User talk:Keithbob/Archive 7

1152:

call it someone from an "anti-Landmark viewpoint" or "enemies of Landmark," seemingly even including those who came into the discussion as a result of the ArbCom request for further input. I also notice how once again DaveApter seems to be engaging in his ongoing effort to not only refuse to assume good faith, but actively posit bad faith, of anyone with whom he disagrees, and a rather obvious tendency to willfully misrepresent facts when they don't support his own viewpoint, by jumping to the irrational assumption that those who disagree with him are biased, and his continuing to paint the actions of others in the worst possible way. In this case, by using the inherently prejudicial term "ignored" to describe others who may have, honestly, just not chosen to respond for whatever reason, even though he obviously seems to be assuming one and only one, and his early misrepresentation of fact saying I refused to participate when in fact I was not able to at the time. I believe these ongoing problem he has demonstrated regarding inability to assume good faith of anyone who is not in wholehearted agreement with him, his inability to recognize his own conflict of interests, which might perhaps be more prejudicially phrased as being that he has no real "conflict" of interests, but perhaps has only one interest, to promote Landmark, and his ongoing refusal to see if his incendiary rushes to judgment regarding others when making his inherently prejudicial statements are in fact accurate. I think his own comments, here and elsewhere, are probably one of the best reasons to indicate why so far as I can tell virtually everyone who does not share his obvious "pro-Landmark" viewpoint has described him as having a bias as overriding as his own COI as per

1034:. The question about MEDCOM and RfC was that, basically, if you read the talk page and recent history, it seems that at least a few individuals on what one other editor has called the "pro"- and "con"- Landmark sides consider their "opponents" biased beyond the capacity of placing policy and guidelines before opinion. And, unfortunately, as someone who has generally only been peripherally involved in the overall history, I can agree that there seems to be consensus among numerous outsiders that at least one of the more active editors historically on the article on Landmark is driven by POV to promote his side. An admin has recently said he has "seen evidence" of COI with another editor, although that editor denies the claim. In this particular case, I think it isn't unreasonable to think that neither "side" really either trusts the other side or thinks that the other side is capable of placing policy and/or guidelines before POV. This sort of thing has happened before, with Scientology, and it might potentially happen the same way here, with blocks or bans accumulating on multiple sides. In fact, one admin recently more or less 1226:

request from ArbCom. Sometimes this may be founded, sometimes not. But it does indicate that, maybe, the one way to resolve this might be something like a MEDCOM conducted not to determine what the individual content of each of the relevant articles should be, which I think it would never be likely to reach consensus on, but maybe to determine what topics need to be covered in one or more of the articles and to devise a jointly agreed-upon RfC or series of RfC's to get the issues resolved by outsiders who, one hopes, will not instantly be called "biased" if they disagree with the positions of individuals on either side. Alternately, I think, the likely outcome is either indeff full protection without any changes, despite the apparent need to them, of the LW article, or perhaps a war of attrition to determine who the last editor unblocked is, unless some such actions are taken. I doubt either option would really appeal to most individuals involved. Also, like I said, Keithbob, if you can think of anything you want to add to the

1885:

on a pedestal because of their knowledge of the system and the work they do as volunteers - and that may contribute somewhat to my disappointment over his actions. While I have walked away from articles that were inundated with disruptive POV pushers (including some admins), I can only half-way agree that walking away from it is the answer because doing so only emboldens the bullies. You are absolutely correct that we should walk away from it for a while to gather our thoughts. However, if we don't do our best to identify and treat the cancer that's plaguing our encyclopedia, and choose instead to just sit back and allow it to take over, then we are equally as guilty for what happens, and in this case, it appears to be trending toward a loss of trust in WP as an encyclopedia. The issues reach much deeper than what most can see at the surface. There are obvious patterned behaviors of advocacy tethered to individual COI that are at play here, and their goal is to remove the competition (or opposition) from "their articles".

753:

possible, I think it might be useful. I have been marginally involved in some of the related content over the years, which is one of the reasons I am not volunteering per se there, but do think that for some of these more, well, emotional and sometimes long-term disputes, maybe the best possible outcome might be some sort of almost super-RfC at the DRN which would with luck have sufficient outside involvement and input to more or less resolve the matter fairly solidly at least in the comparatively short term. I doubt very seriously if there is any sort of real precedent to that, as I said, but if it were possible to get some more generally informed and aware individuals involved in some of these long-term vexatious discussions, I think it might be one of the few ways to really resolve them to the proximate satisfaction of all those involved, maybe even more so than formal mediation, because of the greater involvement of (hopefully) well informed and neutral editors. Just an idea, anyway.

1106:. However, I do note the apparent inability in the above comment to either make factually accurate statements, something which seems to be rather a persistent problem, as per his unfounded accusations against Theobald Tiger which led that basically new editor to retire until others verified the falseness of the claims, and his own conduct in the ARBCOM, which might merit review, I think have demonstrated both DaveApter's biases and his inability to recognize them. It also should be noted that ] specifically does not demand a financial connection, but indicates other factors can and do raise the possibility of COI, although it seems that is the primary, if not sole, reason for Dave so categorically rejecting the term is because of his lack of financial involvement. FWIW, there is a draft essay, at 2079:, I'm happy to help. I'll keep an eye on the thread and give a comment if I have a suggestion. Meanwhile feel free to post here if you have a concern. My first suggestion :-) is to have an open discussion rather than asking participants to comment in their own section. DRN is an "informal" place for dispute resolution and in my observation sectioning off the comments is counterproductive and decreases the chances of resolution. However.......... there are a few people who use that formalized sectional format and it is your personal choice as to what format you use to moderate the case. So use what you find comfortable and effective. Best, -- 1286:

partnership will be renewed. Also, keep in mind that part of Newspapers.com is open access via the clipping function. Clippings allow you to identify particular articles, extract them from the original full sheet newspaper, and share them through unique URLs. Knowledge (XXG) users who click on a clipping link in your citation list will be able to access that particular article, and the full page of the paper if they come from the clipping, without needing to subscribe to Newspapers.com. For more information about how to use clippings, see

295: 1424: 31: 2458:,Thanks my friend. In situations like this it's inevitable that some people will be unhappy no matter what the process or outcome. As mediators we try to find the middle ground but its a thin line we tread :-) I know that emotions run high in these situations but your willingness to come back and apologize speaks volumes for your character. Thank you very much. I hope we can all work together for the best possible outcome. Cheers!-- 2264: 690: 810: 144:

on the topic with the intention of ultimately starting a broader discussion, probably through RfC, about the issues involved. It is more or less in line with a proposal I made for something like a "content" committee, which would probably be more reasonably called a "comment" committee, given the role I think RfC and the hopefully wide variety and number of editors might play in the real outcome of the RfC at

871: 2552:

is still good law. As a consequence, the Constitution does not apply in full, although it does protect the fundamental human rights in those territories. Recently, the Supreme Court has decided that these same rights apply to detainees in Guantanamo Bay. However, other provisions do not apply. Hence there is no birthright citizenship in American Samoa, there are different federal tax rules, etc.

2964: 776: 1102:

say as is said above that all six declined. I know I at least was, as I said, blocked at the time the request was made, and so was not in a position to cast a vote one way or another. And I think that the "chorus of supporters" (by the way, note the inherently prejudicial nature of that comment in itself, which seems to indicate that they are all my "backers") include

1688: 1540: 2615: 1998:

dispute among users so it should be removed until Dispute resolution committee's decision. It is unethical to maintain disputed para for weeks over weeks. It was already on page since last fifteen days to deceive article visitors because its neutrality is seriously questioned and same has been accepted by dispute resolution committee for investigation.

2149:

is relevant to the article per WPs summary style. We don't put every detail of every source in every article. So there is a judgement call here. The easy way out (and maybe the best) is to ask the participants if they could agree to having an RfC. The RfC would say simply: Does this sentence and citations belong in the article? Yes or no. --

1588:

finding asking for what everybody wants and asking them to produce more and more similar versions, but I now see that it may not be the most efficient method here. Regardless, I wish to remain involved in dispute resolution here, so I thought that you may be able to point me in the right direction. Any comments are helpful. Thanks in advance!

1387: 152:

in maybe taking part in this sort of test run for such a committee, I would obviously welcome it. I haven't actually started a separate section on the article talk page yet, because I wanted to see if there were any responses from the individuals I was considering, or, potentially, anyone else who might be interested.

2398:. I have no "official" statement to make as I am not a party to the mediation anymore. I was; I gave up because it was a total mess. I did not interact with the mediation process after that. I'm simply now making comments that I would end up making in the future if the implementation was poor. Is that a problem? 2744:

I was about to help fix up the entry to make it more balanced, I see you beat me to it. I will try to fix it up, better format of paragraphs and NPOV. I saw there were other errors in syntax with links causing it to be reverted. I will see what I can do. I am a long time reader of Knowledge (XXG) but

2642:

hello, My name is yilmaz. I am doing master at Sussex in the field of media and cultural studies and I am writing dissertation about Knowledge (XXG) as a commons but I need to have an interview with at least three (3) Wikipedians. I send you an interview form, which consists of twelve questions. The

2551:

The position of most legal experts as well the Supreme Court of the United States, the executive and Congress is that the unincorporated territories of the United States are administered by the United States but not part of the United States. The legal position was settled in the Insular cases, which

2355:

To date, the RfC discussion at "Talk:United States" in the two sections “Enumeration of the territories” and “Sources” could be collapsed into respective boxes labelled “Mediation participant comments". This would avoid the wall of text off-putting to editors invited to the RfC. TFD has suggested the

2148:

I think there is room for discussion on all kinds of things 1) the veracity of the sources 2) placement of the sentence in the article 3) the wording etc. It's possible, in theory at least, that there could be compromise in one of these areas. The crux of the discussion is whether this minor mention

2103:

Okay, thanks. First question: Normally it seems with DRN that there's room to negotiate, I give you this sentence and you give me one, however in my current case it's a single sentence that is phrased pretty neutrally. I question the suitability of this case for DRN, as it seems that one party has to

1894:

because it addresses some of the issues. Please feel free to add what you think needs to be included. Short of a miracle, I just don't see how I can avoid filing an ARBCOM case going forward and doing whatever else I can to expose the patterned behaviors, bullying, hounding, railroading, etc. It's

1884:

Thanks, Keith. I went to the admin's TP and provided the evidence that supports my position, and requested he repeal the ban/remove it from the log. I realize it's only for a week, and that admin may have had good intentions but had the wool pulled over his eyes - I tend to hold our admins too high

1795:

The admin who imposed the article sanctions against me has demonstrated an unmistakeable bias toward me in the past, and it has shown up here again. That same admin has demonstrated support of what appears to be a very organized group of editors who have a history of disruptive editing and patterned

1285:

Remember, if you find this source useful for your Knowledge (XXG) work, to include citations with links on Knowledge (XXG). Links to partner resources are one of the few ways we can demonstrate usage and demand for accounts to our partners. The greater the linkage, the greater the likelihood a useful

1186:

Hi Folks, I've capped this discussion as it's becoming increasingly more and more personal and less and less productive. My talk page is also not the appropriate place to hash out a long standing dispute between two (or more) editors. You may continue on one of your own talk pages if you feel it will

1068:

John Carter (with a chorus of supporters) has made numerous accusations against me of having a COI, despite having failed to produce a shred of valid evidence, and despite the fact that this accusation has "come up empty" not only at COIN but also at ANI, at ARBCOM, and at AE. The whole catalog looks

565:

You have a more difficult mediation case than Sunray does. Now that one of the editors, who appears on a very cursory glance to be the most reasonable of the editors involved (and I have always known him to be a reasonable editor), has had to take a break from mediation due to illness, the topic has

151:

I was thinking of editors around here who might have some sort of broad experience in the social/religious issues involved and you were one of the first names that came to mind for maybe taking part in reviewing information presented and evaluating sources and the like. If you would have any interest

3386:

I'm aware that is the article. You've removed the article about Katie Jones - the web entrepreneur and redirected it to an article about Katie Tarbox's book - a completely different person, and a page advertising her book at that. I was wondering why, as I explained earlier, you changed a biographic

3203:

see yourself taking cases, please watchlist the DRN page and keep an eye out to see if there are cases which are ready for a volunteer. We have recently had to refuse a number of cases because they were listed for days with no volunteer willing to take them, despite there being almost 150 volunteers

2581:

Seems like a good suggestion to collapse everyone's citations. As for the length I'd like to wait till SunRay get's back and then take stock of the situation. So far no one has voted but mediation participants. Until we start getting some outside input the whole process is not that productive. Let's

1860:

as well. WP has no effective 'justice' system. It is administrated by a changing array of individuals (even ArbCom members change each year) and as such it is random and inconsistent and based on the disposition of whatever Admin(s) show up on that day/week. My advice to you is to walk away from the

1819:

If ARBCOM determines that I am a disruptive BF editor because my edits have been to correct noncompliance with PAGs, then so be it, but I have grown weary of my work being reverted by what appears to be a very organized team of editors who are misapplying MEDRS and NPOV to support what appears to be

1799:

I asked the sanctioning admin to remove the sanctions and to recuse himself from further interactions with me because of his bias. It wasn't that long ago that he imposed an ARBCOM warning against me for a harmless pun and the placement of a rogue emoji on an article TP. It took me nearly a week or

1151:

Actually, what you have honestly illustrated is (1) your perhaps absolute inability to recognize your own bias, which is I believe frankly obvious to everyone but yourself, and (2) your rather paranoic insistence that anyone who doesn't wholeheartedly agree with your own transparent biases is as you

1101:

I believe the evidence of the MEDCOM indicates rather the opposite of what DaveApter says above. The absence of a statement should not reasonably be considered a refusal, and the page itself indicates only six people total expressed opinions, so it is rather an unsupportable misstatement of fact to

772:

says that RfC's can be listed at relevant noticeboard to get further input and there are also many editors who get random reminders of new RfCs on their talk page. It's not usually enough, I know, but there are chronic and egregious man/woman-power shortages all over WP. Its a major problem for the

1843:

Hi Atsme, Based on the information that you've given me I don't see this as the kind of long term behavioral problem that ArbCom is known to address. Generally they only accept cases that involve years of problems and only after all other types of content and behavioral dispute resolution have been

1587:

Hi Keithbob. Noting your comments on the DRN talk page regarding mentor-ship in moderating, I'd like to take you up on that offer. I've had, largely in theoretical teaching, experiences with meditation in real life, but it compares nothing to that of Knowledge (XXG). My typical philosophy is one of

1293:

Do you write unusual articles using this partner's sources? Did access to this source create new opportunities for you in the Knowledge (XXG) community? If you have a unique story to share about your contributions, let me know and we can set up an opportunity for you to write a blog post about your

639:

On the one hand, you are absolutely right in agreeing that the final commentary will be written six to twelve months from now by other authors. However, that doesn't change the fact that it looks to me like a content dispute with conduct complications. As a more experienced mediator, you may have

143:

This probably takes some explaining. At the recent ArbCom case regarding Landmark Worldwide I suggested that maybe it might be possible to get together a group of editors with some broad experience of wikipedia and knowledge of the general topic area to get together and review the sources available

3031:

and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion

1952:

Hey, I reinstated some of the original content on these as there were factual errors and misunderstandings in the material that you added to both. Some of the refs you used didn't support the content they were against either. We also need a proper lead for both. I think you also need to be wary of

960:

And, has been said repeatedly, even in this thread there are questions regarding whether individuals who may have demonstrated or been accused of having POV/COI issues which might make their input potentially problematic. I would be interested in knowing whether you think that perhaps MEDCOM might

215:

I assume you mean mizrabot auto-archive on the talk page. I'm a klutz when it comes to archiving. I've tried it a few times including my own user talk page and it never seems to work right. If you have any skills in that area and could set up the talk page archive bot properly it would be greatly

1787:

I realize my questions exceed the usual DRN issues, and I apologize. I originally posted to Transporterman's TP so I wouldn't be bothering you with something not DRN related, but it appears I've been railroaded for edit warring when it was actually the other editor who was edit warring but we've

752:

I know that this is almost certainly completely unprecedented, and probably according to guidelines and policies maybe unsupportable, but if there might be any way to call a "code red" type situation regarding the above DRN discussion, seeking at least nominal input from as many DRN volunteers as

1038:

he was thinking of blocking or banning pretty much everyone involved and hoping outsiders would take over. I'm not sure that might not be a bad option myself, even if I'm included in that number, but I wonder if there might be some way to maybe bring in the outsiders without heads metaphorically

1997:

We would like to wait and wish best to The moderator User:Steven Zhang for family emergency. Hope he will be blessed by god and on his return he will do the justice. Keithbob Sir during this waiting period Disputed last para of the lead about election 2014 be removed. It was observed and caused

1076:

I have made repeated attempts to resolve the content aspects of the problem, not only with the mediation request, but with two RfCs, and with extended discussions on the Talk page. Invariably these are met with personal attacks, accusations of bad faith and aspersions, rather than with logical

1225:

However, I do think that the evidence indicates that the individuals involved for any length of time have some degree of obvious problems assuming any good faith of those that disagree with them. This lack of AGF unfortunately seems to be extended to those who came in, as they said, as per the

1814:

If I file at ARBCOM, should I also provide evidence (diffs) showing past behaviors of the same admin and editors at different articles other than the one where the sanctions against me are now imposed since this isn't the first article where ill-will has been shown toward me and my edits have

1703:

Solved in the course of solving a related problem. She had accidentally used the {{DRN archive top}} template at the bottom, as well as the top, rather than {{DRN archive bottom}} . What this did was to hide all subsequent threads. Typos in templates are common, and usually obvious and so

3415:. If you disagree you may reopen the discussion there and see if a there is a consensus that supports your view. In the meantime I would caution you and/or others not to disregard current community consensus by reverting past edits. Thanks for working with the WP system of discussion and 2559:

The U.S. government treats the territories as part of the U.S. for some purposes and has for example extended by legislation birthright citizenship to four territories. That has not changed their constitutional status. Some scholars have argued that the territories are part of the U.S. and

589:

The ANI case is about a recent behavioral issue. The mediation is about a large and long standing issues of content. The two are separate as they should be and they'll get worked out individually by the appropriate people at each location.Meanwhile, Thanks for all your help at DRN. Best,

3351:

As per Knowledge (XXG)'s rules regarding changes to pages for advertising purposes (as you have clearly done by editing Katie Jones's webpage over time to remove information) I was wondering why you have made Katie Jones's wikipedia page redirect to a book currently still in publish.

655:

I made a general comment about the problem of recentism on WP. I have no opinion regarding the status of that specific case at DRN. If you take the DRN case, I send you good wishes for success as I remain optimistic that every dispute has the potential for resolution. Best,

953:

It is worth noting that there was a previous request for MEDCOM involvement which seems to have been not accepted because several of the parties who might have been involved chose not to participate, and at least one, me, who was theoretically unable to say anything at the

1558:, Yes, I'd be happy to assist you anytime. Just leave me a note here whenever you need something. On the outside chance you have something private to discuss you can send an email but put a note here saying you sent an email as I don't check my WP email everyday. Cheers!-- 2996:, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, images, a rephrasing of the title, a question that should have been asked at the 1704:

corrected immediately by the template-inserter. In this odd case, the effect was unobvious, but puzzling to someone who remembered what the previous cases had been. I corrected the bottom. The lack of a closing comment applied to the hiding of everything by accident.

1136:

Maybe John has illustrated my point? And if we do have to hair-spilt over the MEDCOM request, of the six editors operating from an "anti-Landmark viewpoint" who were named, three declined, two ignored it, and John could not comment because he was blocked at the time.

3518:

I am really very very angry that you closed the mediation without even the courtesy of attempting to notify or ask editors beforehand. I strongly object. But if you would like to have a different member of Med Com take it up instead of you, that would be OK with me.

1889:

is rampant in what has become "series of articles". PAGs sometimes prevail but when admins are members of the advocacy, we can't expect much to happen. It's spreading like wild fire, and we're losing GF editors as a result. See the essay I created and co-authored

2869:. I'll let Newspapers.com customer support know, and they will extend your subscription. If you don't want to keep your account for another year, you don't have to do anything. Your account will expire unless I hear from you that you want to keep it. All the best, 1187:

help you to progress in your understanding of each others position. I have no dog in this fight, only a desire to see the situation cool down and reach some compromises. I know that contentious topics and articles can be very frustrating and difficult. Good luck.--

1844:

exhausted. ArbCom turns down 3-4 times as many cases as it hears. Furthermore, it sounds like this dispute might be taking place at an article already covered by ArbCom discretionary sanctions ie "fringe" topics and ArbCom would automatically refer it to

2864:

Your free one-year account with Newspapers.com will end on September 5 2015. Newspapers.com has offered to extend existing accounts by another year. If you wish to keep your account until September 5 2016, please add your name to the Account Renewal list

974:

I think you are saying that a second request for mediation is not being considered by participants for fear it will fail again for the same reasons. I would suggest a staw poll on the talk page to see how many would participate in mediation if a case was

2183:, The DRN case seems to have withered. This happens sometimes. I suggest you ping all the participants and let them know that the case needs to move along and if there is no willingness to keep the case moving you will need to close it in 24 to 48 hrs.-- 2793:

Thanks! I did some changes when I thought you were finished. Sorry if I troubled you. Also I wrote some on talk page there, I will see how the feedback is. I love Knowledge (XXG) and enjoy finally learning about all the work that people put in to it!

2565:

Surely 1100 words is not the intent of the RfC 200 word max limit, it violates both the spirit and the letter of the usual WP procedure. His sources might be allowed in a collapsible box in that the Mediation sources summary box is about 200 words...

982:

says that allegations of COI should not be used as a stick in content disputes. Any remaining issues of POV should be handled in the standard manner ie discussion, RfC and other forms of dispute resolution. I don't see MEDCOM having any role in that

897:

until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

619:

Thank you for taking a look at the request for dispute assistance. As you noted, since the request was placed, discussion and edits ceased awaiting assistance. If you are still interested in volunteering I invite you over to the talk

1953:

saying that the Belevedere connection caused the suspension of Fulhold. Although it probably did, we don't know for sure. In addition the allegations about Belvedere remain unproven. Please discuss on talk before editing them further.

2695:

would be good to demonstrate how the community views the issue and that would create resolution. You could recommend that to the party that filed the DRN. In either case don't feel bad 85% or more of DRN cases end without resolution.

1800:

more to prove the emoji was not my doing, and included providing screen captures, repeated explanations, and finally getting Technical 13 to validate it from a tech POV. I won't go into the details but the bias is evident.

2013:

Although it's unhelpful to a dispute, there is no rule that says that changes must wait until an ongoing dispute resolution has been completed. I hope a new DRN volunteer comes forward to help you with your case. Good

349: 3036:. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request 901:

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

2620: 305: 3284:. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose 3198:

take a case. If you do not see yourself taking cases in the foreseeable future, please remove yourself from the volunteer list so that we can have a better idea of the size of our pool of volunteers; if you

570:. My sympathies. Unfortunately, it appears that mediation is likely to fail, and you know better than I at when mediation fails. (A few editors have complained when I have failed moderated discussion at 957:

Under the circumstances, that might make even some individuals who might have considered accepting mediation opt not to, as it would be unlikely to be accepted with as many people rejecting it as it had.

308:

aiming for a "balanced and accurate representation of reliable sources from all significant points of view", with "improve prior edit" a frequent edit summary, for discussion instead of reverts and for

768:

Yes, its always good to have lots of outside input from uninvolved editors. Unfortunately there a many RfC's that only draw in one or two outside opinions and fail to provide consensus or resolution.

1156:, which is not limited to employment only, and also his rather regrettable assertion of transparently false and/or unfounded accusations of others, rather clearly violating basic conduct guidelines. 1792:

I removed material that was noncompliant with NPOV and expanded the lede citing 3 quality reviews and a 3rd party NBCNews interview using inline text attribution - all compliant with MEDRS and NPOV.

2404:"I know this a long standing dispute and there is a lot of history and pent up frustration but please exercise some restraint." Likewise; don't antagonize people by hiding legitimate comments. -- 518: 2719:

Thanks, Keith! I don't feel bad -- I just thought it was pretty straightforward. :) I've watched the page, if I see it starting up again I'll point them in the direction of RfC, thanks!

1929:

Thank you, Keith. I will definitely need the luck. As I see it, my edits are consistently reverted which is the same as not editing so there really isn't much more to lose by trying. 😊

2324: 1609:

Sure, do you have any questions about a case you are moderating now? Or do you want to look at a past case and give some comments? Just let me know what you need. I'm happy to help.--

1278:

You are receiving this message because you have a one-year subscription to Newspapers.com through the Knowledge (XXG) Library. This is a brief update, to remind you about that access:

103: 312:

dispute resolution: "... mindful of their tone. I understand this process is slow and frustrating but WP requires civility at all times and we should try to remain calm and respectful

425:

It seems the AN thread has been archived with no action taken. I also did some editing on the article to create more accurate/neutral content and removed the clean up tags. Peace!--

3192:. We have a number of pending requests which need a volunteer to address them. Unless you are an inexperienced volunteer who is currently just watching DRN to learn our processes, 2388:"This section is being collapsed because it is counterproductive to the RfC." I agree, the people continuing their interminable fight is counterproductive. I'm not part of that. 1110:, still in the early stages, which deals more explicitly with such situations, and, Keithbob, you would be more than welcome to make any additions or changes you might see fit. 3220: 2391:"This is not a place to rehash or extend the mediation discussions." I agree; my statement has nothing to do with the mediation and everything to do with the implementation. 3557:

That's very nice of you (and tolerant of my initial response). I appreciate that. And I've mellowed out a lot since my initial reaction, so I no longer feel so strongly. --

971:

MEDCOM was rejected because several parties declined participation. ----- This is normal. As you know dispute resolution procedures such as DRN and MEDCOM are optional.

2676:

Well, that was frustrating! And it seemed like such a straightforward case -- no, you can't synthesize, and yes, you need reliable sources. :D Thanks for your help!

1685:

Hi - can you tell me why there is a tag that says "no closing comments were detected"? I put "closed" in the status, and for archive I gave the reason for closing.

114: 1632:

The case I currently have is a bit of a dud that I think I'll be forced to close... perhaps I'll come back when I take up the next and you can guide me through it?

1808:

If I file at ARBCOM, should I name all the parties (the admin, the editors who have shown repeated behavioral patterns, diffs of tag-teaming, ill-will and reverts?

145: 3348:

You've made several changes to Katie Jones's wikipedia page - and now even removing it all together by just making it a redirection page to Katie Tarbox's book.

1302:. Your input will help us to facilitate this particular partnership, and to discover what other partnerships and services the Knowledge (XXG) Library can offer. 894: 3534:

I understand you're reaction. In your shoes I might feel the same way. Let's continue our discussion on T-man's talk page to keep it all in one place. Thanks!--

1441: 124:

If you do not intend to take cases or help with the administration of DRN on a regular basis, or if you do not wish to receive further notices of this nature,

3619: 3463: 1364: 883: 167:

Thanks John for thinking of me. I'm flattered. I'd be open to participating in a content committee if the community were to establish one. Happy new year!--

1253: 471: 3405:

Hi PhaseTime. I just want to understand who I'm talking to. Did you also leave the unsigned comment above? Also are you the IP that reverted the redirect

1741:

Robert handled it perfectly, Keith. I'm good to go. It was an oversight on my behalf and I will certainly be more cautious in the future. Thank you!

1211:

Agreed - I was about to suggest that it was unfair to take up space on your talk page with this kind of stuff. Apologies for my part in prolonging it.

1230:

page before it might be moved to mainspace, feel free to do so. I do know and acknowledge up front that at least some copyediting is likely required.

1160:

is not intended to apply to individuals who have repeatedly demonstrated that their own actions are not necessarily guided by policies or guidelines.

2953: 1861:

issue and find some other topics to edit that are non-controversial. Probably not what you wanted to hear but that is the best advice I can offer.--

836:

Please stop with your threats. I am cleaning up a sloppily written and formatted article. Happy to discuss any concerns with you on the talk page.--

2493:

Hi Keithbob, is one of the Register links you placed on Jimbo's talk wrong? (You've got the same link twice.) And it might be worth linking Wales'

1227: 1107: 821:. If you aren't willing to allow your contributions to be edited extensively or be redistributed by others, please do not submit them. Thank you. 2643:

interview is crucial to analyse the main logic of Knowledge (XXG) and digital commons. I hope you will help me for this. Best Regards, Yilmaz

702:

For remaining civil in spite of harsh personal attacks at the Dispute Resolution Noticeboard. Certain people may not think so, but go MedCom!

3615: 3459: 1999: 1360: 3309: 3229: 3215: 2341: 2333: 2263: 2280:

With only a couple hours per week, you can make a big difference for sharing knowledge. Please sign up and help us in one of these ways:

1080:

The tone and style of expression of some of the editors pushing for an article more critical of Landmark is illustrated by this example:

3411:

The merge and redirect was made by virtue of a consensus discussion held on the talk page of the Katie Jones article which you can read

822: 2401:"At this point in the process we want to hear from the community not from mediation participants." I will refrain from expletives here. 316: 1831:"Allowing experts to run the show would merely invite them to introduce their personal biases into articles." It's happening now. -- 128:

remove your username from the volunteer list. If you later decide to resume activities at DRN you may relist your name at that time.

2370:

Hi I was wondering if you can collapse the refs in TFD section, if so, I'm fine with collapseing my "See also" section. Thanks.

2206:

That's my fault, as I remarked there yesterday, I've had a death in the family and won't be editing. I marked it as "needassist".

1796:

behaviors. This isn't the first article I have been subjected to their disruptive behavior and attempts to railroad me into a TB.

978:

COI matters should be addressed at COIN only. If the COIN discussion comes up empty then the COI allegations should be dropped as

3305: 3225: 2337: 2973: 3612:. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. 3456:. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. 2647:

I'm not interested in being interviewed but you will likely find others who are more inclined. Good luck with your project.--

2571: 2507: 2394:"Your job is to make an official statement and walk away." My job is to COMMENT in a section for "COMMENTS" in a REQUEST FOR 2361: 1357:. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. 3028: 2989: 2957: 197: 146:

Knowledge (XXG):Village pump (idea lab)/Archive 16#Rehashing an old idea - Maybe a "Comment committee" to deal with content?

2494: 1811:

Will ARBCOM also decide on the current imposed article sanction and admin's action or do I have to file a separate action?

1328: 1058:

Thanks for your efforts to bring some sanity to this discussion. As you are probably aware the MEDCOM request that I made

3097:

your removal of content from that article. It appears to be the same person, but I'd like to discuss it further. Thanks,

3033: 3013: 2546:

TFD has approximately 175 words of statement, and approximately 925 of bibliographic essay. He is entitled to the 175:

1299: 961:

be, perhaps in conjunction with an RfC or perhaps group of RfCs, perhaps effective in helping to determine such matters.

84: 72: 67: 59: 3296:

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to

887: 574:, although I thought that they were unreasonable editors, and I don't know how to mediate with unreasonable editors.) 3301: 3001: 2980: 2866: 2441:

I apologize for my fury above. You likely had no reason to think that you were stepping into a nest of scorpions. --

1718:

Good catch Robert. Thanks! Atsme, does that answer your question or do you need more explanation or assistance? --

3604:

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

3448:

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

2817: 1349:

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

38: 3017: 1059: 2918: 2567: 2375: 2357: 2003: 1709: 1523: 1282:

Please make sure that you can still log in to your Newspapers.com account. If you are having trouble let me know.

645: 579: 239:

An admin from the help desk has fixed it. Admin privileges were required to reset the archive file to Archive 1.

1070: 1026:

I think the operative individuals involved might be me, blocked at the time (deservedly, in this instance), and

3209: 1477: 402: 3049: 1968:

I've outlined all of my edits and sources on the talk page. Let's discuss and come to an agreement. Best, --

826: 3009: 357: 327: 3416: 3297: 2997: 1853: 3149: 2825: 1958: 1235: 1165: 1115: 1044: 758: 625: 157: 2356:

solution for "Sources", The Gnome has noted the potential problem at "Enumeration of the territories".

3142: 3562: 3524: 2914: 2371: 1705: 1519: 641: 575: 526: 407: 345: 244: 205: 3273: 3264: 3094: 3008:

for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on

2988:

Hello, and welcome to Knowledge (XXG). This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on

3449: 3395: 3205: 2799: 2756: 2214: 2112: 2062: 1640: 1596: 1469: 1337: 1261: 1216: 1142: 1088: 1065:

of the "anti-Landmark" editors declined to engage with it, several of them with insulting comments.

479: 453: 415: 301: 3412: 3293: 3277: 1891: 1752:

Glad it worked out. I've made many 'mark up' blunders on WP. Don't worry, you are doing great! --

703: 448:

Thanks! Yes, the Admin board is quickly triaged. Someone did put a COI flag. Very Best. --- (Bob)

3656: 3582: 3571:

Great, let's work through this together. At the end of the day we both have the same goal :-) --

3545: 3500: 3430: 3373: 3330: 3250: 3170: 3123: 3075: 3044: 2939: 2895: 2846: 2777: 2724: 2707: 2681: 2658: 2628: 2593: 2528: 2502: 2469: 2429: 2237: 2226:

Thanks, we'll find a new moderator. So sorry for your loss. Best wishes to you and your family.--

2194: 2160: 2136: 2090: 2025: 1979: 1917: 1872: 1763: 1729: 1663: 1620: 1569: 1500: 1452: 1430: 1423: 1405: 1198: 1012: 994: 917: 878: 862: 847: 790: 731: 667: 601: 547: 500: 436: 378: 264: 227: 178: 47: 17: 294: 403:

https://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Lori_Greiner_article

3635: 3479: 3102: 2874: 2691:

If one party was not willing to embrace the standard interpretation of the guidelines then an

1380: 1313: 707: 640:

reason to be optimistic that we might be able to resolve it without it being sent to ArbCom.

353: 323: 3289: 3281: 3037: 3005: 3145: 2821: 2446: 2409: 1954: 1821: 1518:

I will defer to your opinion. I didn't think it was off-topic, but will take your advice.

1231: 1161: 1111: 1040: 754: 621: 153: 3292:, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The 3285: 3189: 2993: 2692: 2271: 2051: 1886: 1849: 1157: 1153: 979: 814: 769: 571: 567: 406:

Any help or clarification is useful, especially since you've communicated with the editor (

107: 3558: 3520: 522: 340: 240: 201: 2623:, "He consciously excluded any mention of it from his acclaimed Memoirs." Best wishes, 1857: 1845: 689: 3391: 2795: 2752: 2208: 2180: 2106: 2076: 2056: 1634: 1590: 1350: 1332: 1257: 1212: 1138: 1084: 475: 449: 411: 2992:

requesting that it be speedily deleted from Knowledge (XXG). This has been done under

3648: 3626:

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

3574: 3537: 3492: 3470:

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

3422: 3365: 3322: 3242: 3162: 3115: 3067: 2931: 2887: 2838: 2769: 2720: 2699: 2677: 2650: 2624: 2585: 2520: 2498: 2461: 2421: 2229: 2186: 2152: 2128: 2082: 2017: 1971: 1909: 1864: 1755: 1721: 1655: 1612: 1561: 1492: 1449: 1397: 1371:

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

1190: 1055: 1004: 986: 909: 839: 782: 745: 723: 659: 593: 539: 492: 428: 370: 256: 219: 170: 1895:

a crap situation and the smell is offensive. There has been talk of a task force.

3663: 3639: 3631: 3627: 3589: 3566: 3552: 3528: 3507: 3483: 3475: 3471: 3437: 3399: 3380: 3337: 3313: 3257: 3233: 3177: 3153: 3130: 3106: 3098: 3082: 3058: 2946: 2922: 2902: 2878: 2870: 2853: 2829: 2803: 2784: 2760: 2728: 2714: 2685: 2665: 2632: 2600: 2575: 2535: 2511: 2476: 2450: 2436: 2413: 2379: 2365: 2345: 2244: 2221: 2201: 2167: 2143: 2119: 2097: 2069: 2032: 2007: 1986: 1962: 1935: 1924: 1901: 1879: 1837: 1770: 1747: 1736: 1713: 1697: 1687: 1670: 1647: 1627: 1603: 1576: 1549: 1527: 1507: 1483: 1458: 1437: 1412: 1376: 1372: 1339: 1317: 1309: 1265: 1239: 1220: 1205: 1169: 1146: 1119: 1092: 1048: 1029: 1019: 924: 854: 830: 797: 762: 738: 711: 674: 649: 629: 608: 583: 554: 530: 507: 483: 457: 443: 419: 397: 385: 361: 331: 271: 248: 234: 209: 185: 161: 3387:

page about a person and redirected it to an page about a different person's book.

1256:

about incorporating peer review suggestions. Was hoping you could review. Thanks.

809: 1539: 148:. ArbCom itself requested some broader input in the topic area in its decision. 3605: 3239:

Thanks Tman, I'll try to keep an eye on things and take a case if I have time.--

3032:

tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with

2455: 2442: 2405: 1103: 818: 474:

concerning additions to the history section. Was hoping you could help. Thanks.

46:

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

3188:

You are receiving this message because you are signed up as a volunteer at the

2560:

consequently current government policy is illegal. That is a minority opinion.

1930: 1896: 1832: 1742: 1692: 1555: 1544: 196:

Hi Keithbob. Fyi, I noticed that links to the archive pages are missing from

3609: 2104:

be "right", if not I'm not sure how to proceed. Advice is much appreciated.

1287: 536:

Thanks, yes I saw it today and a response is next on my WP to do list :-) --

775: 773:

project in my opinion. Good luck and thank you for all your contributions!

1906:

I admire your courage and integrity. Good luck with your efforts. Best, --

2972:

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read

2517:

Thanks I've added a comment with better links and clearer explanation.--

2274:

has been a useful resource for your work. TWL is expanding rapidly and

3359: 3280:

is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Knowledge (XXG)

3004:

desks, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see

1354: 3023:

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may

1788:

heard that before, right? I need a 3O and was hoping you could help.

1815:

repeatedly been reverted based on arguments that are not substantive?

1537:

Thank you for suggesting mentorship at DR Talk - may I choose you?

1825: 117:

there which need volunteer attention. If you have time available,

1331:

at the moment. Feel free to ping me if you get a backlog going.

2611:

Hi! I think you may now see why I wouldn't join that mediation.

1001:

20:53, 24 March 2015 (UTC) Add to words in brackets to my cmt.--

132: 2299:: share updates in blogs, social media, newsletters and notices 1327:

Thanks for your kind words; I'll be back to DR/N, I just have

519:

Knowledge (XXG) talk:Requests for mediation/Christian terrorism

396:

Hi Keithbob. FYI: You might be interested in this issue on the

3453: 1848:. There are other places you could take your dispute such as 25: 3362:

is the article you are referencing. To whom am I speaking? --

2962: 2311:: connect to university libraries, archives, and other GLAMs 2262: 1444:

at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

1422: 1805:

Do you think this admin's behavior toward me is actionable?

1308:

Knowledge (XXG) Library Newspapers.com account coordinator

1298:

Finally, we would greatly appreciate it if you filled out

882:

is suitable for inclusion in Knowledge (XXG) according to

3319:

Thanks, I'll get up to speed and cast some votes soon.--

2305:: advise on building tools to support the library's work 3608:, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page 3452:, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page 3406: 2384:

Responding here because there, it's collapsed, by you:

2047: 1353:, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page 1081: 876:

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article

311: 2766:

Please wait till I have finished my rewrite. Thanks.--

135:

15:52, 8 January 2015 (UTC) (current DRN coordinator)

2582:

give it a day or two and see where we stand. Best,--

410:) in question in the past in 2013. Best wishes. --- 2054:? No pressure whatsoever, whatever works for you! 895:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Helmut Diez 3272:You appear to be eligible to vote in the current 3600:Disambiguation link notification for December 24 2884:I'm not using so go ahead and delete. Thanks! -- 1652:Sure, just give me a ping, when you start :-) -- 304:, for writing and improving articles related to 102:You are receiving this message because you have 3444:Disambiguation link notification for December 3 2970: 338:A year ago, you were the 731st recipient of my 2994:section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion 2860:Knowledge (XXG) library Newspapers.com renewal 1783:Question, re:sanctions imposed by biased admin 1345:Disambiguation link notification for April 19 8: 1254:Talk:Kasowitz, Benson, Torres & Friedman 472:Talk:Kasowitz, Benson, Torres & Friedman 200:. It's probably just a template adjustment. 3344:Katie.com vs Katie Jones (Web Entrepreneur) 1429:Hello, Keithbob. You have new messages at 1252:Sorry to bother. I tagged you in a note at 470:Sorry to bother. I tagged you in a note at 3012:subjects and should provide references to 2913:Thanks for your help in the Grant matter. 940:This is becoming personal and unproductive 935: 300:Thank you for quality biographies such as 289:perseverance and willingness to compromise 3034:Knowledge (XXG)'s policies and guidelines 2125:I'll take a look and then comment here.-- 1294:work with one of our partner's resources. 1288:http://www.newspapers.com/basics/#h-clips 884:Knowledge (XXG)'s policies and guidelines 367:Thank you Gerda! You are too kind......-- 216:appreciated. Thanks and happy new year!-- 3204:listed on the volunteer page. Regards, 2974:the guide to writing your first article 1248:Kasowitz, Benson, Torres & Friedman 1228:User:John Carter/Self-appointed prophet 1108:User:John Carter/Self-appointed prophet 1069:more and more like a classic case of a 466:Kasowitz, Benson, Torres & Friedman 2287:: help distribute free research access 2259:The Knowledge (XXG) Library needs you! 44:Do not edit the contents of this page. 720:Thanks, this is very kind. Cheers! -- 7: 3355:Let me know. ----- Unsigned comment 2612: 2418:Thanks, your objections are noted.-- 615:Gordon B Hinckley Dispute Resolution 2979:You may want to consider using the 489:I've responded on the talk page. -- 2542:RfC statement exceeding 200 words. 2293:: seek new donations from partners 24: 3298:review the candidates' statements 893:The article will be discussed at 198:Knowledge (XXG) talk:POV railroad 139:Request your possible involvement 121:take one or more of these cases. 3112:OK, see you at the talk page! -- 2835:I responded on the talk page. -- 2619:I've been following it, though. 2613: 1686: 1538: 1385: 869: 808: 774: 688: 293: 29: 2990:Delhi Cloth & General Mills 2958:Delhi Cloth & General Mills 2748:Please advise if I am helping. 1820:an advocacy position. I think 1077:responses to the points raised. 3304:. For the Election committee, 3274:Arbitration Committee election 3265:ArbCom elections are now open! 3190:Dispute Resolution Noticeboard 2923:16:33, 29 September 2015 (UTC) 1824:nailed it with the following: 108:Dispute Resolution Noticeboard 1: 3664:01:13, 30 December 2015 (UTC) 3640:09:48, 24 December 2015 (UTC) 3590:19:17, 21 December 2015 (UTC) 3567:19:06, 21 December 2015 (UTC) 3553:19:01, 21 December 2015 (UTC) 3529:20:55, 18 December 2015 (UTC) 3338:18:35, 24 November 2015 (UTC) 3314:13:58, 24 November 2015 (UTC) 3258:18:34, 24 November 2015 (UTC) 3234:19:48, 20 November 2015 (UTC) 3178:18:41, 17 November 2015 (UTC) 3154:21:20, 15 November 2015 (UTC) 3131:18:41, 17 November 2015 (UTC) 3083:18:40, 17 November 2015 (UTC) 2638:Interview for my dissertation 1383:) 09:01, 19 April 2015 (UTC) 931:Landmark discussion continued 739:16:24, 23 February 2015 (UTC) 712:06:31, 23 February 2015 (UTC) 675:19:16, 14 February 2015 (UTC) 650:00:22, 14 February 2015 (UTC) 630:23:51, 13 February 2015 (UTC) 609:20:07, 12 February 2015 (UTC) 584:18:15, 12 February 2015 (UTC) 3508:20:14, 4 December 2015 (UTC) 3484:09:05, 3 December 2015 (UTC) 3438:15:47, 2 December 2015 (UTC) 3400:23:56, 1 December 2015 (UTC) 3381:21:51, 1 December 2015 (UTC) 3218:) (Current DRN coordinator) 3107:15:56, 7 November 2015 (UTC) 3059:17:38, 14 October 2015 (UTC) 2983:to help you create articles. 2947:17:36, 3 November 2015 (UTC) 2903:17:31, 3 November 2015 (UTC) 2854:17:32, 3 November 2015 (UTC) 2816:I have mentioned you on the 555:18:39, 28 January 2015 (UTC) 531:18:07, 28 January 2015 (UTC) 508:18:41, 28 January 2015 (UTC) 484:19:13, 23 January 2015 (UTC) 458:17:52, 31 January 2015 (UTC) 444:18:41, 28 January 2015 (UTC) 420:23:02, 22 January 2015 (UTC) 386:19:25, 26 January 2015 (UTC) 362:09:46, 22 January 2015 (UTC) 332:09:57, 22 January 2014 (UTC) 3300:and submit your choices on 3093:I invite you to discuss at 2879:12:57, 20 August 2015 (UTC) 2830:04:29, 10 August 2015 (UTC) 2334:The Knowledge (XXG) Library 2297:Communications coordinators 2272:The Knowledge (XXG) Library 514:Making sure that you saw it 272:17:32, 9 January 2015 (UTC) 249:13:53, 9 January 2015 (UTC) 235:19:29, 8 January 2015 (UTC) 210:16:58, 8 January 2015 (UTC) 186:20:19, 8 January 2015 (UTC) 162:16:53, 8 January 2015 (UTC) 3680: 3306:MediaWiki message delivery 3226:MediaWiki message delivery 3141:I have mentioned you here 2818:School of Economic Science 2804:21:21, 5 August 2015 (UTC) 2785:18:50, 5 August 2015 (UTC) 2761:18:45, 5 August 2015 (UTC) 2338:MediaWiki message delivery 1514:Will Defer to Your Opinion 1413:19:36, 19 April 2015 (UTC) 1340:07:05, 16 April 2015 (UTC) 1318:19:31, 13 April 2015 (UTC) 1240:20:55, 25 March 2015 (UTC) 1221:20:43, 25 March 2015 (UTC) 1206:20:07, 25 March 2015 (UTC) 1170:16:16, 25 March 2015 (UTC) 1147:07:48, 25 March 2015 (UTC) 1120:22:11, 24 March 2015 (UTC) 1093:21:50, 24 March 2015 (UTC) 1049:21:11, 24 March 2015 (UTC) 1039:rolling in large numbers. 1020:22:01, 24 March 2015 (UTC) 925:21:45, 10 March 2015 (UTC) 93:Talk page archive for 2015 2729:20:08, 21 July 2015 (UTC) 2715:19:11, 21 July 2015 (UTC) 2686:16:35, 20 July 2015 (UTC) 2666:15:12, 20 July 2015 (UTC) 2633:23:11, 17 July 2015 (UTC) 2601:20:25, 12 July 2015 (UTC) 2576:00:42, 11 July 2015 (UTC) 2536:19:57, 12 July 2015 (UTC) 2512:21:25, 10 July 2015 (UTC) 2477:20:04, 12 July 2015 (UTC) 2451:06:14, 12 July 2015 (UTC) 2437:19:22, 10 July 2015 (UTC) 2414:17:29, 10 July 2015 (UTC) 2380:17:15, 10 July 2015 (UTC) 2366:10:14, 10 July 2015 (UTC) 2245:17:34, 14 July 2015 (UTC) 2222:20:15, 13 July 2015 (UTC) 2202:21:08, 12 July 2015 (UTC) 2033:12:38, 24 June 2015 (UTC) 2008:08:23, 23 June 2015 (UTC) 1987:12:35, 24 June 2015 (UTC) 1963:19:57, 22 June 2015 (UTC) 1936:14:08, 24 June 2015 (UTC) 1925:12:34, 24 June 2015 (UTC) 1902:16:16, 23 June 2015 (UTC) 1880:15:54, 22 June 2015 (UTC) 1838:14:42, 21 June 2015 (UTC) 1771:15:57, 15 June 2015 (UTC) 1748:05:09, 15 June 2015 (UTC) 1737:03:27, 14 June 2015 (UTC) 1714:20:51, 13 June 2015 (UTC) 1698:18:42, 13 June 2015 (UTC) 1671:16:07, 12 June 2015 (UTC) 1648:15:00, 12 June 2015 (UTC) 1628:02:31, 12 June 2015 (UTC) 1604:00:19, 12 June 2015 (UTC) 1577:21:09, 11 June 2015 (UTC) 1550:19:36, 11 June 2015 (UTC) 1266:18:12, 2 April 2015 (UTC) 855:21:58, 3 March 2015 (UTC) 831:21:50, 3 March 2015 (UTC) 798:19:48, 2 March 2015 (UTC) 763:17:58, 2 March 2015 (UTC) 687: 3221:(Not watching this page) 3159:Thanks for the notice.-- 2346:04:31, 7 July 2015 (UTC) 2317:: run reference services 2168:15:57, 9 July 2015 (UTC) 2144:14:57, 9 July 2015 (UTC) 2120:21:05, 8 July 2015 (UTC) 2098:17:38, 6 July 2015 (UTC) 2070:00:00, 6 July 2015 (UTC) 2050:to ask for oversight on 1528:18:31, 2 June 2015 (UTC) 1508:20:36, 1 June 2015 (UTC) 1484:16:48, 31 May 2015 (UTC) 1459:20:35, 20 May 2015 (UTC) 1438:20:35, 20 May 2015 (UTC) 886:or whether it should be 2928:You're most welcome! -- 2672:DRN -- closed as failed 1271:Newspapers.com check-in 635:American Sniper comment 306:new religious movements 3025:contest the nomination 2985: 2967: 2303:Technical coordinators 2267: 1427: 106:as a volunteer at the 3278:Arbitration Committee 2966: 2351:RfC collapsible boxes 2315:Research coordinators 2309:Outreach coordinators 2266: 2046:I presume it's still 1948:Belvedere and Fulhold 1426: 1061:was rejected because 815:ownership of articles 813:Please do not assume 696:The Civility Barnstar 42:of past discussions. 3628:opt-out instructions 3472:opt-out instructions 3006:Knowledge (XXG):Stub 2568:TheVirginiaHistorian 2358:TheVirginiaHistorian 2291:Partner coordinators 2285:Account coordinators 2052:the case I'm opening 1856:effect there and at 1431:LFaraone's talk page 1373:opt-out instructions 566:been jerked back to 392:Lori Greiner article 253:Thanks my friend! -- 98:DRN needs assistance 3450:Stephen D. Sullivan 3282:arbitration process 1468:You've got mail. — 681:A barnstar for you! 561:Christian Terrorism 302:Norman E. Rosenthal 3618:• Join us at the 3462:• Join us at the 3294:arbitration policy 3184:Help needed at DRN 2968: 2332:Send on behalf of 2276:we need your help! 2268: 1852:but beware of the 1442:remove this notice 1428: 1363:• Join us at the 948:Hi John, You said: 317:awesome Wikipedian 18:User talk:Keithbob 3623: 3467: 3223: 3089:Jim Bachi article 3064:Got it, thanks!-- 3029:visiting the page 2562: 2554: 2510: 2497:as well. Best, -- 1489:got it, thanks!-- 1368: 1300:this short survey 1275:Hello Keithbob, 1183: 1182: 717: 716: 90: 89: 54: 53: 48:current talk page 3671: 3662: 3659: 3613: 3588: 3585: 3551: 3548: 3506: 3503: 3457: 3436: 3433: 3379: 3376: 3336: 3333: 3256: 3253: 3222: 3219: 3176: 3173: 3129: 3126: 3081: 3078: 3056: 3047: 3043: 3020:their content. 3014:reliable sources 2965: 2945: 2942: 2901: 2898: 2852: 2849: 2783: 2780: 2713: 2710: 2664: 2661: 2618: 2617: 2616: 2607:Ulysses S. Grant 2599: 2596: 2557: 2549: 2534: 2531: 2505: 2501: 2475: 2472: 2435: 2432: 2327: 2243: 2240: 2220: 2217: 2211: 2200: 2197: 2166: 2163: 2142: 2139: 2118: 2115: 2109: 2096: 2093: 2068: 2065: 2059: 2031: 2028: 1993:Kashmir conflict 1985: 1982: 1933: 1923: 1920: 1899: 1878: 1875: 1835: 1769: 1766: 1745: 1735: 1732: 1695: 1690: 1669: 1666: 1646: 1643: 1637: 1626: 1623: 1602: 1599: 1593: 1575: 1572: 1547: 1542: 1506: 1503: 1480: 1474: 1455: 1445: 1411: 1408: 1393: 1389: 1388: 1358: 1335: 1204: 1201: 1033: 1018: 1015: 1000: 997: 936: 923: 920: 906:Acknowledged. -- 873: 872: 853: 850: 812: 796: 793: 778: 737: 734: 692: 685: 684: 673: 670: 607: 604: 553: 550: 506: 503: 442: 439: 384: 381: 343: 314: 297: 270: 267: 233: 230: 184: 181: 115:backlog of cases 81: 56: 55: 33: 32: 26: 3679: 3678: 3674: 3673: 3672: 3670: 3669: 3668: 3657: 3646: 3620:DPL WikiProject 3602: 3583: 3572: 3546: 3535: 3516: 3501: 3490: 3464:DPL WikiProject 3446: 3431: 3420: 3374: 3363: 3346: 3331: 3320: 3302:the voting page 3268: 3251: 3240: 3186: 3171: 3160: 3139: 3124: 3113: 3091: 3076: 3065: 3054: 3050: 3045: 3041: 2986: 2963: 2961: 2954:Speedy deletion 2940: 2929: 2915:Alanscottwalker 2911: 2896: 2885: 2862: 2847: 2836: 2814: 2778: 2767: 2739: 2708: 2697: 2674: 2659: 2648: 2640: 2614: 2609: 2594: 2583: 2544: 2529: 2518: 2503: 2491: 2470: 2459: 2430: 2419: 2372:Alanscottwalker 2353: 2329: 2325: 2261: 2238: 2227: 2215: 2209: 2207: 2195: 2184: 2161: 2150: 2137: 2126: 2113: 2107: 2105: 2091: 2080: 2063: 2057: 2055: 2044: 2026: 2015: 2000:115.186.146.225 1995: 1980: 1969: 1950: 1931: 1918: 1907: 1897: 1873: 1862: 1833: 1785: 1764: 1753: 1743: 1730: 1719: 1706:Robert McClenon 1693: 1683: 1664: 1653: 1641: 1635: 1633: 1621: 1610: 1597: 1591: 1589: 1585: 1570: 1559: 1545: 1535: 1520:Robert McClenon 1516: 1501: 1490: 1478: 1470: 1466: 1453: 1446: 1435: 1420: 1406: 1395: 1386: 1384: 1365:DPL WikiProject 1347: 1333: 1325: 1273: 1250: 1199: 1188: 1184: 1071:WP:POV railroad 1027: 1013: 1002: 995: 984: 941: 933: 918: 907: 874: 870: 867: 848: 837: 806: 791: 780: 750: 732: 721: 683: 668: 657: 642:Robert McClenon 637: 617: 602: 591: 576:Robert McClenon 563: 548: 537: 516: 501: 490: 468: 437: 426: 408:User:Philpallen 394: 379: 368: 341: 336: 335: 315:, - you are an 310: 298: 284: 265: 254: 228: 217: 194: 179: 168: 141: 104:listed yourself 100: 77: 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 3677: 3675: 3667: 3666: 3601: 3598: 3597: 3596: 3595: 3594: 3593: 3592: 3515: 3512: 3511: 3510: 3445: 3442: 3441: 3440: 3409: 3384: 3383: 3345: 3342: 3341: 3340: 3271: 3267: 3262: 3261: 3260: 3206:TransporterMan 3185: 3182: 3181: 3180: 3138: 3135: 3134: 3133: 3095:Talk:Jim Bachi 3090: 3087: 3086: 3085: 3052: 2981:Article Wizard 2969: 2960: 2956:nomination of 2951: 2950: 2949: 2910: 2907: 2906: 2905: 2861: 2858: 2857: 2856: 2813: 2810: 2809: 2808: 2807: 2806: 2788: 2787: 2738: 2735: 2734: 2733: 2732: 2731: 2673: 2670: 2669: 2668: 2639: 2636: 2608: 2605: 2604: 2603: 2543: 2540: 2539: 2538: 2495:Guardian piece 2490: 2487: 2486: 2485: 2484: 2483: 2482: 2481: 2480: 2479: 2402: 2399: 2392: 2389: 2352: 2349: 2331: 2323: 2321: 2319: 2318: 2312: 2306: 2300: 2294: 2288: 2260: 2257: 2256: 2255: 2254: 2253: 2252: 2251: 2250: 2249: 2248: 2247: 2181:User:Kharkiv07 2173: 2172: 2171: 2170: 2101: 2100: 2077:User:Kharkiv07 2043: 2040: 2038: 2036: 2035: 1994: 1991: 1990: 1989: 1949: 1946: 1945: 1944: 1943: 1942: 1941: 1940: 1939: 1938: 1817: 1816: 1812: 1809: 1806: 1802: 1801: 1797: 1793: 1784: 1781: 1780: 1779: 1778: 1777: 1776: 1775: 1774: 1773: 1682: 1679: 1678: 1677: 1676: 1675: 1674: 1673: 1584: 1583:DRN moderating 1581: 1580: 1579: 1534: 1531: 1515: 1512: 1511: 1510: 1472:TransporterMan 1465: 1462: 1436:Message added 1434: 1421: 1419: 1416: 1351:Virtual Wallet 1346: 1343: 1329:other drahmahz 1324: 1321: 1296: 1295: 1291: 1283: 1272: 1269: 1249: 1246: 1245: 1244: 1243: 1242: 1181: 1180: 1179: 1178: 1177: 1176: 1175: 1174: 1173: 1172: 1129: 1128: 1127: 1126: 1125: 1124: 1123: 1122: 1096: 1095: 1078: 1074: 1066: 1023: 1022: 976: 972: 963: 962: 958: 955: 943: 942: 939: 934: 932: 929: 928: 927: 868: 866: 861:Nomination of 859: 858: 857: 817:as you did at 805: 802: 801: 800: 749: 748:DRN discussion 743: 742: 741: 715: 714: 699: 698: 693: 682: 679: 678: 677: 636: 633: 616: 613: 612: 611: 562: 559: 558: 557: 515: 512: 511: 510: 467: 464: 463: 462: 461: 460: 405: 401: 393: 390: 389: 388: 292: 286: 285: 283: 282:Precious again 280: 279: 278: 277: 276: 275: 274: 193: 190: 189: 188: 140: 137: 133:TransporterMan 131:Best regards, 99: 96: 88: 87: 82: 75: 70: 65: 62: 52: 51: 34: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 3676: 3665: 3660: 3654: 3653: 3652: 3644: 3643: 3642: 3641: 3637: 3633: 3629: 3624: 3621: 3617: 3611: 3607: 3599: 3591: 3586: 3580: 3579: 3578: 3570: 3569: 3568: 3564: 3560: 3556: 3555: 3554: 3549: 3543: 3542: 3541: 3533: 3532: 3531: 3530: 3526: 3522: 3513: 3509: 3504: 3498: 3497: 3496: 3488: 3487: 3486: 3485: 3481: 3477: 3473: 3468: 3465: 3461: 3455: 3451: 3443: 3439: 3434: 3428: 3427: 3426: 3418: 3414: 3410: 3408: 3407:in this edit? 3404: 3403: 3402: 3401: 3397: 3393: 3390:Let me know. 3388: 3382: 3377: 3371: 3370: 3369: 3361: 3358: 3357: 3356: 3353: 3349: 3343: 3339: 3334: 3328: 3327: 3326: 3318: 3317: 3316: 3315: 3311: 3307: 3303: 3299: 3295: 3291: 3287: 3283: 3279: 3275: 3266: 3263: 3259: 3254: 3248: 3247: 3246: 3238: 3237: 3236: 3235: 3231: 3227: 3217: 3214: 3211: 3207: 3202: 3197: 3196: 3191: 3183: 3179: 3174: 3168: 3167: 3166: 3158: 3157: 3156: 3155: 3151: 3147: 3143: 3136: 3132: 3127: 3121: 3120: 3119: 3111: 3110: 3109: 3108: 3104: 3100: 3096: 3088: 3084: 3079: 3073: 3072: 3071: 3063: 3062: 3061: 3060: 3057: 3055: 3048: 3046:Non-Dropframe 3039: 3035: 3030: 3026: 3021: 3019: 3015: 3011: 3007: 3003: 2999: 2995: 2991: 2984: 2982: 2977: 2975: 2959: 2955: 2952: 2948: 2943: 2937: 2936: 2935: 2927: 2926: 2925: 2924: 2920: 2916: 2908: 2904: 2899: 2893: 2892: 2891: 2883: 2882: 2881: 2880: 2876: 2872: 2868: 2859: 2855: 2850: 2844: 2843: 2842: 2834: 2833: 2832: 2831: 2827: 2823: 2819: 2811: 2805: 2801: 2797: 2792: 2791: 2790: 2789: 2786: 2781: 2775: 2774: 2773: 2765: 2764: 2763: 2762: 2758: 2754: 2749: 2746: 2742: 2741:Hi Keithbob! 2736: 2730: 2726: 2722: 2718: 2717: 2716: 2711: 2705: 2704: 2703: 2694: 2690: 2689: 2688: 2687: 2683: 2679: 2671: 2667: 2662: 2656: 2655: 2654: 2646: 2645: 2644: 2637: 2635: 2634: 2630: 2626: 2622: 2606: 2602: 2597: 2591: 2590: 2589: 2580: 2579: 2578: 2577: 2573: 2569: 2563: 2561: 2555: 2553: 2547: 2541: 2537: 2532: 2526: 2525: 2524: 2516: 2515: 2514: 2513: 2509: 2506: 2500: 2496: 2488: 2478: 2473: 2467: 2466: 2465: 2457: 2454: 2453: 2452: 2448: 2444: 2440: 2439: 2438: 2433: 2427: 2426: 2425: 2417: 2416: 2415: 2411: 2407: 2403: 2400: 2397: 2393: 2390: 2387: 2386: 2385: 2382: 2381: 2377: 2373: 2368: 2367: 2363: 2359: 2350: 2348: 2347: 2343: 2339: 2335: 2328: 2322: 2316: 2313: 2310: 2307: 2304: 2301: 2298: 2295: 2292: 2289: 2286: 2283: 2282: 2281: 2278: 2277: 2273: 2265: 2258: 2246: 2241: 2235: 2234: 2233: 2225: 2224: 2223: 2218: 2212: 2205: 2204: 2203: 2198: 2192: 2191: 2190: 2182: 2179: 2178: 2177: 2176: 2175: 2174: 2169: 2164: 2158: 2157: 2156: 2147: 2146: 2145: 2140: 2134: 2133: 2132: 2124: 2123: 2122: 2121: 2116: 2110: 2099: 2094: 2088: 2087: 2086: 2078: 2074: 2073: 2072: 2071: 2066: 2060: 2053: 2049: 2041: 2039: 2034: 2029: 2023: 2022: 2021: 2012: 2011: 2010: 2009: 2005: 2001: 1992: 1988: 1983: 1977: 1976: 1975: 1967: 1966: 1965: 1964: 1960: 1956: 1947: 1937: 1934: 1928: 1927: 1926: 1921: 1915: 1914: 1913: 1905: 1904: 1903: 1900: 1893: 1888: 1883: 1882: 1881: 1876: 1870: 1869: 1868: 1859: 1855: 1851: 1847: 1842: 1841: 1840: 1839: 1836: 1830: 1829: 1823: 1813: 1810: 1807: 1804: 1803: 1798: 1794: 1791: 1790: 1789: 1782: 1772: 1767: 1761: 1760: 1759: 1751: 1750: 1749: 1746: 1740: 1739: 1738: 1733: 1727: 1726: 1725: 1717: 1716: 1715: 1711: 1707: 1702: 1701: 1700: 1699: 1696: 1689: 1681:Closed Osgood 1680: 1672: 1667: 1661: 1660: 1659: 1651: 1650: 1649: 1644: 1638: 1631: 1630: 1629: 1624: 1618: 1617: 1616: 1608: 1607: 1606: 1605: 1600: 1594: 1582: 1578: 1573: 1567: 1566: 1565: 1557: 1554: 1553: 1552: 1551: 1548: 1541: 1532: 1530: 1529: 1525: 1521: 1513: 1509: 1504: 1498: 1497: 1496: 1488: 1487: 1486: 1485: 1481: 1475: 1473: 1463: 1461: 1460: 1457: 1456: 1451: 1443: 1439: 1432: 1425: 1417: 1415: 1414: 1409: 1403: 1402: 1401: 1392: 1382: 1378: 1374: 1369: 1366: 1362: 1356: 1352: 1344: 1342: 1341: 1338: 1336: 1330: 1322: 1320: 1319: 1315: 1311: 1306: 1303: 1301: 1292: 1289: 1284: 1281: 1280: 1279: 1276: 1270: 1268: 1267: 1263: 1259: 1255: 1247: 1241: 1237: 1233: 1229: 1224: 1223: 1222: 1218: 1214: 1210: 1209: 1208: 1207: 1202: 1196: 1195: 1194: 1171: 1167: 1163: 1159: 1155: 1150: 1149: 1148: 1144: 1140: 1135: 1134: 1133: 1132: 1131: 1130: 1121: 1117: 1113: 1109: 1105: 1100: 1099: 1098: 1097: 1094: 1090: 1086: 1082: 1079: 1075: 1072: 1067: 1064: 1060: 1057: 1054: 1053: 1052: 1051: 1050: 1046: 1042: 1037: 1031: 1025: 1024: 1021: 1016: 1010: 1009: 1008: 998: 992: 991: 990: 981: 977: 973: 970: 969: 968: 967: 966:My Responses: 959: 956: 952: 951: 950: 949: 945: 944: 938: 937: 930: 926: 921: 915: 914: 913: 905: 904: 903: 899: 896: 891: 889: 885: 881: 880: 864: 860: 856: 851: 845: 844: 843: 835: 834: 833: 832: 828: 824: 823:209.104.250.2 820: 816: 811: 803: 799: 794: 788: 787: 786: 777: 771: 767: 766: 765: 764: 760: 756: 747: 746:Daisaku Ikeda 744: 740: 735: 729: 728: 727: 719: 718: 713: 709: 705: 701: 700: 697: 694: 691: 686: 680: 676: 671: 665: 664: 663: 654: 653: 652: 651: 647: 643: 634: 632: 631: 627: 623: 614: 610: 605: 599: 598: 597: 588: 587: 586: 585: 581: 577: 573: 569: 560: 556: 551: 545: 544: 543: 535: 534: 533: 532: 528: 524: 520: 513: 509: 504: 498: 497: 496: 488: 487: 486: 485: 481: 477: 473: 465: 459: 455: 451: 447: 446: 445: 440: 434: 433: 432: 424: 423: 422: 421: 417: 413: 409: 404: 400:article. See: 399: 391: 387: 382: 376: 375: 374: 366: 365: 364: 363: 359: 355: 351: 348: 347: 344: 334: 333: 329: 325: 320: 318: 313: 307: 303: 296: 291: 290: 281: 273: 268: 262: 261: 260: 252: 251: 250: 246: 242: 238: 237: 236: 231: 225: 224: 223: 214: 213: 212: 211: 207: 203: 199: 191: 187: 182: 176: 175: 174: 166: 165: 164: 163: 159: 155: 149: 147: 138: 136: 134: 129: 127: 122: 120: 116: 111: 109: 105: 97: 95: 94: 86: 83: 80: 76: 74: 71: 69: 66: 63: 61: 58: 57: 49: 45: 41: 40: 35: 28: 27: 19: 3650: 3649: 3625: 3603: 3576: 3575: 3539: 3538: 3517: 3494: 3493: 3469: 3447: 3424: 3423: 3417:WP:Consensus 3389: 3385: 3367: 3366: 3354: 3350: 3347: 3324: 3323: 3269: 3244: 3243: 3212: 3200: 3194: 3193: 3187: 3164: 3163: 3140: 3117: 3116: 3092: 3069: 3068: 3051: 3024: 3022: 2987: 2978: 2971: 2933: 2932: 2912: 2889: 2888: 2863: 2840: 2839: 2820:Talk page. - 2815: 2771: 2770: 2750: 2747: 2745:new editor. 2743: 2740: 2737:youngStartup 2701: 2700: 2675: 2652: 2651: 2641: 2610: 2587: 2586: 2564: 2558: 2556: 2550: 2548: 2545: 2522: 2521: 2492: 2463: 2462: 2423: 2422: 2395: 2383: 2369: 2354: 2330: 2320: 2314: 2308: 2302: 2296: 2290: 2284: 2279: 2275: 2269: 2231: 2230: 2188: 2187: 2154: 2153: 2130: 2129: 2102: 2084: 2083: 2045: 2037: 2019: 2018: 1996: 1973: 1972: 1951: 1911: 1910: 1866: 1865: 1854:WP:BOOMERANG 1827: 1818: 1786: 1757: 1756: 1723: 1722: 1684: 1657: 1656: 1614: 1613: 1586: 1563: 1562: 1536: 1517: 1494: 1493: 1471: 1467: 1448: 1447: 1399: 1398: 1390: 1370: 1348: 1326: 1307: 1304: 1297: 1277: 1274: 1251: 1192: 1191: 1185: 1062: 1035: 1006: 1005: 988: 987: 965: 964: 947: 946: 911: 910: 900: 892: 877: 875: 865:for deletion 841: 840: 807: 784: 783: 751: 725: 724: 695: 661: 660: 638: 618: 595: 594: 564: 541: 540: 521:. Thanks. -- 517: 494: 493: 469: 430: 429: 398:Lori Greiner 395: 372: 371: 354:Gerda Arendt 339: 337: 324:Gerda Arendt 321: 299: 288: 287: 258: 257: 221: 220: 195: 172: 171: 150: 142: 130: 125: 123: 118: 112: 101: 92: 91: 78: 43: 37: 3606:Parry Aftab 3146:Roberthall7 2822:Roberthall7 2621:Sarna wrote 2456:User:Golbez 2326:Sign up now 1955:Philafrenzy 1822:Someguy1221 1305:Thank you, 1232:John Carter 1162:John Carter 1112:John Carter 1104:User:Drmies 1041:John Carter 879:Helmut Diez 863:Helmut Diez 819:Diane Black 804:Diane Black 755:John Carter 622:Mormography 154:John Carter 36:This is an 3630:. Thanks, 3559:Tryptofish 3521:Tryptofish 3474:. Thanks, 3290:topic bans 2048:a bad time 1828:Verifiable 1556:User:Atsme 1440:. You can 1375:. Thanks, 983:process.-- 523:Tryptofish 241:Ignocrates 202:Ignocrates 113:We have a 3614:Read the 3610:Fair Play 3514:Objection 3458:Read the 3392:PhaseTime 3286:site bans 3002:reference 2909:Mediation 2796:CaMoBap24 2753:CaMoBap24 2751:Be well! 2210:Kharkiv07 2108:Kharkiv07 2058:Kharkiv07 1892:WP:AVDUCK 1636:Kharkiv07 1592:Kharkiv07 1533:Mentoring 1359:Read the 1334:Montanabw 1258:NinaSpezz 1213:DaveApter 1139:DaveApter 1085:DaveApter 975:accepted. 476:NinaSpezz 450:Wikiklrsc 412:Wikiklrsc 85:Archive 8 79:Archive 7 73:Archive 6 68:Archive 5 60:Archive 1 3651:Keithbob 3577:Keithbob 3540:Keithbob 3495:Keithbob 3489:Fixed.-- 3425:Keithbob 3368:Keithbob 3325:Keithbob 3245:Keithbob 3216:contribs 3165:Keithbob 3118:Keithbob 3070:Keithbob 2934:Keithbob 2890:Keithbob 2841:Keithbob 2772:Keithbob 2721:valereee 2702:Keithbob 2678:valereee 2653:Keithbob 2625:YoPienso 2588:Keithbob 2523:Keithbob 2464:Keithbob 2424:Keithbob 2396:COMMENTS 2270:We hope 2232:Keithbob 2189:Keithbob 2155:Keithbob 2131:Keithbob 2085:Keithbob 2020:Keithbob 1974:Keithbob 1912:Keithbob 1867:Keithbob 1758:Keithbob 1724:Keithbob 1658:Keithbob 1615:Keithbob 1564:Keithbob 1495:Keithbob 1418:Talkback 1400:Keithbob 1193:Keithbob 1056:Keithbob 1007:Keithbob 989:Keithbob 912:Keithbob 842:Keithbob 785:Keithbob 726:Keithbob 662:Keithbob 596:Keithbob 542:Keithbob 495:Keithbob 431:Keithbob 373:Keithbob 259:Keithbob 222:Keithbob 192:archives 173:Keithbob 3645:done.-- 3632:DPL bot 3476:DPL bot 3099:Bahooka 3010:notable 2871:HazelAB 2499:Andreas 2014:luck.-- 1454:Faraone 1377:DPL bot 1355:Android 1310:HazelAB 1063:all six 1030:Astynax 888:deleted 704:Banedon 342:Pumpkin 39:archive 3276:. The 3195:please 3018:verify 2693:WP:RfC 2443:Golbez 2406:Golbez 2336:using 1887:WP:OWN 1850:WP:ANI 1826:Under 1323:Thanks 1158:WP:AGF 1154:WP:COI 980:WP:COI 770:WP:RfC 572:WP:DRN 568:WP:ANI 126:please 119:please 3016:that 2489:Links 1932:Atsme 1898:Atsme 1858:WP:AE 1846:WP:AE 1834:Atsme 1744:Atsme 1694:Atsme 1546:Atsme 954:time. 620:page. 350:Prize 16:< 3658:Talk 3636:talk 3584:Talk 3563:talk 3547:Talk 3525:talk 3502:Talk 3480:talk 3432:Talk 3413:here 3396:talk 3375:Talk 3360:Here 3332:Talk 3310:talk 3252:Talk 3230:talk 3224:via 3210:talk 3172:Talk 3150:talk 3125:Talk 3103:talk 3077:Talk 3053:talk 3040:. 3038:here 2998:help 2941:Talk 2919:talk 2897:Talk 2875:talk 2867:here 2848:Talk 2826:talk 2800:talk 2779:Talk 2757:talk 2725:talk 2709:Talk 2682:talk 2660:Talk 2629:talk 2595:Talk 2572:talk 2530:Talk 2471:Talk 2447:talk 2431:Talk 2410:talk 2376:talk 2362:talk 2342:talk 2239:Talk 2196:Talk 2162:Talk 2138:Talk 2092:Talk 2027:Talk 2004:talk 1981:Talk 1959:talk 1919:Talk 1874:Talk 1765:Talk 1731:Talk 1710:talk 1665:Talk 1622:Talk 1571:Talk 1524:talk 1502:Talk 1479:TALK 1464:Mail 1407:Talk 1391:Done 1381:talk 1314:talk 1262:talk 1236:talk 1217:talk 1200:Talk 1166:talk 1143:talk 1116:talk 1089:talk 1045:talk 1036:said 1014:Talk 996:Talk 919:Talk 849:Talk 827:talk 792:Talk 759:talk 733:Talk 708:talk 669:Talk 646:talk 626:talk 603:Talk 580:talk 549:Talk 527:talk 502:Talk 480:talk 454:talk 438:Talk 416:talk 380:Talk 358:talk 352:, -- 328:talk 266:Talk 245:talk 229:Talk 206:talk 180:Talk 158:talk 3616:FAQ 3460:FAQ 3454:TSR 3419:.-- 3270:Hi, 3137:COI 3027:by 3000:or 2812:FYI 2508:466 2075:Hi 2042:DRN 1361:FAQ 346:Sky 3661:• 3655:• 3647:— 3638:) 3587:• 3581:• 3573:— 3565:) 3550:• 3544:• 3536:— 3527:) 3519:-- 3505:• 3499:• 3491:— 3482:) 3435:• 3429:• 3421:— 3398:) 3378:• 3372:• 3364:— 3335:• 3329:• 3321:— 3312:) 3288:, 3255:• 3249:• 3241:— 3232:) 3201:do 3175:• 3169:• 3161:— 3152:) 3128:• 3122:• 3114:— 3105:) 3080:• 3074:• 3066:— 3042:-- 2944:• 2938:• 2930:— 2921:) 2900:• 2894:• 2886:— 2877:) 2851:• 2845:• 2837:— 2828:) 2802:) 2782:• 2776:• 2768:— 2759:) 2727:) 2712:• 2706:• 2698:— 2696:-- 2684:) 2663:• 2657:• 2649:— 2631:) 2598:• 2592:• 2584:— 2574:) 2533:• 2527:• 2519:— 2504:JN 2474:• 2468:• 2460:— 2449:) 2434:• 2428:• 2420:— 2412:) 2378:) 2364:) 2344:) 2242:• 2236:• 2228:— 2199:• 2193:• 2185:— 2165:• 2159:• 2151:— 2141:• 2135:• 2127:— 2095:• 2089:• 2081:— 2030:• 2024:• 2016:— 2006:) 1984:• 1978:• 1970:— 1961:) 1922:• 1916:• 1908:— 1877:• 1871:• 1863:— 1768:• 1762:• 1754:— 1734:• 1728:• 1720:— 1712:) 1691:-- 1668:• 1662:• 1654:— 1625:• 1619:• 1611:— 1574:• 1568:• 1560:— 1543:-- 1526:) 1505:• 1499:• 1491:— 1482:) 1410:• 1404:• 1396:— 1394:-- 1316:) 1264:) 1238:) 1219:) 1203:• 1197:• 1189:— 1168:) 1145:) 1118:) 1091:) 1083:. 1047:) 1017:• 1011:• 1003:— 999:• 993:• 985:— 922:• 916:• 908:— 890:. 852:• 846:• 838:— 829:) 795:• 789:• 781:— 779:-- 761:) 736:• 730:• 722:— 710:) 672:• 666:• 658:— 656:-- 648:) 628:) 606:• 600:• 592:— 590:-- 582:) 552:• 546:• 538:— 529:) 505:• 499:• 491:— 482:) 456:) 441:• 435:• 427:— 418:) 383:• 377:• 369:— 360:) 330:) 322:-- 319:! 269:• 263:• 255:— 247:) 232:• 226:• 218:— 208:) 183:• 177:• 169:— 160:) 110:. 64:← 3634:( 3622:. 3561:( 3523:( 3478:( 3466:. 3394:( 3308:( 3228:( 3213:· 3208:( 3148:( 3144:- 3101:( 2976:. 2917:( 2873:( 2824:( 2798:( 2755:( 2723:( 2680:( 2627:( 2570:( 2445:( 2408:( 2374:( 2360:( 2340:( 2219:) 2216:T 2213:( 2117:) 2114:T 2111:( 2067:) 2064:T 2061:( 2002:( 1957:( 1708:( 1645:) 1642:T 1639:( 1601:) 1598:T 1595:( 1522:( 1476:( 1450:L 1433:. 1379:( 1367:. 1312:( 1290:. 1260:( 1234:( 1215:( 1164:( 1141:( 1114:( 1087:( 1073:. 1043:( 1032:: 1028:@ 825:( 757:( 706:( 644:( 624:( 578:( 525:( 478:( 452:( 414:( 356:( 326:( 243:( 204:( 156:( 50:.

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

Index