223: 185: 184: 100: 99: 54: 53: 48:current talk page 4998: 4972: 4950: 4949: 4927: 4926: 4920: 4893: 4886: 4885: 4873: 4868: 4863: 4822: 4817: 4812: 4783: 4778: 4773: 4754:, do you? Lol. 4737: 4732: 4727: 4688: 4683: 4678: 4645: 4635:Paul Butterfield 4613:Paul Butterfield 4608: 4601: 4587: 4582: 4577: 4572: 4568: 4567: 4531: 4526: 4521: 4486: 4481: 4476: 4411: 4410: 4407: 4400:(developer) and 4370: 4352: 4345: 4344: 4332: 4327: 4322: 4276: 4239: 4234: 4229: 4205: 4204: 4154: 4152: 4147: 4142: 4128: 4126: 4121: 4116: 4102: 4100: 4095: 4090: 4073: 4068: 4063: 3980: 3975: 3970: 3915: 3910: 3905: 3894: 3892: 3887: 3882: 3831: 3829: 3824: 3819: 3796: 3791: 3786: 3739: 3737: 3732: 3727: 3711: 3709: 3704: 3699: 3667: 3665: 3660: 3655: 3639: 3637: 3632: 3627: 3574: 3572: 3567: 3562: 3548: 3546: 3541: 3536: 3497: 3495: 3490: 3485: 3450: 3445: 3440: 3364: 3359: 3354: 3303: 3298: 3293: 3242: 3237: 3232: 3220: 3218: 3207: 3167: 3156: 3154: 3078:! Thank you for 3076:welcome to STiki 3070: 3069: 3057: 3052: 3047: 2983: 2971: 2842: 2837: 2832: 2819: 2814: 2809: 2796: 2782: 2761: 2750:FTR, 2 days ago 2743: 2712: 2710: 2705: 2700: 2686:What the...? I 2679: 2661:User:Dirtlawyer1 2639: 2630:July 15: WP:VA/E 2619: 2614: 2609: 2590: 2575: 2570: 2565: 2535: 2530: 2525: 2476: 2471: 2466: 2423: 2421: 2414: 2407: 2395: 2390: 2385: 2372: 2370: 2363: 2356: 2338: 2333: 2328: 2299: 2294: 2289: 2255:Vital folk music 2222: 2215:check to confirm 2192: 2187: 2182: 2163: 2149: 2142: 2141: 2129: 2124: 2119: 2080:On 22 May 2013, 2077: 2070: 2056: 2051: 2046: 1970: 1965: 1960: 1821:Schubert's No. 6 1803: 1756: 1751: 1746: 1712: 1707: 1702: 1679: 1658: 1639: 1634: 1629: 1575: 1570: 1565: 1551: 1546: 1541: 1518: 1513: 1508: 1473: 1471: 1466: 1461: 1322: 1317: 1312: 1279: 1277: 1272: 1267: 1252: 1216: 1211: 1206: 1180: 1175: 1170: 1158: 1156: 1151: 1146: 1107: 1102: 1097: 1059: 1054: 1049: 1015: 1010: 1005: 903: 898: 893: 827: 822: 817: 736: 731: 726: 713: 681: 674: 658: 653: 648: 609: 592: 587: 582: 568: 540: 535: 530: 518: 512: 480: 473: 457: 452: 447: 424: 375: 368: 348: 292: 285:check to confirm 262: 257: 252: 237: 230: 199: 192: 171: 114: 107: 106: 78: 56: 55: 33: 32: 26: 5006: 5005: 5001: 5000: 4999: 4997: 4996: 4995: 4968: 4924: 4905:Kudpung กุดผึ้ง 4884: 4871: 4866: 4861: 4837: 4820: 4815: 4810: 4781: 4776: 4771: 4750:...you endorse 4748: 4735: 4730: 4725: 4699: 4686: 4681: 4676: 4627: 4620:Knowledge (XXG) 4598: 4585: 4580: 4575: 4565: 4563: 4542: 4540:RfC to consider 4529: 4524: 4519: 4497: 4484: 4479: 4474: 4455:Justpassingtime 4426: 4408: 4405: 4403: 4363: 4343: 4330: 4325: 4320: 4296: 4266: 4237: 4232: 4227: 4202: 4199: 4150: 4145: 4140: 4138: 4124: 4119: 4114: 4112: 4098: 4093: 4088: 4086: 4071: 4066: 4061: 3978: 3973: 3968: 3913: 3908: 3903: 3890: 3885: 3880: 3878: 3827: 3822: 3817: 3815: 3794: 3789: 3784: 3779: 3735: 3730: 3725: 3723: 3707: 3702: 3697: 3695: 3663: 3658: 3653: 3651: 3635: 3630: 3625: 3623: 3618: 3570: 3565: 3560: 3558: 3544: 3539: 3534: 3532: 3493: 3488: 3483: 3481: 3448: 3443: 3438: 3417: 3362: 3357: 3352: 3301: 3296: 3291: 3256: 3240: 3235: 3230: 3216: 3208: 3193: 3152: 3148: 3068: 3055: 3050: 3045: 3035: 3018: 2981: 2969: 2954: 2873:User:Tryptofish 2858:Robert McClenon 2853: 2840: 2835: 2830: 2817: 2812: 2807: 2794: 2780: 2759: 2741: 2708: 2703: 2698: 2696: 2677: 2637: 2632: 2617: 2612: 2607: 2588: 2573: 2568: 2563: 2533: 2528: 2523: 2474: 2469: 2464: 2436: 2417: 2410: 2408: 2393: 2388: 2383: 2366: 2359: 2357: 2353: 2336: 2331: 2326: 2297: 2292: 2287: 2257: 2229:DPL WikiProject 2203: 2190: 2185: 2180: 2161: 2140: 2127: 2122: 2117: 2098:candidates page 2068: 2054: 2049: 2044: 1981: 1968: 1963: 1958: 1938: 1903: 1873: 1801: 1754: 1749: 1744: 1710: 1705: 1700: 1696: 1695: 1677: 1659: 1650: 1637: 1632: 1627: 1586: 1573: 1568: 1563: 1549: 1544: 1539: 1529: 1516: 1511: 1506: 1482: 1480:Neitmi !vote AN 1469: 1464: 1459: 1457: 1449: 1407: 1374: 1320: 1315: 1310: 1275: 1270: 1265: 1263: 1250: 1214: 1209: 1204: 1178: 1173: 1168: 1154: 1149: 1144: 1142: 1138: 1105: 1100: 1095: 1070: 1057: 1052: 1047: 1026: 1013: 1008: 1003: 983: 934: 901: 896: 891: 825: 820: 815: 776: 750: 734: 729: 724: 711: 700:candidates page 672: 656: 651: 646: 623: 607: 590: 585: 580: 566: 551: 538: 533: 528: 516: 510: 499:candidates page 471: 455: 450: 445: 386: 373: 366: 357: 355:Your AIV report 341: 329: 299:DPL WikiProject 273: 260: 255: 250: 235: 228: 218:candidates page 190: 169: 105: 103:Happy New Year! 74: 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 5004: 5002: 4992: 4991: 4986: 4983: 4978: 4973: 4966: 4961: 4956: 4946: 4945: 4928: 4916: 4915: 4900: 4899: 4894: 4883: 4880: 4879: 4878: 4836: 4833: 4832: 4831: 4830: 4829: 4828: 4827: 4789: 4788: 4747: 4744: 4743: 4742: 4709:Dr. Fleischman 4698: 4695: 4694: 4693: 4624: 4623: 4609: 4599: 4597: 4594: 4593: 4592: 4541: 4538: 4537: 4536: 4496: 4493: 4492: 4491: 4425: 4422: 4419: 4418: 4372: 4371: 4364: 4355: 4353: 4342: 4339: 4338: 4337: 4295: 4289: 4281: 4273: 4265: 4262: 4261: 4260: 4259: 4258: 4198: 4195: 4194: 4193: 4164: 4163: 4162: 4161: 4160: 4159: 4133: 4079: 4078: 4050: 4049: 4048: 4047: 4046: 4045: 4044: 4043: 4042: 4041: 4040: 4039: 4038: 4037: 4036: 4035: 3996: 3995: 3994: 3993: 3992: 3991: 3990: 3989: 3988: 3987: 3986: 3985: 3927: 3926: 3925: 3924: 3923: 3922: 3921: 3920: 3868: 3867: 3866: 3865: 3837: 3836: 3778: 3775: 3774: 3773: 3772: 3771: 3770: 3769: 3768: 3767: 3716: 3691: 3617: 3614: 3613: 3612: 3611: 3610: 3609: 3608: 3607: 3606: 3587:User:Canoe1967 3553: 3476: 3475: 3474: 3456: 3455: 3416: 3413: 3412: 3411: 3410: 3409: 3408: 3407: 3406: 3405: 3374: 3373: 3372: 3371: 3370: 3369: 3338: 3337: 3336: 3335: 3309: 3308: 3255: 3249: 3248: 3247: 3192: 3187: 3169: 3168: 3161: 3137: 3136: 3128: 3116: 3115: 3108: 3107: 3106: 3099: 3067: 3064: 3063: 3062: 3029: 3017: 3014: 2986: 2985: 2974: 2973: 2953: 2952:Vital Articles 2950: 2949: 2948: 2947: 2946: 2945: 2944: 2943: 2942: 2877:User:Viriditas 2852: 2849: 2848: 2847: 2802: 2801: 2787: 2771: 2770: 2769: 2768: 2767: 2766: 2748: 2631: 2628: 2627: 2626: 2625: 2624: 2583: 2582: 2581: 2580: 2511: 2510: 2509: 2508: 2482: 2481: 2435: 2432: 2431: 2430: 2429: 2428: 2401: 2400: 2352: 2349: 2348: 2347: 2346: 2345: 2344: 2343: 2305: 2304: 2256: 2253: 2202: 2199: 2198: 2197: 2172: 2171: 2150: 2139: 2136: 2102: 2101: 2078: 2067: 2064: 2063: 2062: 1980: 1977: 1976: 1975: 1937: 1934: 1902: 1896: 1872: 1869: 1868: 1867: 1866: 1865: 1864: 1863: 1840: 1839: 1838: 1837: 1836: 1835: 1792: 1791: 1790: 1789: 1788: 1787: 1764: 1763: 1762: 1761: 1737: 1736: 1664: 1653: 1652: 1651: 1649: 1646: 1645: 1644: 1585: 1582: 1581: 1580: 1528: 1525: 1524: 1523: 1481: 1478: 1448: 1443: 1406: 1400: 1373: 1370: 1332: 1331: 1330: 1329: 1328: 1327: 1303: 1302: 1284: 1283: 1258: 1257: 1226: 1225: 1224: 1223: 1222: 1221: 1137: 1134: 1133: 1132: 1131: 1130: 1113: 1112: 1069: 1066: 1065: 1064: 1025: 1022: 1021: 1020: 982: 979: 933: 930: 929: 928: 886: 885: 840:Moonriddengirl 835: 834: 833: 832: 775: 772: 749: 746: 744: 742: 741: 704: 703: 682: 671: 665: 664: 663: 622: 619: 618: 617: 616: 615: 550: 547: 546: 545: 503: 502: 481: 470: 464: 463: 462: 385: 382: 356: 353: 328: 322: 272: 269: 268: 267: 222: 221: 200: 189: 186: 183: 182: 164: 123: 122: 117: 115: 104: 101: 98: 97: 92: 89: 84: 79: 72: 67: 62: 52: 51: 34: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 5003: 4990: 4987: 4984: 4982: 4979: 4977: 4974: 4971: 4967: 4965: 4962: 4960: 4957: 4955: 4952: 4951: 4943: 4939: 4935: 4934: 4929: 4922: 4921: 4914: 4910: 4906: 4902: 4901: 4898: 4895: 4892: 4887: 4881: 4877: 4874: 4869: 4864: 4857: 4856: 4855: 4854: 4850: 4846: 4842: 4834: 4826: 4823: 4818: 4813: 4807: 4806: 4805: 4801: 4797: 4793: 4792: 4791: 4790: 4787: 4784: 4779: 4774: 4768: 4767: 4766: 4765: 4761: 4757: 4753: 4745: 4741: 4738: 4733: 4728: 4721: 4720: 4719: 4718: 4714: 4710: 4705: 4696: 4692: 4689: 4684: 4679: 4673: 4672: 4671: 4670: 4665: 4661: 4657: 4653: 4649: 4644: 4640: 4636: 4632: 4629:On behalf of 4621: 4617: 4616:good articles 4614: 4610: 4607: 4603: 4602: 4595: 4591: 4588: 4583: 4578: 4571: 4562: 4561: 4560: 4559: 4555: 4551: 4547: 4539: 4535: 4532: 4527: 4522: 4516: 4515: 4514: 4513: 4509: 4505: 4501: 4494: 4490: 4487: 4482: 4477: 4471: 4467: 4466: 4465: 4464: 4460: 4456: 4452: 4449: 4448:Kind regards 4446: 4443: 4440: 4435: 4432: 4429: 4428:Hi jusdafax! 4423: 4417: 4416: 4413: 4412: 4399: 4398:West.andrew.g 4395: 4391: 4387: 4383: 4379: 4374: 4373: 4369: 4362: 4360: 4354: 4351: 4346: 4340: 4336: 4333: 4328: 4323: 4317: 4316: 4315: 4314: 4310: 4306: 4301: 4293: 4290: 4288: 4287: 4283: 4282: 4279: 4275: 4274: 4271: 4264:My recent RfA 4263: 4257: 4253: 4249: 4245: 4244: 4243: 4240: 4235: 4230: 4224: 4223: 4222: 4221: 4217: 4213: 4209: 4196: 4192: 4188: 4184: 4180: 4179: 4178: 4177: 4173: 4169: 4158: 4155: 4153: 4148: 4143: 4134: 4132: 4129: 4127: 4122: 4117: 4108: 4107: 4106: 4103: 4101: 4096: 4091: 4083: 4082: 4081: 4080: 4077: 4074: 4069: 4064: 4057: 4052: 4051: 4034: 4030: 4026: 4021: 4017: 4012: 4011: 4010: 4009: 4008: 4007: 4006: 4005: 4004: 4003: 4002: 4001: 4000: 3999: 3998: 3997: 3984: 3981: 3976: 3971: 3965: 3964: 3963: 3959: 3955: 3950: 3946: 3941: 3937: 3936: 3935: 3934: 3933: 3932: 3931: 3930: 3929: 3928: 3919: 3916: 3911: 3906: 3900: 3899: 3898: 3895: 3893: 3888: 3883: 3874: 3873: 3872: 3871: 3870: 3869: 3864: 3860: 3856: 3852: 3848: 3844: 3841: 3840: 3839: 3838: 3835: 3832: 3830: 3825: 3820: 3812: 3808: 3803: 3802: 3801: 3800: 3797: 3792: 3787: 3776: 3766: 3762: 3758: 3754: 3750: 3745: 3744: 3743: 3740: 3738: 3733: 3728: 3721: 3717: 3715: 3712: 3710: 3705: 3700: 3692: 3688: 3687: 3686: 3682: 3678: 3673: 3672: 3671: 3668: 3666: 3661: 3656: 3649: 3646: 3645: 3644: 3643: 3640: 3638: 3633: 3628: 3615: 3605: 3601: 3597: 3592: 3588: 3584: 3580: 3579: 3578: 3575: 3573: 3568: 3563: 3554: 3552: 3549: 3547: 3542: 3537: 3529: 3525: 3524: 3523: 3519: 3515: 3511: 3506: 3503: 3502: 3501: 3498: 3496: 3491: 3486: 3477: 3473: 3469: 3465: 3460: 3459: 3458: 3457: 3454: 3451: 3446: 3441: 3434: 3433: 3432: 3431: 3427: 3423: 3414: 3404: 3400: 3396: 3392: 3387: 3382: 3381: 3380: 3379: 3378: 3377: 3376: 3375: 3368: 3365: 3360: 3355: 3349: 3344: 3343: 3342: 3341: 3340: 3339: 3334: 3330: 3326: 3322: 3318: 3313: 3312: 3311: 3310: 3307: 3304: 3299: 3294: 3287: 3286: 3285: 3284: 3280: 3276: 3272: 3268: 3267:User:Jusdafax 3264: 3260: 3253: 3250: 3246: 3243: 3238: 3233: 3227: 3226: 3225: 3224: 3219: 3213: 3212: 3205: 3201: 3197: 3191: 3188: 3186: 3184: 3180: 3176: 3166: 3160: 3159: 3155: 3150: 3146: 3145:West.andrew.g 3142: 3134: 3133: 3129: 3126: 3125: 3121: 3120: 3119: 3114: 3113: 3109: 3105: 3104: 3100: 3098: 3097: 3093: 3092: 3091:, including: 3090: 3089: 3085: 3084: 3083: 3081: 3077: 3072: 3071: 3065: 3061: 3058: 3053: 3048: 3041: 3040: 3039: 3038: 3034: 3033: 3027: 3023: 3015: 3013: 3012: 3008: 3004: 3000: 2998: 2993: 2991: 2979: 2978: 2977: 2967: 2966: 2965: 2962: 2959: 2958: 2951: 2941: 2937: 2933: 2929: 2928: 2927: 2923: 2919: 2915: 2911: 2910: 2909: 2905: 2901: 2897: 2893: 2892: 2891: 2887: 2883: 2878: 2874: 2870: 2869: 2868: 2867: 2863: 2859: 2850: 2846: 2843: 2838: 2833: 2826: 2825: 2824: 2823: 2820: 2815: 2810: 2800: 2797: 2791: 2788: 2786: 2783: 2777: 2773: 2772: 2765: 2762: 2757: 2753: 2749: 2747: 2744: 2738: 2733: 2729: 2725: 2722:10,000? Like 2721: 2717: 2716: 2715: 2711: 2706: 2701: 2694: 2689: 2685: 2684: 2683: 2680: 2674: 2670: 2666: 2662: 2658: 2654: 2650: 2646: 2645: 2644: 2643: 2640: 2629: 2623: 2620: 2615: 2610: 2604: 2600: 2596: 2595: 2594: 2591: 2585: 2584: 2579: 2576: 2571: 2566: 2560: 2559: 2558: 2554: 2550: 2546: 2542: 2541: 2540: 2539: 2536: 2531: 2526: 2520: 2516: 2507: 2503: 2499: 2494: 2490: 2486: 2485: 2484: 2483: 2480: 2477: 2472: 2467: 2461: 2457: 2453: 2452: 2451: 2450: 2446: 2442: 2433: 2427: 2422: 2420: 2415: 2413: 2405: 2404: 2403: 2402: 2399: 2396: 2391: 2386: 2379: 2378: 2377: 2376: 2371: 2369: 2364: 2362: 2342: 2339: 2334: 2329: 2323: 2319: 2318: 2317: 2314: 2309: 2308: 2307: 2306: 2303: 2300: 2295: 2290: 2283: 2279: 2274: 2269: 2268: 2267: 2266: 2263: 2254: 2252: 2250: 2246: 2242: 2238: 2233: 2230: 2226: 2220: 2216: 2212: 2208: 2200: 2196: 2193: 2188: 2183: 2176: 2175: 2170: 2169: 2166: 2164: 2159: 2154: 2151: 2148: 2144: 2143: 2137: 2135: 2133: 2130: 2125: 2120: 2113: 2112: 2109: 2099: 2095: 2094: 2093: 2087: 2086: 2085: 2079: 2076: 2072: 2071: 2065: 2060: 2057: 2052: 2047: 2041: 2037: 2033: 2029: 2024: 2019: 2014: 2010: 2009: 2008: 2007: 2003: 1999: 1994: 1990: 1986: 1978: 1974: 1971: 1966: 1961: 1955: 1954: 1953: 1952: 1948: 1944: 1935: 1933: 1931: 1927: 1923: 1920: 1916: 1912: 1908: 1901: 1897: 1895: 1894: 1890: 1886: 1885: 1880: 1879: 1870: 1862: 1858: 1854: 1850: 1846: 1845: 1844: 1843: 1842: 1841: 1834: 1830: 1826: 1822: 1818: 1814: 1810: 1807: 1804: 1798: 1797: 1796: 1795: 1794: 1793: 1786: 1782: 1778: 1774: 1773:some thoughts 1770: 1769: 1768: 1767: 1766: 1765: 1760: 1757: 1752: 1747: 1741: 1740: 1739: 1738: 1735: 1731: 1727: 1723: 1719: 1718: 1717: 1716: 1713: 1708: 1703: 1694: 1693: 1689: 1685: 1680: 1676: 1672: 1668: 1663: 1657: 1647: 1643: 1640: 1635: 1630: 1623: 1622: 1621: 1620: 1616: 1612: 1606: 1604: 1599: 1597: 1592: 1589: 1583: 1579: 1576: 1571: 1566: 1559: 1558: 1557: 1556: 1553: 1552: 1547: 1542: 1534: 1526: 1522: 1519: 1514: 1509: 1502: 1501: 1500: 1499: 1495: 1491: 1486: 1479: 1477: 1476: 1472: 1467: 1462: 1455: 1447: 1444: 1442: 1441: 1440: 1436: 1432: 1426: 1422: 1418: 1417: 1416:Talk:Watchmen 1412: 1405: 1404:Talk:Watchmen 1401: 1399: 1398: 1394: 1390: 1386: 1381: 1379: 1371: 1369: 1368: 1364: 1360: 1354: 1351: 1347: 1343: 1339: 1335: 1326: 1323: 1318: 1313: 1307: 1306: 1305: 1304: 1301: 1297: 1293: 1288: 1287: 1286: 1285: 1282: 1278: 1273: 1268: 1260: 1259: 1256: 1253: 1247: 1243: 1239: 1235: 1231: 1228: 1227: 1220: 1217: 1212: 1207: 1201: 1200: 1199: 1195: 1191: 1186: 1185: 1184: 1181: 1176: 1171: 1164: 1163: 1162: 1161: 1157: 1152: 1147: 1135: 1129: 1125: 1121: 1117: 1116: 1115: 1114: 1111: 1108: 1103: 1098: 1091: 1090: 1089: 1088: 1084: 1080: 1075: 1067: 1063: 1060: 1055: 1050: 1044: 1043: 1042: 1041: 1037: 1033: 1032: 1023: 1019: 1016: 1011: 1006: 999: 998: 997: 996: 992: 988: 987:Amadscientist 980: 978: 977: 973: 969: 965: 961: 960: 955: 951: 947: 943: 939: 931: 927: 923: 919: 914: 910: 909: 908: 907: 904: 899: 894: 883: 878: 874: 870: 869: 868: 866: 862: 858: 852: 848: 845: 841: 831: 828: 823: 818: 811: 810: 809: 805: 801: 797: 793: 792: 791: 790: 786: 782: 773: 771: 770: 767: 766: 763: 760: 755: 747: 745: 740: 737: 732: 727: 721: 720: 719: 718: 715: 714: 701: 697: 696: 695: 689: 688: 683: 680: 676: 675: 670: 666: 662: 659: 654: 649: 643: 642: 641: 640: 636: 632: 628: 621:Arikkadamukku 620: 614: 611: 610: 604: 603: 598: 597: 596: 593: 588: 583: 576: 575: 574: 573: 570: 569: 563: 562: 556: 548: 544: 541: 536: 531: 525: 524: 523: 522: 519: 514: 513: 500: 496: 495: 494: 493:Shokri Belaid 488: 487: 482: 479: 475: 474: 469: 468:Shokri Belaid 465: 461: 458: 453: 448: 441: 436: 435: 434: 433: 428: 423: 418: 416: 411: 407: 405: 400: 399:WP:ANIISLOUSY 396: 393: 391: 381: 380: 377: 376: 370: 369: 362: 354: 352: 351: 347: 346: 338: 334: 327: 324:Your post to 323: 321: 320: 316: 312: 308: 303: 300: 296: 290: 286: 282: 278: 270: 266: 263: 258: 253: 246: 245: 244: 243: 240: 239: 238: 231: 219: 215: 214: 213: 207: 206: 201: 198: 194: 193: 187: 181: 180: 176: 172: 165: 162: 158: 154: 150: 146: 141: 139: 135: 131: 125: 124: 121: 118: 113: 108: 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: 4969: 4937: 4931: 4896: 4838: 4751: 4749: 4700: 4643:TonyTheTiger 4628: 4612: 4569: 4543: 4498: 4453: 4450: 4447: 4444: 4441: 4436: 4433: 4430: 4427: 4401: 4377: 4375: 4356: 4297: 4278: 4272:Buster Seven 4270: 4267: 4200: 4168:Coretheapple 4165: 4141:petrarchan47 4137: 4115:petrarchan47 4111: 4089:petrarchan47 4085: 4019: 4015: 3948: 3944: 3881:petrarchan47 3877: 3818:petrarchan47 3814: 3806: 3780: 3752: 3726:petrarchan47 3722: 3698:petrarchan47 3694: 3654:petrarchan47 3650: 3626:petrarchan47 3622: 3619: 3590: 3582: 3561:petrarchan47 3557: 3535:petrarchan47 3531: 3509: 3504: 3484:petrarchan47 3480: 3418: 3347: 3271:Talk section 3257: 3210: 3194: 3175:91.43.126.24 3172: 3153:numbermaniac 3138: 3130: 3122: 3117: 3110: 3101: 3094: 3086: 3075: 3073: 3030: 3019: 3001: 2994: 2987: 2975: 2963: 2960: 2956: 2955: 2854: 2803: 2736: 2731: 2719: 2692: 2687: 2673:User:Carlwev 2669:ad infinitum 2668: 2665:User:Carlwev 2651:sub-list at 2648: 2633: 2545:my talk page 2514: 2512: 2455: 2437: 2418: 2411: 2367: 2360: 2354: 2321: 2281: 2277: 2272: 2258: 2234: 2204: 2155: 2152: 2114: 2105: 2092:Ray Manzarek 2090: 2089: 2082: 2081: 2039: 2035: 2021: 1988: 1982: 1979:Your comment 1939: 1904: 1882: 1876: 1874: 1853:Gerda Arendt 1825:Gerda Arendt 1819:, last fall 1815:, this year 1813:Sparrow Mass 1777:Gerda Arendt 1726:Gerda Arendt 1697: 1684:Gerda Arendt 1681: 1661: 1660: 1607: 1602: 1600: 1595: 1593: 1590: 1587: 1537: 1532: 1530: 1488:Thank you. 1487: 1483: 1453: 1450: 1428: 1414: 1408: 1382: 1375: 1355: 1352: 1348: 1344: 1340: 1336: 1333: 1229: 1139: 1073: 1071: 1029: 1027: 984: 957: 945: 935: 887: 881: 872: 864: 853: 849: 836: 777: 757: 751: 743: 709: 707: 692: 691: 685: 624: 606: 601: 565: 560: 552: 508: 506: 491: 490: 484: 439: 419: 412: 408: 397: 394: 387: 372: 365: 358: 342: 336: 330: 304: 274: 233: 232: 225: 210: 209: 203: 166: 153:TFA requests 142: 127: 119: 75: 43: 37: 4930:This is an 4897:Best wishes 4390:leaderboard 3675:denialers. 3505:Information 3032:FL wishlist 2790:And another 2732:yet another 2724:chewing gum 2084:In the news 1993:my question 1943:Dirtlawyer1 1871:Thanks much 1817:Nelson Mass 1359:Dirtlawyer1 1292:Dirtlawyer1 1230:For context 1190:Dirtlawyer1 1120:Dirtlawyer1 1079:Dirtlawyer1 774:Arbcom case 687:In the news 627:Vejvančický 486:In the news 281:Jeremy Hunt 205:In the news 36:This is an 4989:Archive 15 4981:Archive 10 4660:WP:CHICAGO 4631:WP:CHICAGO 4504:Writegeist 3851:canvassing 3757:Tryptofish 3648:here it is 3464:Tryptofish 3422:Tryptofish 3252:Glyphosate 3200:WP:CANVASS 2918:Tryptofish 2489:Huon's RfA 2239:. Thanks, 2066:ITN thanks 2018:User:Kalki 1907:user:Arzel 1900:user:Arzel 1771:I started 1662:soul music 1244:, and now 1166:the best. 555:AFD'd this 511:Mohamed CJ 507:Good job. 333:ad hominem 309:. Thanks, 188:ITN Credit 95:Archive 15 87:Archive 10 4976:Archive 9 4970:Archive 8 4964:Archive 7 4959:Archive 6 4954:Archive 5 4841:like this 4835:ANI close 4664:WP:WAWARD 4495:Well said 4470:this edit 4468:You mean 4394:talk page 4305:Bloom6132 3677:IRWolfie- 3196:Well said 3132:Userboxes 2688:supported 2549:JustBerry 2498:JustBerry 2441:JustBerry 2434:Adminship 2223:Read the 2032:WP:BATTLE 1998:DanielTom 1922:Casprings 1898:RFC/U on 1603:I like it 1527:Infoboxes 959:Callanecc 918:Viriditas 877:Karl Rove 857:North8000 844:Karl Rove 800:Viriditas 781:Viriditas 293:Read the 277:Undershaw 82:Archive 9 76:Archive 8 70:Archive 7 65:Archive 6 60:Archive 5 4704:referred 4361:Barnstar 4183:Jusdafax 3690:measure. 3254:edit war 3206:. Sigh. 3190:WP:ITN/C 3003:Martinvl 2896:this dif 2412:Taroaldo 2361:Taroaldo 2273:invented 2211:Producer 2108:LukeSurl 2020:put it: 1989:At least 1915:WP:RFC/U 1648:Precious 968:contribs 861:Goethean 667:ITN for 635:contribs 602:Stalwart 561:Stalwart 466:ITN for 4933:archive 4697:Snowden 4656:WP:FOUR 3749:WP:COIN 2653:WP:VA/E 2649:Regions 2493:canvass 2241:DPL bot 1985:comment 1802:Pumpkin 1722:baklava 1596:Support 1446:WP:VA/E 1431:RFC bot 1389:Fladrif 712:Spencer 422:Toddst1 311:DPL bot 170:Georgia 39:archive 4845:Drmies 4796:μηδείς 4756:μηδείς 4752:posing 4248:Jytdog 4212:Jytdog 4025:Jytdog 3954:Jytdog 3855:Jytdog 3751:, but 3596:Jytdog 3514:Jytdog 3395:Jytdog 3391:WP:3RR 3386:WP:BRD 3325:Jytdog 3321:WP:BRD 3317:WP:3RR 3275:Jytdog 3265:, and 2932:Jytdog 2914:Jytdog 2900:Jytdog 2882:Jytdog 2795:GabeMc 2781:GabeMc 2760:GabeMc 2754:said: 2742:GabeMc 2678:GabeMc 2638:GabeMc 2589:GabeMc 2519:WP:CDA 2036:should 2028:WP:AGF 1611:HiLo48 1251:GabeMc 1074:really 981:Thanks 517:(talk) 345:danjel 229:Jayron 4882:Cold? 4746:So... 4639:WP:GA 4382:STiki 4378:1,000 4359:STiki 3616:CREWE 3348:again 3217:Chat 3211:Pedro 3204:WP:AN 2728:bench 2720:right 2693:right 1919:here. 1809:Prize 1550:Space 1533:years 374:rolls 168:Sandy 16:< 4909:talk 4849:talk 4800:talk 4760:talk 4713:talk 4570:Done 4554:talk 4508:talk 4500:Here 4459:talk 4309:talk 4280:Talk 4252:talk 4216:talk 4187:talk 4172:talk 4029:talk 4016:only 3958:talk 3949:must 3859:talk 3847:here 3811:Here 3761:talk 3681:talk 3600:talk 3528:this 3518:talk 3468:talk 3426:talk 3399:talk 3329:talk 3279:talk 3179:talk 3007:talk 2961:Hi, 2936:talk 2922:talk 2904:talk 2886:talk 2862:talk 2776:here 2737:help 2726:and 2718:The 2663:and 2553:talk 2502:talk 2445:talk 2245:talk 2002:talk 1947:talk 1926:talk 1911:here 1889:talk 1884:Cirt 1857:talk 1851:, -- 1829:talk 1781:talk 1730:talk 1724:, -- 1688:talk 1615:talk 1545:From 1540:Them 1494:talk 1454:very 1435:talk 1393:talk 1385:here 1363:talk 1296:talk 1246:here 1242:here 1238:here 1234:Here 1232:. - 1194:talk 1124:talk 1083:talk 1036:talk 1031:Cirt 991:talk 972:logs 964:talk 922:talk 859:and 804:talk 796:here 785:talk 765:7754 762:chen 631:talk 440:must 427:talk 390:here 367:Tide 315:talk 175:Talk 151:and 4872:fax 4862:Jus 4821:fax 4811:Jus 4782:fax 4772:Jus 4736:fax 4726:Jus 4687:fax 4677:Jus 4641:.-- 4618:on 4586:fax 4576:Jus 4550:N2e 4530:fax 4520:Jus 4502:— 4485:fax 4475:Jus 4409:yya 4331:fax 4321:Jus 4294:ITN 4238:fax 4228:Jus 4197:ANI 4072:fax 4062:Jus 3979:fax 3969:Jus 3914:fax 3904:Jus 3807:all 3795:fax 3785:Jus 3753:not 3449:fax 3439:Jus 3363:fax 3353:Jus 3302:fax 3292:Jus 3241:fax 3231:Jus 3056:fax 3046:Jus 3026:WFC 2841:fax 2831:Jus 2818:fax 2808:Jus 2618:fax 2608:Jus 2574:fax 2564:Jus 2534:fax 2524:Jus 2475:fax 2465:Jus 2394:fax 2384:Jus 2337:fax 2327:Jus 2298:fax 2288:Jus 2225:FAQ 2191:fax 2181:Jus 2128:fax 2118:Jus 2055:fax 2045:Jus 1969:fax 1959:Jus 1932:)) 1806:Sky 1755:fax 1745:Jus 1711:fax 1701:Jus 1638:fax 1628:Jus 1574:fax 1564:Jus 1517:fax 1507:Jus 1413:on 1380:. 1321:fax 1311:Jus 1215:fax 1205:Jus 1179:fax 1169:Jus 1106:fax 1096:Jus 1058:fax 1048:Jus 1014:fax 1004:Jus 902:fax 892:Jus 826:fax 816:Jus 735:fax 725:Jus 657:fax 647:Jus 608:111 591:fax 581:Jus 567:111 549:AFD 539:fax 529:Jus 456:fax 446:Jus 295:FAQ 261:fax 251:Jus 149:FAR 145:FAC 4985:→ 4911:) 4867:da 4851:) 4816:da 4802:) 4777:da 4762:) 4731:da 4715:) 4682:da 4662:/ 4658:/ 4654:/ 4650:/ 4581:da 4573:- 4556:) 4525:da 4510:) 4480:da 4461:) 4406:at 4404:Pr 4326:da 4311:) 4254:) 4233:da 4218:) 4189:) 4174:) 4067:da 4031:) 3974:da 3960:) 3909:da 3861:) 3790:da 3763:) 3683:) 3602:) 3520:) 3470:) 3444:da 3428:) 3401:) 3358:da 3331:) 3297:da 3281:) 3261:, 3236:da 3214:: 3185:) 3181:) 3051:da 3028:— 3009:) 2984:". 2938:) 2924:) 2906:) 2888:) 2864:) 2836:da 2813:da 2792:. 2778:. 2613:da 2569:da 2555:) 2529:da 2504:) 2470:da 2447:) 2439:-- 2389:da 2332:da 2293:da 2251:) 2247:) 2217:| 2186:da 2158:MM 2134:) 2123:da 2106:-- 2050:da 2004:) 1964:da 1949:) 1928:) 1917:, 1891:) 1859:) 1831:) 1783:) 1750:da 1732:) 1706:da 1690:) 1682:-- 1633:da 1617:) 1569:da 1512:da 1496:) 1437:) 1429:— 1395:) 1387:. 1365:) 1316:da 1298:) 1248:. 1240:, 1236:, 1210:da 1196:) 1174:da 1126:) 1101:da 1085:) 1053:da 1038:) 1009:da 993:) 974:) 970:• 966:• 944:. 924:) 897:da 821:da 806:) 798:. 787:) 759:Rs 730:da 708:-- 652:da 637:) 633:/ 586:da 534:da 451:da 317:) 287:| 256:da 236:32 226:-- 177:) 161:FA 155:. 147:, 138:FA 91:→ 4944:. 4907:( 4847:( 4798:( 4758:( 4711:( 4666:) 4652:C 4648:T 4646:( 4622:. 4552:( 4506:( 4457:( 4307:( 4303:— 4250:( 4214:( 4185:( 4170:( 4151:c 4146:t 4125:c 4120:t 4099:c 4094:t 4027:( 3956:( 3891:c 3886:t 3857:( 3828:c 3823:t 3759:( 3736:c 3731:t 3708:c 3703:t 3679:( 3664:c 3659:t 3636:c 3631:t 3598:( 3571:c 3566:t 3545:c 3540:t 3516:( 3494:c 3489:t 3466:( 3424:( 3397:( 3327:( 3277:( 3177:( 3005:( 2982:] 2980:" 2972:" 2970:] 2968:" 2934:( 2920:( 2902:( 2884:( 2860:( 2709:p 2704:b 2699:p 2551:( 2500:( 2443:( 2419:✉ 2368:✉ 2243:( 2231:. 2213:( 2100:. 2061:) 2000:( 1945:( 1924:( 1887:( 1855:( 1827:( 1779:( 1728:( 1686:( 1613:( 1492:( 1470:p 1465:b 1460:p 1433:( 1427:. 1391:( 1361:( 1294:( 1276:p 1271:b 1266:p 1192:( 1155:p 1150:b 1145:p 1122:( 1081:( 1034:( 989:( 962:( 920:( 802:( 783:( 702:. 629:( 501:. 429:) 425:( 343:˜ 313:( 301:. 283:( 220:. 173:( 50:.

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

Index