User talk:Lar/Archive 49

5237:

against the sense of the vote at WP:VPP, for instance, Balloonman's "If we trust them to work in protected areas, we trust them to work in protected areas." The problem is that that option seems to have thoroughly blown up at this point ... people have agreed that, in general, we don't want non-admins to fiddle with protected pages, too much harm could be done. What I was voting against was the idea that when someone wants to edit the spam blacklist, we'd have a community vote and then get a dev or steward to grant the right, then another vote when we think they're ready to edit some other protected pages, then another vote when they're ready to use some admin userrights, etc. But I'd be perfectly happy with allowing people to make one such "lightweight" request, that might include editing specific protected pages and would come with a standard (smallish) package of userrights, provided we could get some assistance from devs or stewards to make it work. In fact, picking those userrights where there's currently a backlog of chores would be a good way to help the admins out, and seeing how they do with the userrights would be an excellent way to figure out later on whether they're ready for RfA. - Dan

3634:

Dynablaster has abandoned any pretense of being constructive. The current text has gotten no comment from him, and he just keeps insisting the tag goes there. He seems to think he need not engage with what is going on, just object every now and again and it's quell. I don't pretend not to be a fiery editor, but it's plain as day where the bulk of the guilt here lies. They have committed 3R repeatedly in the last few days, combined with a refusal to address either the new text or go to the talk page. No admin has yet addressed these recent developments, and I feel confident I have not committed 3R over a 24 hour period in that timeframe. I also feel Dynablaster is not being constructive. In the event you decide to block both of us I would like Dynablasters tag removed, because otherwise you'll be sending the message that so long as they "get in last" then committing 3R repeatedly was "worth it", which in all honesty seems to be how Dynablaster is thinking since there has been no engagement whatsoever on the talk page in this time, and nothing whatsoever said on the current text.

3520:" as an endorsement of only parts of text is bizarre. When DGG said "leave this alone now" that counts to you too. Instead, you were the one who came in and added the tag after hiding for a few weeks (without adding any explanation on the talk page first to explain why a tag was necessary, indicating that if I hadn't undone it and challenged you that you weren't going to). You seem to have plenty of time to ramble here, but you still haven't explained on the talk page what the problems are with the new version. Again, none of this is relevant to you committing 3R, and I hope you're blocked for a while to think things over. 5115:

for BLPs so if they're at all iffy, away they go) as a place that any one of several intermediate steps are OK to start with... so if we do sighted BLP, great... not my first choice but acceptable step, so it's a second. If we do sighted everything, great, not my first choice but acceptable step, so it's a second, if we do semi BLP, great, not myu first choice, but acceptable step, so it's a second. I'll take what I can get, those are all better than what we have now. It's an acyclic directed graph. :) The only choices I oppose are the do nothing choices. Those are non starters. End of discussion. :) ++

3283:

been asked for months to propose alternative texts. He's now re-added the tag saying there is a POV dispute. He seems to think that as long as he says "I dispute it" every few weeks, then he doesn't have to do anything meaningful, like explain how he would like it written, or engage on the issues on the talk page, etc. Can you please tell him to put up or shut up (preferably the latter at this stage), and stop engaging in edit warring by reverting the tag. I mean, he was given a chance to engage with the new text, and didn't. Nor has he engaged with the talk page. It's just gotten ridiculous.

3483:) makes clear that he was responding to the third and final dispute. Indeed this "...I don't see the significance myself -- in a controversy between A & B, they each generally says that each others' answers are inadequate, & that the other side wont debate on fair terms..." is a clear reference to the first of the three disputes, when you were asked (and failed) to provide direct quotes from both Hitchens and Kopel saying that Moore had declined to debate them. Furthermore, you omit the most important part of DGG's response, "Leave this alone now, 1646:

have issues", "no one is indispensable.") And as for your hints about "administrative action"...do we block for argumentativeness now? Is there something at the bottom of this that I'm missing? Your portentuous tone rather suggests that such is the case. Perhaps you'd lay it out for me, if there is. I'm sure Peter wouldn't mind. I know him as an editor of strong integrity, and it pains me to see you assuming bad faith on his part. Regards,

2416: 1114: 5139:

you. Is there any possible way to make that work? How about if we require admins to keep an eye on how the tool is used by people they hand it out to, and train them or take the tool away if it's being misused, and we get medieval on them if they don't? This might help to set up exactly the kind of coaching relationships that eventually lead to successful RfAs. (I'll be watchlisting for a few days.) - Dan

5545: 4050: 2513: 3090:. We have two sources (Christopher Hitchens and Dave Kopel) who allege that Moore backtracked on a stated position simply in order to attack George Bush, and two other sources (Stephen Himes and Christopher Parry) who contend that Moore's has been misconstrued. Instead of writing the section in a neutral way, allowing readers to follow both sources to make up their own mind, I contend that user 6363:

from not being indexed, it is vastly outweighed by all the items that clearly should NOT be indexed, and further, there are ways to work around this particular item suffering not being indexed, while there are not, by and large, easy ways to work around the rest of the stuff (that should not be indexed) being indexed. The needs of the many sometimes need to outweigh the needs of the few. ++

6336:, where even partial work is welcomed... you should move it there, where it will be taken on board with open arms and you will be able to work on it as you have time and interest... (or others may well work on it). So I don't see it as a counter example or refutation... nothing in this world is perfect and even the best thing sometimes has less than optimal side effects. ++ 1641:

that conversation. It contains a lot of accusations of an "If you won't admit you have issues, you obviously have issues" nature from you (not an actual quote). (See me too "confusing" rhetorical questions with accusations there..? Except that I think the rhetorical confusion was yours.) You mention your own motives—I would never presume to offer an opinion of those — and

5353: 5839: 4258: 2815: 5778:"You will be unable to edit till the matter is resolved" == "you'll be blocked and you won't be unblocked until you agree not to again do the thing that you got blocked over". Has nothing to do with Jossi's status per se. Sorry for any confusion. I could clarify but I'm not sure it's worth the bother. Your message seemed cogent to me. ++ 5802: 6081:

warring nor 3RR warnings are a way around consensus and compromise. You're just seeking this block as a way of putting a rubber stamp on Ferry's deletion of material that is not only notable and relevant, but was added by consensus among editors who disagreed on many subjects but were able to compromise on a brief NPOV wording.

1544:

rhetorical questions with accusations, and questions about motive with aspersions. Not my problem though, Knowledge is not a self help program, and I am not your guidance counselor. However, refusal to admit you have an issue is no defense against administrative action if it turns out to be required... so watch out for that. ++

3095:

actively coming down in favour of one side of it. The dispute has gone on for so long I fear it may be putting people off getting involved. There is a lot of reading to do, but I just want you to take a brief look at the last few exchanges. I will be most grateful if you could spare 15 minutes of your time.

6596:

I'm 51. What would be a better way to get across the idea that even if you're the perfect candidate, the position that some take is not unreasonable that what you say during the RfA counts, since that could be an indicator of how interested you are in the position, or how you deal with stress? - Dan

5154:

I'd have to think about this. Really I think editing protected is a far more powerful permission than rollback so I'm really keen on it not being handed out lightly. (not as onerous as our RfA but SOME process...). In my view (mostly from the outside) I think handing out rollback (and taking it away)

5114:

No, they're tied for second. LMK if I need to clarify this there. I see where we want to get to (sighted for EVERYTHING, including BLP, and BLPs all semiprotected, with marginal notable opt out, dead tree required to not be marginally notable, and default to delete all applying to removal discussions

3355:

That's 3R. User DGG asked me to leave a tag on earlier. That was before more edits and discussion, the new version should be fine, and you've never explained why it isn't. Of course, DGG also told you that my previous version was fine, so you seem to selectively invoke DGG. Quite how this changes

3333:

One more revert and you've committed 3R. How you can claim I have is bizarre. You've been given days to give input to the new text, and you've been on wiki since then. You've also had months to propose alternative texts. a "cooling off period" is just you stalling again. I assume you're going to

2287:

I've reviewed this and I see no clear reason to run a CU and reveal any results. Absent some new reasoning I'd consider this matter closed. If I may offer some advice, though, I'd suggest everyone take things to the talk page a bit more, there was a fair bit of back and forth that some might even say

1987:

Regardless, what do we do? There is some cross Wiki issues right now with Rootology and Moulton, and there is a move for a ban of his talk page on Wikiversity. Is that a good idea? I don't mind it there, as long as he plays with it instead of trashing the rest of the place. If we ip block him but let

1645:

shouldn't presume to offer an opinion of Peter's� motives—especially not an obscure, sideways opinion that is all insinuation and condescension. (For instance, "your apparent inability to parse for meaning," "stop treating everything as not being about you" (? what happened there?), "internalise you

54:

I recognize that this user page belongs to the Knowledge project and not to me personally. As such, I recognize that I am expected to respectfully abide by community standards as to the presentation and content of this page, and that if I do not like these guidelines, I am welcome either to engage in

6446:

are disabled in the article space. All articles are indexed with google and cannot be turned off with any template. While there may be a valid reason to have your page indexed, the large number of pages that should not be indexed generally outweighs the benefit of making it "Opt-In for NoIndex" as

6331:

Baby. This is an exception to the general rule that nothing but articlespace should be indexed, because, at least in a way, it's not really user material, it's work in progress, or background source, or something. But really, this text, since it's a transcription of a PD source (writings of the ICC,

5210:

I'm not necessarily looking for a new "admin-lite" role, with a different package of abilities than the current admin. In fact I probably would not be keen on it. But I am in favour of unbundling, as Rollback was. However to get me to support unbundling, I want to see more process, more review, than

5195:

Oops, just realized that's easy to misread. I just meant that I haven't heard the suggestion that we treat rollback more formally during this round of discussions, but I support that. Btw, it also looks like Flagged Revisions for BLP articles is getting enough support to pass, so maybe the ability

3420:

You are either confused or being deceptive. DGG said that the version I wrote was fine. It has been settled for weeks before you came out of nowhere from licking your wounds and started another edit war. You've never responded to the current version, and more to the point none of this changes the

3282:

Look, I'm sick of the guy too, but he's impossible. To begin with, he was never in the majority anyway. DGG came on and said the text said what the sources said. I've humoured him, even rewritten the text that had been agreed on by the majority so it was more in comprtment with the sources. He's

3261:

I think you guys are talking past each other. I don't see how I can help you, really, as I have too much on my plate already to try to mediate this at the detailed handholding level I think would be needed. I think some other form of dispute resolution may be needed. I'd suggest you work together to

1876:

That proposal has been soundly rejected, I'm not sure why you're trying to revive discussion on it. I don't really see the need for further discussion. Seems rather besides the point. As for the image, I'm not at all offended by it. I've seen far more explicit images than that executed in LEGO. (no,

1737:

Seriously, BMW. For a while there I actually thought the backlash against my complaints against Montana were relevant, but with this aggressive outburst I get the feeling that it might be relevant to bring the issue up again to be solved properly. I mean, it's not like the sandbox discussion lead to

1661:

The "Peter's stuff" thread did not get archived. I usually archive on month boundaries, and do it about a half month or so in (it varies). So I've moved your comment up here with the rest of it. Sorry for any confusion. I think you may be missing out on some of the back story here, though. Take some

1640:

Hi, Lar. You seem to have archived while I was writing a comment on the section "Peter's stuff". Sorry to revive a discussion you felt finished with, but I really do want to comment on it (and the last post in it was actually just a few hours old), so here goes. I'm having trouble with the whole of

6362:

Can you give an example, specific to this transcript, of where the what links here function is needed? Also I'm not clear what the issue with incompleteness is. Much of what is on WS is incomplete. But in any case, while I might agree that this particular item, in user space, will marginally suffer

6080:

I figured that, instead of seeking compromise, you would just edit war and simultaneously also seek to have me blocked for edit warring. And not on a noticeboard, either -- once again you appear to have handpicked an admin. As I've noted before, tag-teaming is not a way around 3RR, and neither edit

5311:

I Am Related To AndrewWeaver1-5, HE ISNT A SOCKPUPPET, I Recommend You Unblock Him Immedatly, YoMamma6188 And AndrewWeaver6188 Is His Best Friend Jacob, Im Not Going To Read User:Lar/Pooh_Policy Because I Know He Isnt A SockPuppet At All, Maybe His Userpage Is Similar To YoMamma6188 But That Doesnt

3858:

and enlist the help of a neutral mediator who can work specifically on this issue. Lar is great at solving problems, but at the end of the day, his talk page isn't set up as a workshop to analyze and resolve the fine point issues of an article. I'll note that generally, the failure of two parties

3715:

You have not posted one single word about the current version of the text in the talk page, or in anyone elses talk page. Saying in each edit where you add a tag something to the effect of "I dispute it" is not enough to justify a tag. You've also been forced to back down on almost every position

3002:

I see that there used to be a sockpuppet tag on the page, so I'm not sure of protocol here. You seem to have been involved in discussions with this user, so it's your call... For now, I've restored the page to your last version. Since she's requested deletion, should the page be deleted, blanked,

1485:

Where was that? Look, seriously, you have to stop treating everything as not being about you... either you will internalise you have issues (as do we all, no one is perfect) that need work, or eventually you will fail. You seem like you have contributions worth making, knowledge worth sharing. But

1349:

Lar, I feel unfairly treated when I see that Montana's personal comments about me is excused by lack of patience, stress or whatever, while my complaints about it are portrayed as personal attacks. If I had gotten just as personal in the article discussions, we'd probably be in the midst of a nasty

5236:

some lightweight standard package (including rollback and one or two other admin userrights that wouldn't "break the wiki"...MBisanz has a long list on his talk page) plus the ability to edit (in seth's case) just the spam-blacklist-associated protected files. This may sound at first like it goes

4603:

It doesn't seem notable to me, either ;) I expect it's a real company and that this editor has some COI, which counts as a spammer to me; a single purpose one; there's probably not enough marketing budget to contract the job out. User repeatedly removed clean-up tags (I didn't leave the originals,

3989:

Interesting problem. I'm very sympathetic. Is Mervyn willing to have a CU run, do you think? If the results showed another account, would my (or my, plus another CU) word be sufficient, without needing to reveal the other account? Because I want to be very sensitive to privacy considerations here.

3633:

I'm not asking you to go back through history and decide if anyone ever committed 3R ever. Other admins have looked at that and made a decision not to do anything, and to push for constructive engagement, so it would be retroactive justice to intervene there. It's now at a very different point.

3576:

I'm sorry but you're obviously wrong. You are also going to be blocked soon. Lastly, you have bad faith too. DGG posted the current text was fine. You vanished for 2 weeks, came back and without any explanation on the talk page you re-added the tags (and deleted some content too if I recall).

2370:

want me to get involved in the page itself, trust me, Because when I go to the page history, I see enough reverts that I'd be comfortable blocking both of you for edit warring. Let's just not go there. As for whether there needs to be a tag or not? How does that really matter? What matters is that

1846:

me neither really - just stumbled across it and it raised my eyebrow a bit - plus it fits in the context, of course! - the matter I'm asking advice over is how to frame a discussion about explicit imagery on Knowledge - and of course your opinion on it - I've proposed restricting sexual content to

1771:

Unfortunately I must be very clear that this in no way condones some of your mischievous and disruptive posts concerning my judgment and responsibility, nor will this have any bearing on the one hundred and forty dollars you'll be sending my way as contribution to the PM Christmas Fund, however in

1300:

Thanks, Lar. Seeing as how it's a sandbox off my talk page, would it be possible to delete the whole thing? I could blank the page, but I'd prefer the whole thing just be removed, unless there is some logical reason to keep it. But I think I need an admin to do that. Of course, maybe there IS a

5138:

Hiya Larry. Regarding "can't just be handed out by admins", I prefer that idea myself ... I think RfAs might go smoother if people were allowed to make mistakes and get their feet wet in an "RfA lite". But most people are thinking of something admins would hand out, so let me run a few ideas by

4025:

Well, that's not quite as explicit as I'd like, but it's in that direction all right. You may have misssed this, but I just replied right below it, pointing here for context but inviting a reply there saying yes or no. Mailing me the other id would be helpful, but it's not required I don't think.

3454:

In reply you ignored him and said basically "I don't agree" right underneath his post, and proceeded to more or less ignore what he said, then try to claim he was only supporting part of what I wrote. I don't understand how this can be read into the text since the chronology was a long series of

1561:

You're claiming good intentions while allowing yourself the indescretion of "rhetorically" asking me if I'm out to screw up articles. That's basically a "have you always been this incompetent?"-type of question. You don't do that to experienced editors unless outright vandalism and POV pushing is

5645:

Right, and I am willing to give options sans an outright community ban, but it needs to take the admittance of ill and wrong doing on SA's part to make aware that his behaviors are unacceptable. We shall see whenever ArbCom does accept -- which is now likely, in 2009. Have a good holiday season,

4996:

signing under "Implement Flagged Revisions for all BLPs". Several users have signed multiple statements they generally agree with (Notably, Rootology, David Gerard and Davewild all signed both "Implement Flagged Revisions for all BLPs" and "Implement Flagged Revisions for all articles / content

3154:

You've been asked dozens of times to submit alternative texts. It's disingenuous to come here pleading clean hands. You have written literally pages of text. It would have been little trouble for you to offer some constructive alternatives. The fact that you haven't speaks of how you've been

5176:

an interesting idea, I haven't heard that; perhaps if there were an "RfA lite", we could toss rollback into that. That would mean we're really talking about userrights that are relatively lightweight ... I'll float this idea around. Do you know anyone who shares your view that rollback is too

2588:

Have you bookmarked (redacted) yet? It's sort of like Wikipeda's refdesk, except it doesn't suck. This may look like spam, but really isn't. It's more of a public service announcement. For some reason, Knowledge has blocked (redacted) hostname from here! Can you believe it? That site deserves a

5600:

As a note at the ScienceApologist RFAR, I made a mention in a follow-up post that I am open to other suggestions, which include topic bans, civility monitoring, and so forth -- strategies that has worked elsewhere and is being used by ArbCom in much more frequency. As there does not seem to be

2351:

dude, you've had dirty hands on this for months. I've already asked DGG to intervene, but if Lar is happy to be an arbiter then stop adding unjustified tags, go to the talk page, and propose to Lar a rewrite for us to discuss and Lar to arbiter. Just stop with the switch and bair tactics and

4560:

Well I wouldn't automatically assume this is a spammer. Self promoter perhaps, but the company seems legit. Probably too small to be notable (Google turns up rather less results than you'd expect for a notable company) but I would say this user should be told about our norms and guided to our

3094:

has made his own determination as to which point of view is correct, and has proceed to edit the article based on the premise that Moore indeed flip-flopped, and has failed to provide an answer as to why he did so. Instead of describing the controversy, his edits have the unintended effect of

6447:

opposed to "Opt-Out for NoIndex". Put differently, there are hundreds and hundreds of user pages that list a person is banned, etc, but probably only a couple dozen like yours that have a reason to be in google. So it is far easier to set the system to "NOINDEX" and let people like you add

4604:

but did restore them). There are some anons in the histories, too, and I expect they're the same person. I did leave the user a note and then saw that this had move on to es:wp, and took the advert tag up on the idea of db-spam. I'm not so soft hearted ;) fyi, I noticed your chat w/Eusebeus

3511:

I want to sugar coat it and not call you a liar, but I don't see how. I said I was going to edit all of the disputed text so there was no issue with sourcing. I did that, including the section currently disputed on Osama, and DGG said "that's fine" per the above comments. Maybe on planet

1543:

OK. You're welcome to take my advice or not, as you like. I've plenty else to worry about so good luck to you. But one final thought, I'm not the only person telling you that you have issues you need to work on. Part of your issue is your apparent inability to parse for meaning, you confuse

1333:

OK, but IMHO, but I fear the person who started all this will NEVER agree it is over but will simply continue using it as a forum for additional abuse and all manner of unjustified personal attacks on me and anyone else who offers to defend me. I frankly consider the direction this went to

1258:. I believe at this point the issue is over as I have no interest in providing a forum for a single individual to harass me and make personal attacks. I think it's time to shut this "mediation" down now. If I am at fault here, I welcome constructive comments. But I am tired of therest. 3516:", in which I listed all the claims (including the Afghanistan one), and said "in the spirit of what DGG has proposed" I would address all the issues, and propose new texts for all fo them. How you read the following section section with DGGs post (which he wrote the title for), entitled " 1123:

Let the amber nectar flow all day and night. Let it run down the mountains and through the caverns and across the rich lawns to swamp the streets. Let it rain beer. Let the heavens open and shine forth beer. Let it all be beer. Wonderful beer. And let it be as deep as the heart of a lion.

4675:

Ya, I see, and it didn't take long. I'm thinking you meant locking the page against recreation if they persist at pasting it back. My sense of it is that the user's not experienced enough to have a local copy of the wiki-text. I'll go de-iwlink the fr and es pages. I'll leave the en page

1847:

article space, though the conversation hasn't really moved things on that far, and the current view is clearly against such a measure. I believe a full discussion about sexual content is overdue, and wondered what you thought, and how you might recommend enabling it? thasall... best,

1372:

Look at the sandbox a bit closer, Montana. You consistently ignore the diffs I provide to justify my own behavior and fail to present any to back up your own complaints. Now you're acting as if everyone is against you despite getting support from your friends while I'm being yelled

6611:

Good question! Because that underlying idea is one that I myself hold... we can't predict the future accurately, but I believe that RfA behaviour, imperfect predictor that it is, does give us some foresight. And yes, you have me beat, agewise. Barely :)... I'll be 50 this year.

3609:

Are you sure you want me to look into exactly who has how many reverts in this matter? Remember that 3RR is a bright line, not an entitlement... Really, I think you guys need to try mediation, or an article RfC or something like that because this just isn't going anywhere good.

5419:

are. "I'm not sure you're contributing much to substantive discussion here." No, I am done there after seeing "Beback"'s posited reword, which smacks of irredeemably bad faith, and life's too short (a failure of the wiki system is that it favours those for whom life isn't). I

5312:

Mean Anything At All, Nobody Told Them That Their Userpage Had To Be Different, AndrewWeaver Did Nothing At All That Was Wrong. Like I Said Before I Recommend You Unblock Him And The Rest Of AndrewWeaver1-5's Account Immedatly, Or I Will Take Matters Into My Own Hands Thanks,

5627:

Which is good, I've enough gray hair already... read the SA CU cases to get some sense of the frustration level :) Further, for long term contributors I'd rather seem the issues sorted than the contributor gone. That's a general rule but it applies to SA as well as others.

2874:. At the time, I was looking for a wooden block for children, the A, B, C sort, and didn't find one. I agree that this is a lousy image; replace away. Your talk page was easy to find; not too many letters! Neat edit notice; I'll be back to look behind the curtain. Cheers, 3936:

in his short time here. He's been harassed, outed, was told he could vote, and then yelled at when he did vote, and now he's in this limbo where his frustration is continuing to climb, especially as now he's even being threatened with blocks for even trying to vote (see

5012:

Good point. I've actually been doing just that while you were typing this :) I put in all my "intermediate step" choices in. I don't care how we get there, but we need to get to S/F for all BLP, and F for all articlespace things (or included in articlespace) eventually.

2428:. Further, it's not a way to prove innocence and we don't normally run it on person A at the request of person A. All that said, and without setting a precedent, a CU has been performed. Although there are technical limitations not usually present, in my view the users 2164:

Dynaguy has been trying every trick in the book to dodge consensus, and 3R criticism from the Farenheight 9-11 article. I just find it very suss that all of a sudden a defunct account does his edit for him. I guess check the IPs and so on, and generally keep an eye on

2039:

as a non-Wikipedian using an IP address is inserting his own speculation without a bonafide journalistic citation to back up the edit, about the possibility of former candidate Larry Kilgore running again in 2010. Can you check it out and take action if necessary?

3444:. I don't see the significance myself-- in a controversy between A & B, they each generally says that each others' answers are inadequate, & that the other side wont debate on fair terms & it's just surrounding rhetoric to the real questions at issue, 3922:, and the consensus was that he should be allowed to vote, but his votes would be indented so they wouldn't count. However, when he's trying to vote under the system, he's still getting people yelling at him, and even threatening to block him. The thing is, he 3817:

I'm seeing a lot of "You broke Policy X" and "Policy Y means I am right" in this conversation. That isn't how the editing process works. I think both sides need to take a break from this article and read some of the following essays that I have found useful

3558:) If DGG were entirely happy with your editing, why would he tell you to stop removing the tag? And finaly, I never went into "hinding"; I was just too busy to respond to your endless errors and POV pushing. I will not be responding further on this talk page. 3795:

9) You have since then insisted on re-adding the tag, but refuse to make any comment why, and the best you can come up with is a scant reference in your latest remark on Lars talk page that the new text is "worse". Still no alternative text from you, months

1763:

I have taken the difficult decision, having seen your sensible offer to re-introduce some balance into this year's arb elections, and with the good of the community, and the reputation of the election process in mind, to, with some reservations, allow you to

3678:

I'm not supporting an RfC unless the tag is removed since you've made no comment whatsoever to justify tagging the current text. You can't just claim it's NPOV and get an RfC without any substantive objection. You're just trying to weasel out of your 3R

3931:

show him as meeting the standard. Mervyn would very much like to vote, and is very confused by the mixed messages he's been getting. I think he's an editor that we should nurture, since he's a PhD, a political science professor, and has been repeatedly

3577:

Also, the fact DGG asked at some earlier point to just leave the tags there doesn't mean that they stay until he takes it back. After that edits were made to make the text clearer. You have not ever responded to these subsequent edits on the talk page.

1662:

time and review the prior interactions between Peter and Montanabw, including the sandbox linked at the top of this thread (and what went before), and take on board the comments that others made to Peter and I think a lot of it will clear up for you. ++

5034:

is that a smaller run could assuage those fears. I'm very slightly nervous that co-opting it from a "How to deal with BLPs?" discussion to a "Flagged Revs?" poll with stoke those fears, but it's probably too late now. Ah well, here's to hoping.

3455:

disputes, me rewriting all of it and saying "how bout this", and DGG saying what he said above (indeed, I later worked on the reference to "critics" and replaced it with the names of the critics. Anything else you have imagined. Enjoy your ban.

5327:

Um, why should I unblock ALL of the AndrewWeaver accounts? Wouldn't just one be enough, don't you think? I'll let that one be answered at your leisure. Or his, or whoever. I'm so confused. Oh, I edited your user page for you. Hope that helps.

3421:

fact you just committed 3R and should be blocked for a week (you have a long history of this). Btw, I know you dispute DGG agreed with all my edits, but that's clearly what was written and DGGs text never gives any reason to suppose otherwise.

3136:

I commented. You may not like it, because I think you both could stand to improve. In particular, characterising someone as the "worst editor I have ever come across, since 2003" may not be the best way to find common ground and move forward.

4536:

doesn't exist on fr and es and doesn't have interwiki links to a local template of some other name. I think iwlinks on such things would be great for helping sort such issues cross-wiki even when one doesn't speak the other language. Cheers,

3821: 4744:

I'm tempted to remove the note on the userpage, but am looking for a consensus about it. I'm unconcerned about the editor; doesn't edit much these days, and it seems to have been his own decision. My recollection is that I speedy-tagged the

2593:

This is spam. It was left at several places and I see no reason to follow up on it, or to go to this site, or to contest the blacklisting of the site. However (and with sincere thanks to Redvers for his revert) I've restored it under my

4641:

Well it's gone from here now, and you've done what you can with the user. If they persist in the face of deletion we can lock the account but you have to be pretty persistent before that's done. For now just monitor, I guess. Cheers.

2681:

of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank

1861:

and I also offer my apologies if the image offended you - I understand it's rather base, and although it was intended as a bit of fun, may have been inappropriate... ironic that I should be offering this apology in this context...

6149:

If you look now and my edit history I am having lower number of edits but ....... Yesterday on 08:11 I have given demand for full protection of article Jasenovac i Gradiška Stara. Around 2 hours and 20 minutes latter new account

1877:

I'm not going to share links) I just fail to see the encyclopedic value of it, and note it's only used (as decoration) on one user's page, the one who uploaded it. You are using it in an apparent attempt to stir up controversy. ++

6578:

Hmm... RfA as job interview. I'm not sure. I think maybe dilutes it a bit. But maybe I'm different than many here, I don't really need the help with job interviews that some might. (I'm certainly in the top decile here by age)

5228:

If you'll allow me to be lazy, I find myself wanting to give pretty much the same response that I just gave to Protonk, although you two are approaching this from different directions ... so I'll just copy what I said on his

2677: 4195: 2615:

Could you reconsider? It's not pure spam, the site is actually a GNAA browser hijack site. If people visit it, they will immediately - and unwittingly - start vandalizing with more of the same announcements. Better to

6105:

I wonder what your problem is? As for accusing me of editwarring, I would suggest that I am nowhere near the levels you reached (one edit or so per day on my part?) . Is there a reason why you follow my comments on

3926:

have another username that he was using this year, because he was avoiding another editor who he felt was harassing him. That username doesn't have 150 edits prior to November 1 either, but the two of them combined,

5470:

And another thing you could say is "I take your point about my opening remarks, and whether it is a tendency or an exception in my editing, I will watch for it in future. Thank you." But apart from that, yeah, done.

1454:

behavior. Read BMW's closing comments (and remember, BMW is someone who participates in a lot of WQAs and is extremely mild in tone and very slow to speak bluntly), why don't you? Think about what caused BMW to say

3910:), who's right on the edge of eligibility for ArbCom voting (he needs 150 mainspace edits prior to November 1, but only has around 100). When he clicked on the "are you eligible" utility, it told him that he 3185:

should expect me to help correct the text when, on the article talk page, he maintains that his text is acceptable, and does not need correction. Even now, when his original research remains on the main page,

2133:. Are you sure of the spelling of that userid? Also can you give me some diffs that support your feeling that there is something untoward going on here? I see only one contribution since July for Coruscant. ++ 6086:

Lar will do as he sees fit, but obviously I have to put in my $ 0.02. By the way, when you seek a block, aren't you supposed to warn the person in order to give them the chance to respond to your accusation?

1533:

Telling me I'm out to screw up articles and wreck future FA status has nothing whatsoever to do with my difficulties with Montana. If you hold fast to that, then I don't see why I should take you seriously.

6393: 3448:. work on the rest--try to get rid of the phrase "critics say" Nobody is likely to be blocked, at least by me, but this is not the place to talk about user conduct, nor to accuse other editors of prejudice. 3742:

The current version is worse than the last version, and my objection to that is explained clearly on the talk page of the main article. Anyone can determine tthe truth by reading the last few exchanges.

1457:"At this point, your comments towards Montanabw are leaning towards harassment for harassment sake. Time to WP:AGF. It's way past time for this to end, and the only one who need to apologize now is you." 3512:

Dynablaster that means "only sections x, y and z are ok", but to anyone who can read English I think my view is quite clear. the previous section to the one in which DGG made those remarks was titled "

3194:"disingenuous". It is important that JJJ999 understand why his edits constitute POV pushing and original research. We will achieve nothing until he reads, understands and respects these basic rules. 6396:. (Both refer to the same company, which was apparently split at or after foreclosure; presumably this is what "fourth parcel to nonaffiliated carrier" refers to in the IC valuation, line 54.) This 1459:... So I stand behind my comments, although they are not vitriolic, just blunt. I spoke bluntly because less direct wasn't working. I can get blunter still if you still aren't getting the drift. ++ 5030:

Okay, thanks, good. It would be nice if this poll could serve as a kick in the pants to get moving on the whole issue. Certainly there's a lot of fear of the unknown about flagged revisions. My

3701:

explained why the tag is justified -- not once, but several times! Please stop making outrageous claims. The tag is to alert people that a section is disputed. Which, by your own admission, it is.

1486:

no one is indispensable. If you continue to pick at me and others, you will get more attention paid to your behaviour, that's just human nature. You won't like how that turns out, I don't think. ++

4007:

I'll check with him. What kind of permission would you need to have, to run the CU on his behalf? Would an email be sufficient, or would he have to post a public message on-wiki? Is this enough?

1441:

And I agreed, so now it'll be deleted or archived or whatever. Before that happens, though, I have a question for Lar: are you going to stand by the vitriolic comments in your last reply to me?

5979:

Joe the Plumber has been unlocked for under 24 hours -- and already the gaming is going on to declare that he is not a plumber but that his occupation is either "author" rr "unemployed" ---

6248: 6244: 1794:

Very gracious of you, that, offering to allow me to support you. But I'm afraid I cannot impose on your goodness that way, as really it's too much of a sacrifice on your part to allow it. ++

1269:

I think I'm out too. This is going nowhere, and now he's switched to attacking me. Like Montana says, if I'm at fault, I welcome constructive comments, but I'm getting tired of this too.

1710:

Lar, you've done nothing wrong but try to assist. Because you actually give a sh|t, you've then bore the brunt of one specific user's nastiness, and obviously, one other user hasn't read

6385: 2648:

I left the note (so people know the pattern), but redacted the site url and name, thanks! Where do I go to read about the hijack itself, want to make sure I'm not affected by that. ++

2371:

there is contention about the article content. Instead of warring over whether you need a specific tag or not, try to work the substantive article differences. Why don't you both try

1920:

Well I'd say you're failing at not stirring. Or succeeding at stirring, whichever. Sooner or later you're going to go too far and that arbcom link Durova showed you will turn blue. ++

3786:

6) After much argument (in which frankly you said almost nothing) I was generous enough to propose a new text (something I shouldn't have had to do in light of DGGs earlier remarks).

1384:

I think you're talking past each other. While Montanabw is not perfect (we are none of us perfect) you're not taking anything on board at all, Peter, at least not that I can see. ++

2114:

is a sock or meat puppet of user Dynaguy. It doesn't appear to be more than a casual use of a defunct account, but if someone could keep an eye on it/check it, that would be nice.

3771:

1) You were in the minority to begin with, never proposed an alternative text, and got told to leave it as it was by the admin mediating after I revised the text (see above text).

123: 5211:

rollback has. Whether others share that view I am not sure. I just have seen some loosey-gooseyness in rollback being granted, then revoked, then granted, then revoked, etc. ++

2891:

This cracked me up, which set me off looking for an everyday kids' building block with letters and numbers on it, so startled when I couldn't find one but I did stumble across

1615:

We differ about my motivations for the comments I made. We differ about your motivations for the comments you made. Oh well. I think we're done here, unless you continue. ++

1516:

I stand behind those questions, including the way they are worded, they are very serious and you need to think hard about them instead of trying to shoot the messenger. ++

3656:

RfC sounds good to me. We badly need the input of other editors. The most immediate problem is that JJJ999 keeps removing a NPOV tag when the dispute remains unresolved.

76:. Please do not comment here, use my current talk page for that, thanks. It is part of a series of archives, see the box at right for the list and to navigate to others. 6240: 6233: 4783:

be redacted as a personal attack on me? (y/n) ;) The whole scheme of positioning those notes was copied from my page and only the 'jerks' bit changed en route (see #2 @

6353:

The problem with Wikisource, in addition to the transcriptions being incomplete, is that you lose the "what links here" functionality, which I have used many times. --

4758:

I'm still not clear what you're asking me to do here. Sometimes you have to explain things to me in small words, explicitly, in ways that admit of yes/no answers :) ++

6124:

I'm probably not the right person to bring this stuff to right now, at least not if you want fast turnaround. Plus b) I've a tendency to suggest blocking everyone. ++

3595:

If we can't rely on Admins to enforce 3R, then this place is going to hell in a handbasket. Could you please block this guy for 3R, or refer it to someone who will?

5710: 5439:

My real life identity is right there on my user page. So "whoever you are" doesn't apply to me, like it does to you. I don't think there's much else to say here. ++

4986: 4126:

That address does NOT WORK. use the wikipedia email this user function, or use one of my publicly disclosed mails but not Hotmail... as it says in the contact box.

1183:

to discuss the concerns I had with Montana's protection of article over at the AN/I filed by Una Smith. Your help in resolving the issue would be much appreciated.

5278: 4044: 5847:

Wishing you and yours a joyous holiday season, and happiness, health and hopefulness in 2009. I trust you'll enjoy this little token, a favourite performance of

6629:

Point taken that my last paragraph might be better as advice before an RFA than advice to someone who's feeling bruised, I should probably keep it short. - Dan

6314: 5456:

Since I don't know you and your name means nothing to me, it applies in exactly the same way and is exactly as rude a thing to say, at least where I come from.

5845:

Thanks for making 2008 an interesting and enlightening year for me; I've appreciated your assistance at various points, and some of the discussions we've had.

1815:- I've dug out an image especially for you, and seek your advice on how to avoid conflating 'disruption' with stimulating discussion in this area..... cheers, 5424:

point out though that your first comments there were only in the service of badmouthing the original poster on false premises, which was a substantive point.

3945:

meet the "150" threshold, so that Mervyn can vote without being hassled about it? I think there's precedent for this in the case of renames. For example,

1129: 2336:

until the matter is fully settled? He seems to think that I need to seek his permission before the page can be tagged, and he won't listen to me anymore.

5232:

What would really be nice would be some lighter-weight process, with cooperation from devs and/or stewards so that we could vote on giving someone like

2253:

page, unwittingly duplicating various passages and sources. A differenct editor tagged the offending section, requesting simply that it be cleaned up. (

1334:

constitute an unacceptable level of vitriol, it was abusive, and nothing constructive has emerged. I'm pretty sick and tired of the whole situation.

5572:, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the 3716:

you've taken in regards to this page (we're now down to arguing about a tag), and you've lied about what DGG said, and you've committed 3R repeatedly.

2706: 1056: 4886:

Hi Lar. A user has requested a second opinion on my actions at the above page. I would be grateful if you could take a look. Thanks and take care. --

3446:

but still, the people did say what they are referenced as saying, and peopler can judge the importance for themselves. Leave this alone now, please

6381: 6530:. Even if it works technically, that might be seen as a loophole to be patched ASAP and in the meantime kept off, through force if necessary. -- 5897:

If this can be sorted, there are a lot of nice pieces of art to be had. I could pop over to the museum easily enough, if it would help. Cheers,

3155:

forced to back down from most of the positions you initially took, and are now down to a fight to the death about whether a tag should be there.

4147:

OK.....publicly disclosed where? Looking, not seeing. I don't use Wiki email because I'm afraid the person attempting to out me may access it.

2055:

Found a suitable citation to back up disputed edit, the candidate's own 2010 campaign web site so the edit was restored with the new citation.

6162:) to solve question of 10 edits before revert of semi-protected article. It is funny to say that but I and Ricky agree about this article :) 3826: 2871: 1606:

You were the only one who actually went on to rant about my intentions concerning content. That was bonus incivility, not behavioral advice.

3487:...", which is an unambiguous reference to other disputed areas. How dare you misrepresent DGG's remarks so openly before falsely accusing 2777: 1312:

I would not delete it just yet... consensus is needed that it's over. But if and when, you can tag it for deletion, or even nominate it at

109: 4374:

Hi Lar! I see you edited here some minutes ago. Could you please check the Commons' RfA's (some are over.) and your E-Mail inbox? Thanks,

1679:

Thank you, but I have reviewed it and find it quite clear. What needs clearing up for me is rather your own approach and demeanour, Lar.

1361:

And I feel intimidated and bullied by Peter, whom I feel distorts everything I say. Shall I just quit wikipedia and make everyone happy?

4578:

PS I see you did precisely that and the user has not engaged you in conversation, near as I can tell (unless they did so on your page) ++

3313:) Please do not remove the tag until the dispute is settled. I'm open to debate, but I think a cooling off period would be a good thing. 2487: 2010:

I'm not sure what JWSchmidt is getting on about. If Moulton is using his talk page inappropriately, delete and protect it and move on. ++

6092: 6003:

and a bunch of other changes. See also the Talk page for the comment that a person who is unemployed has no occupation at all <g: -->

2257:) Falsely believing that editors first need to gain consensus on the talk page before tagging the main article, JJJ999 deleted the tag ( 3550:). (Emphasis mine). He simply expressed a wish that we move on to other disputed areas. Furthermore, he told you in no uncertain terms 5472: 5457: 5425: 5196:

to mark revisions for Flagged Revisions plus Rollback (plus maybe something else?) could go into some kind of RFA-lite process. - Dan

3907: 3836: 3246:- "I don't have time to rewrite whole sentences! I'm too busy writing pages and pages of irrelevant ramble criticising your editing." 2036: 2029: 1738:

anything constructive, especially not concerning Montana's ownership tendencies and extreme lack of patience with disagreeing parties.

2481: 2446: 6290:

Wicked cool. (ha, I crack me up). I've seen similar stuff, even bigger stuff but not that particular thing. Thanks for sharing! ++

2328:

I am sorry that this matter has spilled over onto your talk page. But now that we are here, will one of you be kind enough to ask

6274: 5274: 4840: 4221: 3087: 2992: 3941:). I was wondering, as a way out of this, would it be possible for a Checkuser to verify that he has used multiple accounts and 6389: 5380: 5077: 4968: 3956: 2440: 2372: 1089:

Hi, I would appreciate a hand explaining the quite old crosswiki checkuser request that I raised at meta; it has come up here:

116: 5757:

Noted your comment on PatW's page. Could you expand on what is still unresolved at this point? I thought Jossi had retired. -

1811:

ever the gentleman, Lar :-) - now on a totally ungentlemanly note, I wonder if I can steal a moment of attention from you for

1588:

What part of "I'm not the only person telling you that you have issues you need to work on." were you having trouble with? ++

6318: 6088: 6054: 5724: 5104: 5049:

First, open editing is best. But that ain't cutting it for BLPs anymore. I thought that too as well, for the semi-fears, but

3181:

There was nothing wrong with the original section. That is the version I have repeatedly tried to restore. It's curious that

2640: 1726: 1988:

him post as his user name on his talk page, it seems to keep him from seeking other ips etc. I don't know. Its all a mess.

4997:

pages", - thusly, those signing just one or the other might create a misleading impression of the overall support. Cheers,

3831: 1093:. I'll go find diffs over on meta, so that interested people can take a look to see if they think it was all appropriate. 6247:. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, 5364:

has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath

4290: 1812: 3783:

5) You then made an explanation for the tag (but abandoned any attempt to justify textual alterations without consensus).

6170: 5660: 5615: 4224:

and perhaps comment? I've uncovered two of this guy's socks now, and this seems to be a retaliatory nomination. Thanks,

4080: 4017: 3980: 3970: 3060: 3010: 2499: 6457:

to their pages. For instance, right now RFAs are NOINDEXed by the software, but I am proud of my RFA, so I have added

5270: 2333: 80: 1255: 1218: 5573: 2458: 1200: 3777:

3) You came back and without adding so much as a word to the talk page you re-added a tag (and deleted some text).

2785:

That's an attack site, really, and there's no reason for me or anyone else to review it any further. Run along. ++

6621: 6588: 6372: 6345: 6299: 6221: 6133: 6028: 5961: 5916: 5874: 5787: 5743: 5696: 5637: 5448: 5401: 5337: 5297: 5220: 5164: 5124: 5100: 5022: 4941: 4910: 4868: 4767: 4705: 4651: 4587: 4570: 4480: 4435: 4404: 4360: 4328: 4248: 4207: 4139: 4101: 4065: 4035: 3999: 3619: 3271: 3146: 3045: 3028: 2928: 2892: 2857: 2794: 2733: 2657: 2607: 2574: 2528: 2384: 2297: 2223: 2192: 2142: 2078: 2019: 1967: 1929: 1886: 1838: 1803: 1702: 1671: 1624: 1597: 1553: 1525: 1495: 1468: 1393: 1325: 1292: 1242: 1165: 84: 4784: 4547: 1910: 1867: 1852: 1820: 1777: 1022: 1012: 1002: 992: 982: 963: 953: 943: 933: 923: 904: 894: 884: 874: 864: 854: 844: 834: 824: 814: 804: 794: 775: 765: 755: 745: 735: 725: 715: 705: 695: 685: 675: 665: 636: 626: 616: 606: 596: 586: 576: 566: 556: 546: 536: 517: 507: 497: 487: 477: 467: 457: 447: 437: 427: 417: 407: 397: 387: 377: 367: 348: 338: 328: 318: 308: 298: 288: 278: 268: 258: 248: 238: 40: 28: 6384:. (I noticed it because it was a blue link on the transcript, but I normally would have found it be spidering 5521:-- while this is only a co-operative 3RR at this point, I would comment it to your general attention. Thanks! 5269:

seems to have stagnated. I doubt much will change in the next few days. It might be worth closing this one. »

2944:

seems to be an educational toy industry term for building blocks of any shape, learn something new every day!

2773: 1032: 6166: 5317: 5059:

b) I didn't know if all-semi for BLP would fly more or less than all-flagged, so I tossed it both in the air.

5476: 5461: 5429: 3082:

directed by Michael Moore. Hopefully this will not take long. I just want you to say whether or not it is a

2493: 228: 218: 208: 198: 188: 178: 168: 158: 148: 4847:

The 10 edits to get move-confirmed has got to be bumped to about 50; do look at the sandbox edits. Cheers,

5544: 4520: 4458: 4166: 4152: 4114: 3938: 3919: 3901: 2595: 2769: 2434: 5560: 3748: 3706: 3661: 3563: 3496: 3407: 3383: 3318: 3199: 3127: 3100: 2475: 2452: 2404: 2341: 2278: 2155: 2091: 2060: 2045: 2000: 1274: 4561:

standards on N and RS and COI instead of summarily shown the door. But then I'm rather soft hearted. ++

1905:< not at all the intention - was intended to raise a smile, not stir. More there, and my talk page. 3078:

I need your advice on a dispute that spilled onto your talk page three days ago. It concerns the film

2709:? There are strong hints here and there that among these, there's someone with the admin bit. Cheers, 6563:; let me know if you think that improves it or dilutes it. (Watchlisting here for a few days.) - Dan 6500: 6060: 5684: 4880: 4423: 2986: 2982: 2765: 2555: 2424: 6155: 6151: 2429: 6195: 5810: 5680: 5586: 5083: 5063: 5052:

a) something needs doing, and no one has ever been willing to just lob it out there, so why not an

4974: 4270: 4229: 3950: 2949: 2900: 2751: 2714: 2420: 2266: 1948: 1906: 1863: 1848: 1816: 1773: 1180: 1090: 1051: 6212:

I am sorry, this slipped through the cracks. Is there still an action item for me here? Thanks. ++

6019:

I am sorry, this slipped through the cracks. Is there still an action item for me here? Thanks. ++

4959: 2130: 1429:

BMW declared the discussion officially closed, so thanks for your efforts. It was worth a shot.

6560: 5944: 5929: 5898: 5891: 5718: 5313: 5266: 5233: 4848: 4825: 4795: 4750: 4688: 4680: 4621: 4612: 4551: 4538: 3437:

For Lar's benefit, on the talk page, under a heading titled "with the current wording" DGG says:

2959: 2875: 2832: 2690: 1992: 1741: 1716: 1684: 1651: 1607: 1563: 1535: 1508: 1477: 1442: 1404: 1376: 1353: 1186: 1142: 4746: 6480:

I don't have a problem with that, but I get the impression that it will not be possible to add

6417:

from a page with possibly disparaging but relevant information would be protected under BLP? --

6176:

I know 1 or 2 accounts which are 1 revert account and after that nothing, but this are active.

5099:

FYI, I think you listed two "Second choice"s in the not-a-poll. Cut and paste massacre? 8-)

1789:

problem with the 10 buck transfer.... third time lucky, fingers crossed (sending again now) :-)

6503:

and the way the current software is set-up, any change made to that page can be override with

6243:. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, 6203: 6184: 6115: 6070: 6009: 5765: 5526: 5366: 5361: 4450: 4284: 4162: 4148: 4110: 3897: 3872: 2835: 2632: 1156:

Took ya long enough, geez that was almost a week! (oh wait, my RfA thanks took a month... ) ++

4500: 4490: 6634: 6602: 6568: 6440: 6407:

As for preventing things that should not be indexed from being indexed, presumably removing

6259: 5654: 5609: 5242: 5201: 5186: 5144: 4530: 4419: 4077: 4014: 3977: 3964: 3855: 3801: 3744: 3721: 3702: 3684: 3657: 3639: 3600: 3582: 3559: 3525: 3492: 3460: 3426: 3403: 3379: 3361: 3339: 3314: 3288: 3251: 3195: 3160: 3123: 3096: 3057: 3007: 2996: 2470: 2400: 2357: 2337: 2274: 2205: 2170: 2151: 2119: 2087: 2056: 2041: 1996: 1654: 1270: 2589:

Knowledge article, don't you think? Maybe even you could unblock it and start the article?

5039: 5001: 4257: 3864: 3086:

violation to write a section (in whole or in part) from the viewpoint of Moore's critics.

2551: 55:

reasonable discussion about it, to publish my material elsewhere, or to leave the project.

6499:

Well as far as I can read the proposals, everything will be done at the local level with

5601:

consensus for a community ban, these 'creative' strategies may prove to bear some fruit.

1714:. You didn't deserve it. Sorry for not seeing this much much earlier. Hang in there. 1476:

I was talking about that you accused me of bad faith and that I was trying to wreck HiW.

4196:

Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2008#Eligibility_of_Mervyn_Emrys

1829:

I don't follow you. I also don't completely see the encyclopedic value of that image. ++

6507: 6484: 6461: 6451: 6430: 6411: 5806: 5582: 5567: 5371: 5357: 5071: 5053: 4992:

Unless you favour an "all-or-nothing" approach to flagged revisions, it might be worth

4962: 4923: 4891: 4300: 4266: 4225: 3946: 3933: 3399: 3083: 2945: 2896: 2747: 2710: 2617: 2269:

on myself, because he suspects I am using an alternative account to undo his changes. (

2180: 2111: 1944: 1430: 1362: 1335: 1302: 1259: 1222: 1204: 6154:

is created. 1 hours latter article has recieved semi-protection and during next hours

5370:

and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! —

2415: 1600: 1435: 1227: 1113: 6617: 6584: 6531: 6491: 6418: 6368: 6354: 6341: 6322: 6295: 6217: 6129: 6024: 5957: 5912: 5870: 5783: 5739: 5714: 5692: 5633: 5444: 5397: 5333: 5293: 5216: 5160: 5120: 5018: 4937: 4906: 4864: 4763: 4738: 4701: 4647: 4583: 4566: 4476: 4431: 4400: 4381: 4356: 4342:

Did you deliberately time that vote to break the record, or was it a lucky accident?

4324: 4244: 4203: 4135: 4097: 4061: 4031: 3995: 3868: 3841: 3615: 3267: 3142: 3041: 3024: 2924: 2853: 2790: 2729: 2686: 2653: 2603: 2570: 2524: 2380: 2314: 2293: 2219: 2188: 2138: 2074: 2015: 1963: 1925: 1882: 1834: 1799: 1698: 1680: 1667: 1647: 1620: 1593: 1549: 1521: 1491: 1464: 1389: 1321: 1313: 1288: 1238: 1161: 1135: 65: 17: 5518:

Anarchangel is apparently of the mind that he has KillerChihuahua in his pocket per

4749:

page Lazzo created and he lit into my user page; moved it a bunch of times. Cheers,

3402:). That is the verion I wish to restore until such time as we agree on the wording. 3353:

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Fahrenheit_9/11_controversy&action=history

6515: 6469: 6278: 6199: 6180: 6111: 6066: 6005: 5758: 5522: 4280: 3877: 3860: 3111: 3914:

eligible, but then it turned out that there was a bug in the utility, and that he

1450:

Vitriolic? I'm afraid you still haven't internalised that there is a problem with

3959:) is voting, and claiming to meet the threshhold because of prior editing by the 2936:

Truth be told, I'd never heard it as a term for a toy before but lo, the article

1772:

the spirit of the season, I think it's only fair to offer you this olive branch.

6630: 6598: 6564: 6255: 5648: 5603: 5551: 5238: 5197: 5182: 5140: 4776: 4343: 4316: 4074: 4011: 3974: 3960: 3797: 3717: 3680: 3635: 3596: 3578: 3521: 3475:

I have already rebutted this specific claim, in my reply to you of 6 December. (

3456: 3422: 3357: 3335: 3284: 3247: 3182: 3156: 3091: 3054: 3004: 2396: 2353: 2329: 2246: 2201: 2166: 2115: 1095: 5838: 4049: 3990:

Mixed messages are especially bad. Thanks for bringing this to my attention. ++

3822:

Knowledge:Don't overuse shortcuts to policy and guidelines to win your argument

2620:

in this case, pretty please? It wasn't left at several places - it was left at

2565:

Thanks for letting me know. I like Roger's rollup answer. And your thinking. ++

2512: 1283:

I did put a comment in there. I don't think this was very productive. (yet?) ++

6638: 6624: 6606: 6591: 6572: 6534: 6521: 6494: 6475: 6421: 6375: 6357: 6348: 6325: 6302: 6284: 6263: 6224: 6207: 6188: 6136: 6119: 6096: 6074: 6031: 6013: 5964: 5947: 5932: 5919: 5901: 5877: 5848: 5814: 5790: 5772: 5746: 5728: 5699: 5666: 5640: 5621: 5590: 5530: 5480: 5465: 5451: 5433: 5404: 5386: 5352: 5340: 5321: 5300: 5282: 5246: 5223: 5205: 5190: 5167: 5148: 5127: 5108: 5089: 5044: 5036: 5025: 5006: 4998: 4980: 4944: 4927: 4913: 4895: 4871: 4851: 4828: 4798: 4770: 4753: 4708: 4691: 4654: 4624: 4615: 4590: 4573: 4554: 4541: 4483: 4465: 4438: 4407: 4389: 4363: 4331: 4309: 4274: 4251: 4233: 4210: 4170: 4156: 4142: 4118: 4104: 4083: 4068: 4038: 4020: 4002: 3983: 3883: 3805: 3752: 3725: 3710: 3688: 3665: 3643: 3622: 3604: 3586: 3567: 3529: 3500: 3464: 3430: 3411: 3387: 3365: 3343: 3322: 3292: 3274: 3255: 3203: 3164: 3149: 3131: 3104: 3063: 3048: 3031: 3013: 2962: 2953: 2937: 2931: 2904: 2878: 2860: 2797: 2755: 2736: 2718: 2694: 2660: 2643: 2610: 2577: 2559: 2531: 2408: 2387: 2361: 2345: 2318: 2300: 2282: 2226: 2209: 2195: 2174: 2159: 2145: 2123: 2095: 2081: 2064: 2049: 2022: 2004: 1970: 1952: 1932: 1914: 1889: 1871: 1856: 1841: 1824: 1806: 1781: 1744: 1732: 1705: 1687: 1674: 1627: 1610: 1566: 1556: 1538: 1528: 1511: 1498: 1480: 1471: 1445: 1407: 1396: 1379: 1367: 1356: 1340: 1328: 1307: 1295: 1278: 1264: 1245: 1207: 1189: 1168: 1146: 1099: 2866:

PS: I've GOT to replace that horrid image, the perspective is way too forced!

4919: 4887: 4526:

I just tagged the en:page w/db-spam and the others probably should be, too;

2273:) I am quite happy for you to perform this check, should you wish to do so. 1251: 6333: 6313:

You generally seem reasonable. What do you think about indexing pages like

6239:

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

4128:

larrypieniazek(at)hotmail(dot)com (IM only. Not a mail address. Rarely on.)

3398:

There was nothing wrong with the section before you began POV pushing (see

2307:

I was asked for assistance by JJJ, but have not been following the matter.

4918:

Boy, that was fast. Thanks as always for your speedy and accurate work. --

4696:

Can you clarify what point 1 is or what I should be opining on? Thanks! ++

3262:

find it. Because if it gets too bad, you may both end up being blocked. ++

2671:

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXIII (November 2008)

6613: 6580: 6364: 6337: 6291: 6213: 6125: 6020: 5997:

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Joe_the_Plumber&oldid=260239538

5993:

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Joe_the_Plumber&oldid=260240691

5987:

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Joe_the_Plumber&oldid=260242541

5983:

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Joe_the_Plumber&oldid=260243489

5953: 5908: 5866: 5779: 5735: 5688: 5629: 5440: 5393: 5329: 5289: 5212: 5156: 5116: 5014: 4933: 4902: 4860: 4759: 4697: 4643: 4579: 4562: 4472: 4427: 4396: 4376: 4352: 4320: 4240: 4199: 4131: 4093: 4057: 4027: 3991: 3611: 3539: 3263: 3138: 3110:

It's getting silly. The same user doesn't even understand the concept of

3037: 3020: 2920: 2849: 2786: 2725: 2649: 2599: 2566: 2520: 2376: 2309: 2289: 2215: 2184: 2134: 2070: 2011: 1959: 1921: 1878: 1830: 1795: 1694: 1663: 1616: 1589: 1545: 1517: 1487: 1460: 1385: 1317: 1284: 1234: 1157: 5887:

Hi Lar, Merry Christmas. Could you look at the note I just left a user;

5519: 1562:

going on, and I think you know perfectly well that it wasn't happening.

4821: 4510: 4505: 4265:

Thanks for taking a look. As always, your help is much appreciated. :)

2814: 2214:

I don't check on hunches. However I think I like my chances better. ++

1693:

I'll see what I can do. Thanks for letting me know of your concern. ++

973: 914: 785: 656: 527: 358: 139: 5734:

Full marks for a good try but I'm dubious. I have expounded there. ++

6179:

My question is if this accounts are Washington IP or Belgrade IP ?--

5801: 1069:

All dates approximate, conversations organised by thread start date

79:

An index to all my talk page archives, automatically maintained by

5800: 4859:

That one looks sorted, I see other CUs looking into the matter. ++

2200:

Pretty much just a hunch, but if one was done I'd like my chances.

6394:

User:NE2/valuations/Cincinnati, Indianapolis and Western Railroad

6103:

but referred to an ongoing discussion about the flagging of BLPs,

5497:

21:07 19 Dec (initial reinclusion of consensus deleted material)

2399:

won't let the matter drop, insisting that I am operating a sock.

5555: 3896:

Hiya, I need Checkuser advice on something. There's an editor,

3240:- explain to me how you would rewrite it if you don't support it 3122:) This is the worst editor I have ever come across, since 2003. 4611:

I'm off for hours after this post, so I'll see later. G'night,

2183:

to look at please? So far I don't see basis for a check yet. ++

4620:(ec w/ps); nothing on my page or on other wiki's. gotta go... 2352:

refusal to engage on substance. And don't tag it again please

6392:, I see that it appears on not only that transcript but also 5837: 4256: 3309:

disputed. This single edit breaks 2 different rules alone. (

2288:

started to shade toward edit warring. Try not to do that. ++

6249:

Knowledge:Requests for arbitration/Fringe science/Workshop

6245:

Knowledge:Requests for arbitration/Fringe science/Evidence

5515:

Anarchangel was warned by LedRush on 22 Dec at 14:19.

3789:

7) You made no comment for several days about the new text

3334:

revert for the 3rd time. Can you please ban this guy now?

1995:

if you want to weigh in. If not, it doesn't matter. Blah.

6042:

Guess how I feel about using flagging on BLPs? <g: -->

5943:

Positive note from Swidagdo. I pointed him here. Cheers,

4739:

WP:ANI#A conundrum...to block or give a second chance....

4297:

Hello. Could you comment on his unblock request? Thanks,

6388:

with AWB and checking against other lists.) Now if I do

6386:

Category:Defunct railroad companies of the United States

4471:

Sorted. Not quite what I had in mind, but sorted. :) ++

3859:

to put aside their differences and use the set means of

3036:

Answered there. See what you think, and thanks again. ++

1981:"(dude, if **I** think you're narcissistc, you are...)" 6527: 6401: 6321:? Would you classify it as "baby" or "bathwater"? :) -- 6159: 6051: 6048: 6045: 5996: 5992: 5986: 5982: 5510: 5505: 5500: 5495: 4788: 4008: 3854:

Following that reading, I would suggest you both go to

3555: 3547: 3480: 3476: 3352: 3310: 3187: 3119: 3000: 2743: 2547: 2543: 2505: 2464: 2270: 2262: 2258: 2254: 2250: 2112:

http://en.wikipedia.org/Special:Contributions/Coruscant

1504: 1128:

This is an acknowledgment of your participation in the

6332:

as a US federal government agency, are PD) belongs on

5928:

I saw; terima kasih. Enjoy; choo, choo, choo! Cheers,

2110:

I'm not experienced at this process, but suspect user

6561:

User:Dank55/Admins#Advice after close but failed RFAs

4546:

Oh, there was a logo on commons that I got speedied;

4073:

Right, that's not the account we're talking about. --

6528:"would be wary of allowing INDEX on user namespaces" 5288:

I'll try to take a look, thanks for the heads up. ++

4496:

Hi, Lar. What's the norm with a cross-wiki spammer?

3305:

You are making this up as you go along. The section

2829:

Presented for much appreciated guidance and counsel.

3019:

Thanks for the heads up, gimme a few to check... ++

6169:created on 25 December to play with me in article 6101:As I did not say anything whatever about a block, 4683:? Cas didn't comment yet; his life's about to get 3053:Works for me! Thanks for the quick turnaround. -- 6234:Knowledge:Requests for arbitration/Fringe science 6198:. His only edit has been revert of my edit ????-- 5907:Left a note. Back to playing with my new LEGO. ++ 5177:loosey goosey? (Haven't heard that phrase since 2724:Did some digging, posted some results. Cheers. ++ 4216:Checkuser case filed by sock of User:Yorkshirian 3542:'s words are right here: "Leave this alone now, 3378:Everything you say is false. Have you no shame? 3356:the fact you just committed 3R is unclear to me. 2746:, although I know it likely wouldn't show much. 5892:User talk:Swidagdo#an end to the image hassles? 4987:Knowledge:Protecting BLP articles feeler survey 4395:Answered mail. Eugene beat me to the closes. ++ 3228:- it's fine, even a disinterested admin said so 6173:. All his other edits are in reality nothing. 4787:). The page moves on my user page were in the 4109:I will send an email to your hotmail address. 4045:Knowledge:Requests for checkuser/Case/Suigetsu 2395:Will you please perform a check user request. 6317:, a partial transcription of a report by the 6315:User:NE2/valuations/Illinois Central Railroad 4220:Hi Lar. I wonder if you could take a look at 2844:Ha! Thanks. Welcome back, good luck, and you 1401:What is Montana taking on board that I'm not? 117: 8: 4198:. Please advise of questions or concerns. ++ 2958:Isn't that a lot of why we're here? Cheers, 1195:Follow up on a prior RFCU about an IP and SA 1042: 6402:adding categories and sometimes information 5805:Wishing you the very best for the season. 4901:Did. Please advise if further is needed. ++ 2995:) requested deletion of her userpage under 2761:Hey Lar, can you take a look at (redacted) 2705:Hi Lar, if you have time, could you please 2598:, because there is little that I remove. ++ 283:1 September 2006 through 15 September 2006 6004:. I will not use the wrestling analogy. 5539: 3973:) account. Let me know what you think? -- 2261:) and then asked you and a second editor ( 124: 110: 6194:I have not noticed newly created account 6065:We need real flagging implemented, IMHO. 5564:was updated with a fact from the article 3514:Claims made, proposed discussion of terms 2812: 1037:1 January 2023 through 1 January 2025 ?? 392:1 February 2007 through 15 February 2007 343:1 December 2006 through 15 December 2006 333:15 November 2006 through 1 December 2006 323:1 November 2006 through 15 November 2006 293:15 September 2006 through 1 October 2006 6254:On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, 5705:OK, how about carrots instead of sticks? 2848:know where to find me if you need me. ++ 2332:to stop removing the 'dispute' tag from 1181:User talk:Montanabw#Concerning ownership 1007:1 December 2016 through 1 December 2018 997:1 December 2013 through 1 December 2016 987:1 December 2012 through 1 December 2013 899:1 November 2010 through 1 December 2010 879:1 September 2010 through 1 October 2010 770:1 November 2009 through 1 December 2009 750:1 September 2009 through 1 October 2009 641:1 November 2008 through 1 December 2008 621:1 September 2008 through 1 October 2008 512:1 November 2007 through 1 December 2007 492:1 September 2007 through 1 October 2007 382:15 January 2007 through 1 February 2007 353:15 December 2006 through 1 January 2007 313:15 October 2006 through 1 November 2006 273:15 August 2006 through 1 September 2006 6382:Danville, Olney and Ohio River Railroad 6380:Right now I noticed that someone wrote 6158:has made few very "interesting" edits ( 4785:User talk:TLazzo#You're evading a block 3215:That's right pot, I'm a black kettle... 2685:This has been an automated delivery by 1201:User talk:ScienceApologist#Meatpuppetry 1017:1 December 2018 through 1 January 2021 928:1 January 2011 through 1 February 2011 909:1 December 2010 through 1 January 2011 889:1 October 2010 through 1 November 2010 869:1 August 2010 through 1 September 2010 799:1 January 2010 through 1 February 2010 780:1 December 2009 through 1 January 2010 760:1 October 2009 through 1 November 2009 740:1 August 2009 through 1 September 2009 670:1 January 2009 through 1 February 2009 651:1 December 2008 through 1 January 2009 631:1 October 2008 through 1 November 2008 611:1 August 2008 through 1 September 2008 541:1 January 2008 through 1 February 2008 522:1 December 2007 through 1 January 2008 502:1 October 2007 through 1 November 2007 482:1 August 2007 through 1 September 2007 372:1 January 2007 through 15 January 2007 303:1 October 2006 through 15 October 2006 4681:User talk:Casliber#clean-up in aisle 6 4161:Got one and resent my message to you. 4056:, but checks have been run already. ++ 3918:eligible. We discussed this a bit at 1027:1 January 2021 through 1 January 2023 402:15 February 2007 through 1 March 2007 50: 6110:the way it is done on the German WP? 5952:K... LMK if I can be further help. ++ 3088:Take a quick look at the dispute here 938:1 February 2011 through 1 March 2011 809:1 February 2010 through 1 March 2010 680:1 February 2009 through 1 March 2009 551:1 February 2008 through 1 March 2008 263:1 August 2006 through 15 August 2006 7: 3827:Knowledge:Don't bludgeon the process 2129:I don't see any contribs at all for 2035:Here's a web site worth monitoring, 1991:Any ideas? Any suggestions? Here is 5155:is too loosey goosey at present. ++ 3442:the material seems fairly presented 3118:, take a look at his latest edit. ( 968:1 May 2011 through 1 December 2012 432:15 March 2007 through 1 April 2007 412:1 March 2007 through 15 March 2007 253:15 July 2006 through 1 August 2006 6559:... and I've added a paragraph to 3479:). Nothing in DGG's contribution ( 2037:Texas gubernatorial election, 2010 2030:Texas gubernatorial election, 2010 948:1 March 2011 through 1 April 2011 859:1 July 2010 through 1 August 2010 819:1 March 2010 through 1 April 2010 730:1 July 2009 through 1 August 2009 690:1 March 2009 through 1 April 2009 601:1 July 2008 through 1 August 2008 561:1 March 2008 through 1 April 2008 472:1 July 2007 through 1 August 2007 24: 3837:Knowledge:WTF? OMG! TMD TLA. ARG! 2069:Sounds like it is sorted then? ++ 243:1 July 2006 through 15 July 2006 233:15 June 2006 through 1 July 2006 223:1 June 2006 through 15 June 2006 6526:FT2, the proposer, says that he 5543: 5351: 5347:DYK nomination of Handling Ships 4841:Special:Contributions/Rhys Pwnes 4048: 2813: 2511: 2414: 2375:and see where that takes you? ++ 1759:After some serious consideration 1112: 1108: 958:1 April 2011 through 1 May 2011 849:1 June 2010 through 1 July 2010 829:1 April 2010 through 1 May 2010 720:1 June 2009 through 1 July 2009 700:1 April 2009 through 1 May 2009 591:1 June 2008 through 1 July 2008 571:1 April 2008 through 1 May 2008 462:1 June 2007 through 1 July 2007 442:1 April 2007 through 1 May 2007 213:15 May 2006 through 1 June 2006 153:start through about 22 Jan 2006 1175:Resolution attempt with Montana 839:1 May 2010 through 1 June 2010 710:1 May 2009 through 1 June 2009 581:1 May 2008 through 1 June 2008 452:1 May 2007 through 1 June 2007 203:1 May 2006 through 15 May 2006 193:15 Apr 2006 through 1 May 2006 183:1 Apr 2006 through 15 Apr 2006 163:22 Jan 2006 through 1 Mar 2006 6319:Interstate Commerce Commission 6055:User:Factchecker atyourservice 5861:Happy holidays to you all too! 5853:, for your holiday amusement. 4835:while I'm on your talk page... 4781:Thanks to all who aren't jerks 4548:commons:File:logo-voltcan4.gif 3190:) he has the temerity to call 2106:Check User request from JJJ999 1943:Not an urgent one, though. :) 1256:User:Montanabw/Peter's Sandbox 1219:User:Montanabw/Peter's Sandbox 1179:I've started a thread over at 1059:(27 Dec 2005) through present 422:Trentino — South Tyrol topics 173:1 Mar 2006 through 1 Apr 2006 1: 6639:14:43, 31 December 2008 (UTC) 6625:14:41, 31 December 2008 (UTC) 6607:14:32, 31 December 2008 (UTC) 6592:14:25, 31 December 2008 (UTC) 6573:14:12, 31 December 2008 (UTC) 6535:22:31, 30 December 2008 (UTC) 6522:22:19, 30 December 2008 (UTC) 6495:22:18, 30 December 2008 (UTC) 6476:22:16, 30 December 2008 (UTC) 6467:to make it appear in Google. 6422:22:11, 30 December 2008 (UTC) 6376:19:37, 30 December 2008 (UTC) 6358:17:33, 30 December 2008 (UTC) 6349:15:27, 30 December 2008 (UTC) 6326:06:39, 30 December 2008 (UTC) 6303:22:34, 29 December 2008 (UTC) 6285:20:24, 29 December 2008 (UTC) 6264:01:01, 29 December 2008 (UTC) 6208:17:00, 28 December 2008 (UTC) 6189:07:55, 28 December 2008 (UTC) 6137:03:10, 28 December 2008 (UTC) 6120:03:37, 28 December 2008 (UTC) 6097:02:53, 28 December 2008 (UTC) 6075:02:25, 28 December 2008 (UTC) 6014:23:45, 26 December 2008 (UTC) 5965:16:46, 26 December 2008 (UTC) 5948:12:36, 26 December 2008 (UTC) 5933:05:24, 26 December 2008 (UTC) 5920:17:19, 25 December 2008 (UTC) 5902:09:30, 25 December 2008 (UTC) 5878:16:46, 26 December 2008 (UTC) 5815:02:13, 25 December 2008 (UTC) 5791:16:53, 23 December 2008 (UTC) 5773:15:22, 23 December 2008 (UTC) 5747:16:42, 23 December 2008 (UTC) 5729:13:33, 23 December 2008 (UTC) 5700:05:51, 23 December 2008 (UTC) 5667:12:42, 23 December 2008 (UTC) 5641:05:21, 23 December 2008 (UTC) 5622:05:08, 23 December 2008 (UTC) 5591:00:56, 23 December 2008 (UTC) 5531:00:14, 23 December 2008 (UTC) 5481:20:42, 23 December 2008 (UTC) 5466:20:39, 23 December 2008 (UTC) 5452:18:15, 22 December 2008 (UTC) 5434:17:19, 22 December 2008 (UTC) 5405:22:49, 20 December 2008 (UTC) 5392:Ya prolly. Answered there. ++ 5387:22:35, 20 December 2008 (UTC) 5362:Did You Know nominations page 5341:19:48, 20 December 2008 (UTC) 5322:19:41, 20 December 2008 (UTC) 5301:13:33, 20 December 2008 (UTC) 5283:09:40, 20 December 2008 (UTC) 5247:20:30, 21 December 2008 (UTC) 5224:05:04, 21 December 2008 (UTC) 5206:04:05, 21 December 2008 (UTC) 5191:13:41, 20 December 2008 (UTC) 5168:13:33, 20 December 2008 (UTC) 5149:03:33, 20 December 2008 (UTC) 5128:04:06, 22 December 2008 (UTC) 5109:02:58, 22 December 2008 (UTC) 5090:22:00, 19 December 2008 (UTC) 5056:with nothing to lose anymore? 5045:21:50, 19 December 2008 (UTC) 5026:21:40, 19 December 2008 (UTC) 5007:21:31, 19 December 2008 (UTC) 4981:14:26, 19 December 2008 (UTC) 4945:05:36, 19 December 2008 (UTC) 4928:05:29, 19 December 2008 (UTC) 4914:05:21, 19 December 2008 (UTC) 4896:04:43, 19 December 2008 (UTC) 4872:20:30, 19 December 2008 (UTC) 4852:15:33, 19 December 2008 (UTC) 4829:14:49, 19 December 2008 (UTC) 4799:04:10, 20 December 2008 (UTC) 4775:Should the note top-right on 4771:20:30, 19 December 2008 (UTC) 4754:15:28, 19 December 2008 (UTC) 4709:15:05, 19 December 2008 (UTC) 4692:09:42, 19 December 2008 (UTC) 4679:Got an opinion on point 1 at 4655:05:39, 19 December 2008 (UTC) 4625:04:51, 19 December 2008 (UTC) 4616:04:51, 19 December 2008 (UTC) 4591:04:44, 19 December 2008 (UTC) 4574:04:33, 19 December 2008 (UTC) 4555:04:26, 19 December 2008 (UTC) 4542:04:22, 19 December 2008 (UTC) 4484:00:36, 19 December 2008 (UTC) 4466:23:56, 18 December 2008 (UTC) 4439:19:01, 18 December 2008 (UTC) 4408:15:57, 18 December 2008 (UTC) 4390:15:42, 18 December 2008 (UTC) 4364:01:03, 15 December 2008 (UTC) 4332:22:38, 15 December 2008 (UTC) 4310:10:12, 13 December 2008 (UTC) 4275:14:36, 11 December 2008 (UTC) 4252:14:17, 11 December 2008 (UTC) 4234:13:43, 11 December 2008 (UTC) 4211:04:22, 12 December 2008 (UTC) 4171:21:50, 11 December 2008 (UTC) 4157:21:34, 11 December 2008 (UTC) 4143:18:52, 11 December 2008 (UTC) 4119:17:35, 11 December 2008 (UTC) 4105:05:01, 11 December 2008 (UTC) 4084:04:56, 11 December 2008 (UTC) 4069:04:46, 11 December 2008 (UTC) 4039:04:44, 11 December 2008 (UTC) 4021:04:37, 11 December 2008 (UTC) 4003:04:29, 11 December 2008 (UTC) 3984:23:58, 10 December 2008 (UTC) 3884:18:58, 14 December 2008 (UTC) 3806:03:50, 14 December 2008 (UTC) 3780:4) I called you on doing this 3774:2) You slunk off for 2 weeks. 3753:03:40, 14 December 2008 (UTC) 3726:03:22, 14 December 2008 (UTC) 3711:03:18, 14 December 2008 (UTC) 3689:03:11, 14 December 2008 (UTC) 3666:03:07, 14 December 2008 (UTC) 3644:03:04, 14 December 2008 (UTC) 3623:02:44, 14 December 2008 (UTC) 3605:01:14, 14 December 2008 (UTC) 3587:03:21, 13 December 2008 (UTC) 3568:03:16, 13 December 2008 (UTC) 3530:02:51, 13 December 2008 (UTC) 3501:02:22, 13 December 2008 (UTC) 3465:02:19, 13 December 2008 (UTC) 3431:02:15, 13 December 2008 (UTC) 3412:02:11, 13 December 2008 (UTC) 3388:02:14, 13 December 2008 (UTC) 3366:02:10, 13 December 2008 (UTC) 3344:02:07, 13 December 2008 (UTC) 3323:02:00, 13 December 2008 (UTC) 3293:01:32, 13 December 2008 (UTC) 3275:14:07, 10 December 2008 (UTC) 3256:12:57, 10 December 2008 (UTC) 3204:12:03, 10 December 2008 (UTC) 3165:06:20, 10 December 2008 (UTC) 3150:03:21, 10 December 2008 (UTC) 3132:03:05, 10 December 2008 (UTC) 3105:00:38, 10 December 2008 (UTC) 2963:06:44, 10 December 2008 (UTC) 2805: 2798:14:53, 11 December 2008 (UTC) 2756:12:11, 11 December 2008 (UTC) 1733:21:50, 31 December 2008 (UTC) 1706:01:46, 16 December 2008 (UTC) 1688:01:28, 16 December 2008 (UTC) 1675:00:56, 16 December 2008 (UTC) 1655:23:30, 15 December 2008 (UTC) 1628:22:14, 15 December 2008 (UTC) 1611:21:34, 15 December 2008 (UTC) 1601:20:50, 15 December 2008 (UTC) 1567:20:41, 15 December 2008 (UTC) 1557:16:15, 14 December 2008 (UTC) 1539:15:42, 14 December 2008 (UTC) 1529:11:52, 11 December 2008 (UTC) 1512:06:16, 11 December 2008 (UTC) 1499:14:20, 10 December 2008 (UTC) 1481:07:02, 10 December 2008 (UTC) 6171:Foreign relations of Croatia 3832:Knowledge:Don't be officious 3064:17:10, 9 December 2008 (UTC) 3049:16:48, 9 December 2008 (UTC) 3032:16:41, 9 December 2008 (UTC) 3014:16:39, 9 December 2008 (UTC) 2954:16:48, 9 December 2008 (UTC) 2932:16:41, 9 December 2008 (UTC) 2905:16:34, 9 December 2008 (UTC) 2879:14:23, 9 December 2008 (UTC) 2861:14:04, 9 December 2008 (UTC) 2836:12:38, 9 December 2008 (UTC) 2737:03:40, 9 December 2008 (UTC) 2719:12:06, 8 December 2008 (UTC) 2695:17:54, 6 December 2008 (UTC) 2661:18:23, 6 December 2008 (UTC) 2644:17:49, 6 December 2008 (UTC) 2611:16:10, 6 December 2008 (UTC) 2584:Question to you regarding AT 2578:20:02, 6 December 2008 (UTC) 2560:07:57, 6 December 2008 (UTC) 2532:04:36, 7 December 2008 (UTC) 2409:02:07, 7 December 2008 (UTC) 2388:00:27, 7 December 2008 (UTC) 2362:23:57, 6 December 2008 (UTC) 2346:23:43, 6 December 2008 (UTC) 2319:22:57, 6 December 2008 (UTC) 2301:21:33, 6 December 2008 (UTC) 2283:19:11, 6 December 2008 (UTC) 2227:00:27, 7 December 2008 (UTC) 2210:23:58, 6 December 2008 (UTC) 2196:18:29, 6 December 2008 (UTC) 2175:07:06, 6 December 2008 (UTC) 2160:05:06, 6 December 2008 (UTC) 2146:03:05, 6 December 2008 (UTC) 2124:01:42, 6 December 2008 (UTC) 2096:11:52, 9 December 2008 (UTC) 2082:22:27, 6 December 2008 (UTC) 2065:17:05, 5 December 2008 (UTC) 2050:16:51, 5 December 2008 (UTC) 2023:12:22, 9 December 2008 (UTC) 2005:00:27, 5 December 2008 (UTC) 1971:12:59, 4 December 2008 (UTC) 1958:Read it, replied, thanks. ++ 1953:12:09, 4 December 2008 (UTC) 1933:00:58, 6 December 2008 (UTC) 1915:23:36, 5 December 2008 (UTC) 1890:14:22, 5 December 2008 (UTC) 1872:04:58, 5 December 2008 (UTC) 1857:03:58, 5 December 2008 (UTC) 1842:03:53, 5 December 2008 (UTC) 1825:03:36, 5 December 2008 (UTC) 1807:04:00, 4 December 2008 (UTC) 1785:and yeah - I know there was 1782:03:52, 4 December 2008 (UTC) 1745:10:32, 10 January 2009 (UTC) 1472:12:18, 9 December 2008 (UTC) 1446:11:29, 9 December 2008 (UTC) 1436:06:44, 7 December 2008 (UTC) 1408:13:33, 7 December 2008 (UTC) 1397:16:11, 6 December 2008 (UTC) 1380:11:36, 6 December 2008 (UTC) 1368:10:57, 6 December 2008 (UTC) 1357:10:20, 6 December 2008 (UTC) 1341:07:13, 6 December 2008 (UTC) 1329:05:35, 6 December 2008 (UTC) 1308:05:21, 6 December 2008 (UTC) 1296:03:31, 5 December 2008 (UTC) 1279:00:57, 5 December 2008 (UTC) 1265:20:48, 4 December 2008 (UTC) 1246:00:12, 3 December 2008 (UTC) 1233:Watchlisted already. Thx. ++ 1228:23:13, 2 December 2008 (UTC) 1208:19:11, 2 December 2008 (UTC) 1190:12:50, 2 December 2008 (UTC) 1169:21:52, 1 December 2008 (UTC) 1147:19:12, 1 December 2008 (UTC) 1100:10:05, 1 December 2008 (UTC) 1085:old meta crosswiki checkuser 6490:to override the default. -- 6400:simplifies what I do next, 6225:22:32, 6 January 2009 (UTC) 6032:22:34, 6 January 2009 (UTC) 4824:was speedied, too. Cheers, 4741:(should have said bullet 1) 4194:Followup: I have posted at 3554:to keep removing the tag. ( 2641:a sweet and tender hooligan 2334:Fahrenheit 9/11 controversy 1635: 977:My post 2012 archived talk 918:My 2011/2012 archived talk 90: 81:User:HBC Archive Indexerbot 6661: 6059:3RR Warning at 02:19 from 5512:23:58 22 Dec (by Buster7) 5356:Hello! Your submission of 2624:this morning, well over a 2542:I updated my answer - see 1254:and the recent history at 6089:Factchecker atyourservice 4414:Single Revision Deletions 3842:Knowledge:NOT#BUREAUCRACY 2819: 2780:) 07:36, 11 December 2008 2179:Can you give me specific 1217:Lar, discussion moved to 1045: 976: 917: 788: 659: 530: 361: 142: 98: 85:User:Lar/TalkArchiveIndex 6426:Couple broad comments. 4960:Hows it going so far? :) 3544:please. work on the rest 3518:with the current wording 3485:please. work on the rest 3222:- "your text is no good" 1316:and see what is said. ++ 6167:user:EbaZdameNeBaBdokiN 6038:Sarah Palin editwarring 5850:Baby, it's Cold Outside 5709:A contest like ---: --> 5574:Did you know? talk page 5367:your nomination's entry 4315:Did. Now unblocked per 3766:Chronology (Simplified) 2919:What's a unit block? ++ 1301:reason to keep it...? 5883:A user needs OTRS help 5842: 5817: 5536:DYK for Handling Ships 4319:. Thx for heads up. ++ 4262: 3939:User talk:Mervyn Emrys 2596:User:Lar/Eeyore Policy 1091:User_talk:Nishkid64#AA 789:My 2010 archived talk 660:My 2009 archived talk 531:My 2008 archived talk 362:My 2007 archived talk 143:My 2006 archived talk 64:This is an archive of 5841: 5804: 5265:Hey Lar. The poll on 4932:Slow nite I guess? ++ 4516:all by the same user 4260: 3003:or something else? -- 2744:I've added another IP 2707:please look into this 2373:writing for the enemy 1212: 6501:MediaWiki:Robots.txt 5975:Joe the (unemployed) 5101:Georgewilliamherbert 4881:User talk:Timotheus7 4090:Check your mail pls. 3792:8) I removed the tag 6555:Glad you enjoyed it 6165:Then we are having 5753:Until its resolved? 5681:User_talk:Gatoclass 5491:Anarchangel et alia 5064:lesser of two evils 4521:sulutil:Antoinesdad 4444:Checkuser mail list 4239:Commented there. ++ 2823:You've been Blocked 2806:You've been Blocked 2678:November 2008 issue 1636:Peter's stuff redux 5843: 5818: 5713:this one. Cheers, 5234:User:lustiger seth 4263: 3861:dispute resolution 1503:I'm talking about 1120:Have a beer on me. 101:Talk Page Archives 6390:"what links here" 6145:Harass accounts ? 6108:flagging articles 6053:02:03 All from 5797:Seasons Greetings 5770: 5665: 5620: 5580: 5579: 5385: 5375: 4385: 4308: 2870:Disclaimer: I've 2867: 2847: 2841: 2840: 2782: 2768:comment added by 2697: 1790: 1768:my candidature. 1153: 1152: 1105:A round of drinks 1078: 1077: 1074: 1073: 1063: 1062: 1041: 1040: 972: 971: 913: 912: 784: 783: 655: 654: 526: 525: 357: 356: 134: 133: 6652: 6518: 6512: 6506: 6489: 6483: 6472: 6466: 6460: 6456: 6450: 6445: 6439: 6435: 6429: 6416: 6410: 6281: 5769: 5766: 5763: 5663: 5657: 5651: 5647: 5618: 5612: 5606: 5602: 5547: 5540: 5377: 5374: 5355: 5086: 5080: 5074: 5042: 5004: 4977: 4971: 4965: 4955:Deletey goodness 4737:Cas took it to: 4535: 4529: 4461: 4453: 4420:User_talk:Tznkai 4386: 4383: 4379: 4351:Some of each. ++ 4346: 4307: 4305: 4298: 4052: 3880: 3234:- "no, it isn't" 2872:used this before 2865: 2845: 2817: 2810: 2809: 2781: 2762: 2701:if you have time 2684: 2639: 2635: 2546:and what I said 2515: 2509: 2468: 2418: 1784: 1731: 1729: 1725: 1719: 1433: 1365: 1338: 1305: 1262: 1225: 1144: 1138: 1116: 1109: 1098: 1043: 974: 915: 786: 657: 528: 359: 140: 126: 119: 112: 96: 95: 92: 91: 83:can be found at 48: 47: 6660: 6659: 6655: 6654: 6653: 6651: 6650: 6649: 6557: 6516: 6510: 6504: 6487: 6481: 6470: 6464: 6458: 6454: 6448: 6443: 6437: 6433: 6427: 6414: 6408: 6311: 6279: 6271: 6237: 6147: 6061:User:Ferrylodge 6040: 5977: 5885: 5863: 5858: 5835: 5799: 5767: 5759: 5755: 5707: 5679:(Refactored to 5677: 5661: 5655: 5649: 5616: 5610: 5604: 5598: 5538: 5493: 5413: 5384: 5349: 5309: 5263: 5136: 5084: 5078: 5072: 5040: 5002: 4990: 4975: 4969: 4963: 4957: 4884: 4533: 4527: 4494: 4459: 4451: 4446: 4418:(Refactored to 4416: 4382: 4377: 4372: 4344: 4340: 4301: 4299: 4295: 4218: 4130:!!!! Thanks. ++ 3894: 3878: 3867:to protect the 3863:will result in 3080:Fahrenheit 9/11 3076: 2979: 2940:is sourced and 2808: 2763: 2703: 2673: 2633: 2629: 2586: 2540: 2473: 2432: 2265:) to perform a 2249:made a mess of 2108: 2033: 1979: 1941: 1761: 1727: 1721: 1717: 1715: 1638: 1431: 1363: 1336: 1303: 1260: 1223: 1215: 1197: 1177: 1136: 1133: 1107: 1096:John Vandenberg 1094: 1087: 1046:RfA Thank Yous 130: 103: 70:1 December 2008 58: 45: 44: 37: 32: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 6658: 6656: 6648: 6647: 6646: 6645: 6644: 6643: 6642: 6641: 6556: 6553: 6552: 6551: 6550: 6549: 6548: 6547: 6546: 6545: 6544: 6543: 6542: 6541: 6540: 6539: 6538: 6537: 6405: 6310: 6307: 6306: 6305: 6270: 6267: 6236: 6231: 6230: 6229: 6228: 6227: 6156:user:OdVardara 6152:user:OdVardara 6146: 6143: 6142: 6141: 6140: 6139: 6122: 6083: 6082: 6039: 6036: 6035: 6034: 6002: 5976: 5973: 5972: 5971: 5970: 5969: 5968: 5967: 5938: 5937: 5936: 5935: 5923: 5922: 5895: 5894: 5884: 5881: 5862: 5859: 5856: 5854: 5846: 5836: 5834: 5833:Happy Holidays 5831: 5829: 5828: 5827: 5826: 5825: 5824: 5823: 5822: 5821: 5820: 5798: 5795: 5794: 5793: 5754: 5751: 5750: 5749: 5706: 5703: 5676: 5673: 5672: 5671: 5670: 5669: 5597: 5594: 5578: 5577: 5568:Handling Ships 5548: 5537: 5534: 5492: 5489: 5488: 5487: 5486: 5485: 5484: 5483: 5412: 5409: 5408: 5407: 5378: 5358:Handling Ships 5348: 5345: 5344: 5343: 5308: 5305: 5304: 5303: 5262: 5259: 5258: 5257: 5256: 5255: 5254: 5253: 5252: 5251: 5250: 5249: 5230: 5179:Mrs. Doubtfire 5135: 5132: 5131: 5130: 5097: 5096: 5095: 5094: 5093: 5092: 5069: 5068: 5067: 5060: 5057: 4989: 4984: 4956: 4953: 4952: 4951: 4950: 4949: 4948: 4947: 4883: 4878: 4877: 4876: 4875: 4874: 4845: 4844: 4837: 4836: 4832: 4831: 4818: 4817: 4816: 4815: 4814: 4813: 4812: 4811: 4810: 4809: 4808: 4807: 4806: 4805: 4804: 4803: 4802: 4801: 4792: 4742: 4722: 4721: 4720: 4719: 4718: 4717: 4716: 4715: 4714: 4713: 4712: 4711: 4677: 4664: 4663: 4662: 4661: 4660: 4659: 4658: 4657: 4632: 4631: 4630: 4629: 4628: 4627: 4618: 4609: 4608:my above post. 4596: 4595: 4594: 4593: 4524: 4523: 4514: 4513: 4508: 4503: 4493: 4488: 4487: 4486: 4445: 4442: 4415: 4412: 4411: 4410: 4371: 4368: 4367: 4366: 4339: 4336: 4335: 4334: 4294: 4278: 4255: 4254: 4217: 4214: 4192: 4191: 4190: 4189: 4188: 4187: 4186: 4185: 4184: 4183: 4182: 4181: 4180: 4179: 4178: 4177: 4176: 4175: 4174: 4173: 4047:which came up 3893: 3890: 3889: 3888: 3887: 3886: 3849: 3848: 3847: 3846: 3845: 3844: 3839: 3834: 3829: 3824: 3811: 3809: 3808: 3793: 3790: 3787: 3784: 3781: 3778: 3775: 3772: 3769: 3762: 3761: 3760: 3759: 3758: 3757: 3756: 3755: 3733: 3732: 3731: 3730: 3729: 3728: 3692: 3691: 3675: 3674: 3673: 3672: 3671: 3670: 3669: 3668: 3647: 3646: 3630: 3629: 3628: 3627: 3626: 3625: 3590: 3589: 3573: 3572: 3571: 3570: 3533: 3532: 3508: 3507: 3506: 3505: 3504: 3503: 3491:of doing so. 3468: 3467: 3452: 3451: 3450: 3435: 3434: 3433: 3415: 3414: 3395: 3394: 3393: 3392: 3391: 3390: 3371: 3370: 3369: 3368: 3347: 3346: 3330: 3329: 3328: 3327: 3326: 3325: 3298: 3297: 3296: 3295: 3259: 3258: 3241: 3235: 3229: 3223: 3217: 3212: 3211: 3210: 3209: 3208: 3207: 3206: 3172: 3171: 3170: 3169: 3168: 3167: 3075: 3072: 3071: 3070: 3069: 3068: 3067: 3066: 2978: 2975: 2974: 2973: 2972: 2971: 2970: 2969: 2968: 2967: 2966: 2965: 2912: 2911: 2910: 2909: 2908: 2907: 2884: 2883: 2882: 2881: 2863: 2839: 2838: 2830: 2826: 2825: 2820: 2818: 2807: 2804: 2803: 2802: 2801: 2800: 2770:67.212.187.154 2740: 2739: 2702: 2699: 2683: 2672: 2669: 2668: 2667: 2666: 2665: 2664: 2663: 2585: 2582: 2581: 2580: 2539: 2538:More BLP stuff 2536: 2535: 2534: 2393: 2392: 2391: 2390: 2326: 2325: 2324: 2323: 2322: 2321: 2305: 2304: 2303: 2238: 2237: 2236: 2235: 2234: 2233: 2232: 2231: 2230: 2229: 2198: 2107: 2104: 2103: 2102: 2101: 2100: 2099: 2098: 2032: 2027: 2026: 2025: 1984:I liked that. 1978: 1975: 1974: 1973: 1940: 1937: 1936: 1935: 1907:Privatemusings 1903: 1902: 1901: 1900: 1899: 1898: 1897: 1896: 1895: 1894: 1893: 1892: 1864:Privatemusings 1849:Privatemusings 1817:Privatemusings 1774:Privatemusings 1760: 1757: 1756: 1755: 1754: 1753: 1752: 1751: 1750: 1749: 1748: 1747: 1739: 1637: 1634: 1633: 1632: 1631: 1630: 1586: 1585: 1584: 1583: 1582: 1581: 1580: 1579: 1578: 1577: 1576: 1575: 1574: 1573: 1572: 1571: 1570: 1569: 1427: 1426: 1425: 1424: 1423: 1422: 1421: 1420: 1419: 1418: 1417: 1416: 1415: 1414: 1413: 1412: 1411: 1410: 1402: 1374: 1351: 1347: 1346: 1345: 1344: 1343: 1214: 1211: 1203:. Thank you. 1196: 1193: 1176: 1173: 1172: 1171: 1151: 1150: 1127: 1117: 1106: 1103: 1086: 1083: 1081: 1079: 1076: 1075: 1072: 1071: 1065: 1064: 1061: 1060: 1054: 1048: 1047: 1039: 1038: 1035: 1029: 1028: 1025: 1019: 1018: 1015: 1009: 1008: 1005: 999: 998: 995: 989: 988: 985: 979: 978: 970: 969: 966: 960: 959: 956: 950: 949: 946: 940: 939: 936: 930: 929: 926: 920: 919: 911: 910: 907: 901: 900: 897: 891: 890: 887: 881: 880: 877: 871: 870: 867: 861: 860: 857: 851: 850: 847: 841: 840: 837: 831: 830: 827: 821: 820: 817: 811: 810: 807: 801: 800: 797: 791: 790: 782: 781: 778: 772: 771: 768: 762: 761: 758: 752: 751: 748: 742: 741: 738: 732: 731: 728: 722: 721: 718: 712: 711: 708: 702: 701: 698: 692: 691: 688: 682: 681: 678: 672: 671: 668: 662: 661: 653: 652: 649: 643: 642: 639: 633: 632: 629: 623: 622: 619: 613: 612: 609: 603: 602: 599: 593: 592: 589: 583: 582: 579: 573: 572: 569: 563: 562: 559: 553: 552: 549: 543: 542: 539: 533: 532: 524: 523: 520: 514: 513: 510: 504: 503: 500: 494: 493: 490: 484: 483: 480: 474: 473: 470: 464: 463: 460: 454: 453: 450: 444: 443: 440: 434: 433: 430: 424: 423: 420: 414: 413: 410: 404: 403: 400: 394: 393: 390: 384: 383: 380: 374: 373: 370: 364: 363: 355: 354: 351: 345: 344: 341: 335: 334: 331: 325: 324: 321: 315: 314: 311: 305: 304: 301: 295: 294: 291: 285: 284: 281: 275: 274: 271: 265: 264: 261: 255: 254: 251: 245: 244: 241: 235: 234: 231: 225: 224: 221: 215: 214: 211: 205: 204: 201: 195: 194: 191: 185: 184: 181: 175: 174: 171: 165: 164: 161: 155: 154: 151: 145: 144: 136: 135: 132: 131: 129: 128: 121: 114: 106: 104: 99: 89: 74:1 January 2009 72:through about 62: 60: 51: 46: 38: 33: 26: 25: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 6657: 6640: 6636: 6632: 6628: 6627: 6626: 6623: 6619: 6615: 6610: 6609: 6608: 6604: 6600: 6595: 6594: 6593: 6590: 6586: 6582: 6577: 6576: 6575: 6574: 6570: 6566: 6562: 6554: 6536: 6533: 6529: 6525: 6524: 6523: 6520: 6519: 6509: 6502: 6498: 6497: 6496: 6493: 6486: 6479: 6478: 6477: 6474: 6473: 6463: 6453: 6442: 6432: 6425: 6424: 6423: 6420: 6413: 6406: 6403: 6399: 6395: 6391: 6387: 6383: 6379: 6378: 6377: 6374: 6370: 6366: 6361: 6360: 6359: 6356: 6352: 6351: 6350: 6347: 6343: 6339: 6335: 6330: 6329: 6328: 6327: 6324: 6320: 6316: 6308: 6304: 6301: 6297: 6293: 6289: 6288: 6287: 6286: 6283: 6282: 6275: 6268: 6266: 6265: 6261: 6257: 6252: 6250: 6246: 6242: 6235: 6232: 6226: 6223: 6219: 6215: 6211: 6210: 6209: 6205: 6201: 6197: 6196:user:Pressume 6193: 6192: 6191: 6190: 6186: 6182: 6177: 6174: 6172: 6168: 6163: 6161: 6157: 6153: 6144: 6138: 6135: 6131: 6127: 6123: 6121: 6117: 6113: 6109: 6104: 6100: 6099: 6098: 6094: 6090: 6085: 6084: 6079: 6078: 6077: 6076: 6072: 6068: 6063: 6062: 6057: 6056: 6052: 6049: 6046: 6043: 6037: 6033: 6030: 6026: 6022: 6018: 6017: 6016: 6015: 6011: 6007: 6000: 5998: 5994: 5990: 5988: 5984: 5980: 5974: 5966: 5963: 5959: 5955: 5951: 5950: 5949: 5946: 5945:Jack Merridew 5942: 5941: 5940: 5939: 5934: 5931: 5930:Jack Merridew 5927: 5926: 5925: 5924: 5921: 5918: 5914: 5910: 5906: 5905: 5904: 5903: 5900: 5899:Jack Merridew 5893: 5890: 5889: 5888: 5882: 5880: 5879: 5876: 5872: 5868: 5860: 5857: 5852: 5851: 5840: 5832: 5830: 5816: 5812: 5808: 5803: 5796: 5792: 5789: 5785: 5781: 5777: 5776: 5775: 5774: 5771: 5764: 5762: 5752: 5748: 5745: 5741: 5737: 5733: 5732: 5731: 5730: 5726: 5723: 5720: 5716: 5712: 5704: 5702: 5701: 5698: 5694: 5690: 5686: 5682: 5674: 5668: 5664: 5658: 5652: 5644: 5643: 5642: 5639: 5635: 5631: 5626: 5625: 5624: 5623: 5619: 5613: 5607: 5595: 5593: 5592: 5588: 5584: 5575: 5571: 5570: 5569: 5563: 5562: 5561:Did you know? 5557: 5553: 5549: 5546: 5542: 5541: 5535: 5533: 5532: 5528: 5524: 5520: 5516: 5513: 5511: 5508: 5507:08:56 22 Dec 5506: 5503: 5502:01:25 22 Dec 5501: 5498: 5496: 5490: 5482: 5478: 5474: 5469: 5468: 5467: 5463: 5459: 5455: 5454: 5453: 5450: 5446: 5442: 5438: 5437: 5436: 5435: 5431: 5427: 5423: 5418: 5410: 5406: 5403: 5399: 5395: 5391: 5390: 5389: 5388: 5383: 5382: 5373: 5369: 5368: 5363: 5359: 5354: 5346: 5342: 5339: 5335: 5331: 5326: 5325: 5324: 5323: 5319: 5315: 5314:KFCWeaver1994 5306: 5302: 5299: 5295: 5291: 5287: 5286: 5285: 5284: 5280: 5276: 5272: 5268: 5260: 5248: 5244: 5240: 5235: 5231: 5227: 5226: 5225: 5222: 5218: 5214: 5209: 5208: 5207: 5203: 5199: 5194: 5193: 5192: 5188: 5184: 5180: 5175: 5171: 5170: 5169: 5166: 5162: 5158: 5153: 5152: 5151: 5150: 5146: 5142: 5133: 5129: 5126: 5122: 5118: 5113: 5112: 5111: 5110: 5106: 5102: 5091: 5087: 5081: 5075: 5070: 5065: 5061: 5058: 5055: 5051: 5050: 5048: 5047: 5046: 5043: 5038: 5033: 5029: 5028: 5027: 5024: 5020: 5016: 5011: 5010: 5009: 5008: 5005: 5000: 4995: 4988: 4985: 4983: 4982: 4978: 4972: 4966: 4961: 4954: 4946: 4943: 4939: 4935: 4931: 4930: 4929: 4925: 4921: 4917: 4916: 4915: 4912: 4908: 4904: 4900: 4899: 4898: 4897: 4893: 4889: 4882: 4879: 4873: 4870: 4866: 4862: 4858: 4857: 4856: 4855: 4854: 4853: 4850: 4849:Jack Merridew 4842: 4839: 4838: 4834: 4833: 4830: 4827: 4826:Jack Merridew 4823: 4820: 4819: 4800: 4797: 4796:Jack Merridew 4793: 4790: 4786: 4782: 4778: 4774: 4773: 4772: 4769: 4765: 4761: 4757: 4756: 4755: 4752: 4751:Jack Merridew 4748: 4743: 4740: 4736: 4735: 4734: 4733: 4732: 4731: 4730: 4729: 4728: 4727: 4726: 4725: 4724: 4723: 4710: 4707: 4703: 4699: 4695: 4694: 4693: 4690: 4689:Jack Merridew 4686: 4682: 4678: 4674: 4673: 4672: 4671: 4670: 4669: 4668: 4667: 4666: 4665: 4656: 4653: 4649: 4645: 4640: 4639: 4638: 4637: 4636: 4635: 4634: 4633: 4626: 4623: 4622:Jack Merridew 4619: 4617: 4614: 4613:Jack Merridew 4610: 4607: 4602: 4601: 4600: 4599: 4598: 4597: 4592: 4589: 4585: 4581: 4577: 4576: 4575: 4572: 4568: 4564: 4559: 4558: 4557: 4556: 4553: 4552:Jack Merridew 4549: 4544: 4543: 4540: 4539:Jack Merridew 4532: 4522: 4519: 4518: 4517: 4512: 4509: 4507: 4504: 4502: 4499: 4498: 4497: 4492: 4489: 4485: 4482: 4478: 4474: 4470: 4469: 4468: 4467: 4463: 4462: 4455: 4454: 4443: 4441: 4440: 4437: 4433: 4429: 4425: 4421: 4413: 4409: 4406: 4402: 4398: 4394: 4393: 4392: 4391: 4388: 4387: 4380: 4369: 4365: 4362: 4358: 4354: 4350: 4349: 4348: 4347: 4337: 4333: 4330: 4326: 4322: 4318: 4314: 4313: 4312: 4311: 4306: 4304: 4292: 4289: 4286: 4282: 4279: 4277: 4276: 4272: 4268: 4259: 4253: 4250: 4246: 4242: 4238: 4237: 4236: 4235: 4231: 4227: 4223: 4215: 4213: 4212: 4209: 4205: 4201: 4197: 4172: 4168: 4164: 4160: 4159: 4158: 4154: 4150: 4146: 4145: 4144: 4141: 4137: 4133: 4129: 4125: 4122: 4121: 4120: 4116: 4112: 4108: 4107: 4106: 4103: 4099: 4095: 4091: 4087: 4086: 4085: 4082: 4079: 4076: 4072: 4071: 4070: 4067: 4063: 4059: 4055: 4051: 4046: 4043:PS, see also 4042: 4041: 4040: 4037: 4033: 4029: 4024: 4023: 4022: 4019: 4016: 4013: 4009: 4006: 4005: 4004: 4001: 3997: 3993: 3988: 3987: 3986: 3985: 3982: 3979: 3976: 3972: 3969: 3966: 3962: 3958: 3955: 3952: 3948: 3944: 3940: 3935: 3930: 3925: 3921: 3917: 3913: 3909: 3906: 3903: 3899: 3891: 3885: 3882: 3881: 3874: 3870: 3866: 3862: 3857: 3853: 3852: 3851: 3850: 3843: 3840: 3838: 3835: 3833: 3830: 3828: 3825: 3823: 3820: 3819: 3816: 3815: 3814: 3813: 3812: 3807: 3803: 3799: 3794: 3791: 3788: 3785: 3782: 3779: 3776: 3773: 3770: 3767: 3764: 3763: 3754: 3750: 3746: 3741: 3740: 3739: 3738: 3737: 3736: 3735: 3734: 3727: 3723: 3719: 3714: 3713: 3712: 3708: 3704: 3700: 3696: 3695: 3694: 3693: 3690: 3686: 3682: 3677: 3676: 3667: 3663: 3659: 3655: 3654: 3653: 3652: 3651: 3650: 3649: 3648: 3645: 3641: 3637: 3632: 3631: 3624: 3621: 3617: 3613: 3608: 3607: 3606: 3602: 3598: 3594: 3593: 3592: 3591: 3588: 3584: 3580: 3575: 3574: 3569: 3565: 3561: 3557: 3553: 3549: 3545: 3541: 3537: 3536: 3535: 3534: 3531: 3527: 3523: 3519: 3515: 3510: 3509: 3502: 3498: 3494: 3490: 3486: 3482: 3478: 3474: 3473: 3472: 3471: 3470: 3469: 3466: 3462: 3458: 3453: 3449: 3447: 3443: 3439: 3438: 3436: 3432: 3428: 3424: 3419: 3418: 3417: 3416: 3413: 3409: 3405: 3401: 3397: 3396: 3389: 3385: 3381: 3377: 3376: 3375: 3374: 3373: 3372: 3367: 3363: 3359: 3354: 3351: 3350: 3349: 3348: 3345: 3341: 3337: 3332: 3331: 3324: 3320: 3316: 3312: 3308: 3304: 3303: 3302: 3301: 3300: 3299: 3294: 3290: 3286: 3281: 3280: 3279: 3278: 3277: 3276: 3273: 3269: 3265: 3257: 3253: 3249: 3245: 3242: 3239: 3236: 3233: 3230: 3227: 3224: 3221: 3218: 3216: 3213: 3205: 3201: 3197: 3193: 3189: 3184: 3180: 3179: 3178: 3177: 3176: 3175: 3174: 3173: 3166: 3162: 3158: 3153: 3152: 3151: 3148: 3144: 3140: 3135: 3134: 3133: 3129: 3125: 3121: 3117: 3113: 3109: 3108: 3107: 3106: 3102: 3098: 3093: 3089: 3085: 3081: 3073: 3065: 3062: 3059: 3056: 3052: 3051: 3050: 3047: 3043: 3039: 3035: 3034: 3033: 3030: 3026: 3022: 3018: 3017: 3016: 3015: 3012: 3009: 3006: 3001: 2998: 2994: 2991: 2988: 2984: 2976: 2964: 2961: 2960:Jack Merridew 2957: 2956: 2955: 2951: 2947: 2943: 2939: 2935: 2934: 2933: 2930: 2926: 2922: 2918: 2917: 2916: 2915: 2914: 2913: 2906: 2902: 2898: 2894: 2890: 2889: 2888: 2887: 2886: 2885: 2880: 2877: 2876:Jack Merridew 2873: 2869: 2868: 2864: 2862: 2859: 2855: 2851: 2843: 2842: 2837: 2834: 2833:Jack Merridew 2828: 2827: 2824: 2821: 2816: 2811: 2799: 2796: 2792: 2788: 2784: 2783: 2779: 2775: 2771: 2767: 2760: 2759: 2758: 2757: 2753: 2749: 2745: 2738: 2735: 2731: 2727: 2723: 2722: 2721: 2720: 2716: 2712: 2708: 2700: 2698: 2696: 2692: 2688: 2680: 2679: 2670: 2662: 2659: 2655: 2651: 2647: 2646: 2645: 2642: 2637: 2636: 2628:this week. ➨ 2627: 2623: 2619: 2614: 2613: 2612: 2609: 2605: 2601: 2597: 2592: 2591: 2590: 2583: 2579: 2576: 2572: 2568: 2564: 2563: 2562: 2561: 2557: 2553: 2549: 2545: 2537: 2533: 2530: 2526: 2522: 2518: 2514: 2507: 2504: 2501: 2498: 2495: 2492: 2489: 2486: 2483: 2480: 2477: 2472: 2466: 2463: 2460: 2457: 2454: 2451: 2448: 2445: 2442: 2439: 2436: 2431: 2427: 2426: 2422: 2417: 2413: 2412: 2411: 2410: 2406: 2402: 2398: 2389: 2386: 2382: 2378: 2374: 2369: 2365: 2364: 2363: 2359: 2355: 2350: 2349: 2348: 2347: 2343: 2339: 2335: 2331: 2320: 2316: 2312: 2311: 2306: 2302: 2299: 2295: 2291: 2286: 2285: 2284: 2280: 2276: 2272: 2268: 2264: 2260: 2256: 2252: 2248: 2244: 2243: 2242: 2241: 2240: 2239: 2228: 2225: 2221: 2217: 2213: 2212: 2211: 2207: 2203: 2199: 2197: 2194: 2190: 2186: 2182: 2178: 2177: 2176: 2172: 2168: 2163: 2162: 2161: 2157: 2153: 2150:He means me. 2149: 2148: 2147: 2144: 2140: 2136: 2132: 2128: 2127: 2126: 2125: 2121: 2117: 2113: 2105: 2097: 2093: 2089: 2085: 2084: 2083: 2080: 2076: 2072: 2068: 2067: 2066: 2062: 2058: 2054: 2053: 2052: 2051: 2047: 2043: 2038: 2031: 2028: 2024: 2021: 2017: 2013: 2009: 2008: 2007: 2006: 2002: 1998: 1994: 1989: 1985: 1982: 1976: 1972: 1969: 1965: 1961: 1957: 1956: 1955: 1954: 1950: 1946: 1938: 1934: 1931: 1927: 1923: 1919: 1918: 1917: 1916: 1912: 1908: 1891: 1888: 1884: 1880: 1875: 1874: 1873: 1869: 1865: 1860: 1859: 1858: 1854: 1850: 1845: 1844: 1843: 1840: 1836: 1832: 1828: 1827: 1826: 1822: 1818: 1814: 1810: 1809: 1808: 1805: 1801: 1797: 1793: 1792: 1791: 1788: 1783: 1779: 1775: 1769: 1767: 1758: 1746: 1743: 1740: 1736: 1735: 1734: 1730: 1724: 1720: 1713: 1709: 1708: 1707: 1704: 1700: 1696: 1692: 1691: 1689: 1686: 1682: 1678: 1677: 1676: 1673: 1669: 1665: 1660: 1659: 1658: 1656: 1653: 1649: 1644: 1629: 1626: 1622: 1618: 1614: 1613: 1612: 1609: 1605: 1604: 1603: 1602: 1599: 1595: 1591: 1568: 1565: 1560: 1559: 1558: 1555: 1551: 1547: 1542: 1541: 1540: 1537: 1532: 1531: 1530: 1527: 1523: 1519: 1515: 1514: 1513: 1510: 1506: 1502: 1501: 1500: 1497: 1493: 1489: 1484: 1483: 1482: 1479: 1475: 1474: 1473: 1470: 1466: 1462: 1458: 1453: 1449: 1448: 1447: 1444: 1440: 1439: 1438: 1437: 1434: 1409: 1406: 1403: 1400: 1399: 1398: 1395: 1391: 1387: 1383: 1382: 1381: 1378: 1375: 1371: 1370: 1369: 1366: 1360: 1359: 1358: 1355: 1352: 1348: 1342: 1339: 1332: 1331: 1330: 1327: 1323: 1319: 1315: 1311: 1310: 1309: 1306: 1299: 1298: 1297: 1294: 1290: 1286: 1282: 1281: 1280: 1276: 1272: 1268: 1267: 1266: 1263: 1257: 1253: 1249: 1248: 1247: 1244: 1240: 1236: 1232: 1231: 1230: 1229: 1226: 1220: 1213:Peter's stuff 1210: 1209: 1206: 1202: 1194: 1192: 1191: 1188: 1184: 1182: 1174: 1170: 1167: 1163: 1159: 1155: 1154: 1149: 1148: 1143: 1140: 1139: 1131: 1125: 1121: 1118: 1115: 1111: 1110: 1104: 1102: 1101: 1097: 1092: 1084: 1082: 1070: 1067: 1066: 1058: 1055: 1053: 1050: 1049: 1044: 1036: 1034: 1031: 1030: 1026: 1024: 1021: 1020: 1016: 1014: 1011: 1010: 1006: 1004: 1001: 1000: 996: 994: 991: 990: 986: 984: 981: 980: 975: 967: 965: 962: 961: 957: 955: 952: 951: 947: 945: 942: 941: 937: 935: 932: 931: 927: 925: 922: 921: 916: 908: 906: 903: 902: 898: 896: 893: 892: 888: 886: 883: 882: 878: 876: 873: 872: 868: 866: 863: 862: 858: 856: 853: 852: 848: 846: 843: 842: 838: 836: 833: 832: 828: 826: 823: 822: 818: 816: 813: 812: 808: 806: 803: 802: 798: 796: 793: 792: 787: 779: 777: 774: 773: 769: 767: 764: 763: 759: 757: 754: 753: 749: 747: 744: 743: 739: 737: 734: 733: 729: 727: 724: 723: 719: 717: 714: 713: 709: 707: 704: 703: 699: 697: 694: 693: 689: 687: 684: 683: 679: 677: 674: 673: 669: 667: 664: 663: 658: 650: 648: 645: 644: 640: 638: 635: 634: 630: 628: 625: 624: 620: 618: 615: 614: 610: 608: 605: 604: 600: 598: 595: 594: 590: 588: 585: 584: 580: 578: 575: 574: 570: 568: 565: 564: 560: 558: 555: 554: 550: 548: 545: 544: 540: 538: 535: 534: 529: 521: 519: 516: 515: 511: 509: 506: 505: 501: 499: 496: 495: 491: 489: 486: 485: 481: 479: 476: 475: 471: 469: 466: 465: 461: 459: 456: 455: 451: 449: 446: 445: 441: 439: 436: 435: 431: 429: 426: 425: 421: 419: 416: 415: 411: 409: 406: 405: 401: 399: 396: 395: 391: 389: 386: 385: 381: 379: 376: 375: 371: 369: 366: 365: 360: 352: 350: 347: 346: 342: 340: 337: 336: 332: 330: 327: 326: 322: 320: 317: 316: 312: 310: 307: 306: 302: 300: 297: 296: 292: 290: 287: 286: 282: 280: 277: 276: 272: 270: 267: 266: 262: 260: 257: 256: 252: 250: 247: 246: 242: 240: 237: 236: 232: 230: 227: 226: 222: 220: 217: 216: 212: 210: 207: 206: 202: 200: 197: 196: 192: 190: 187: 186: 182: 180: 177: 176: 172: 170: 167: 166: 162: 160: 157: 156: 152: 150: 147: 146: 141: 138: 137: 127: 122: 120: 115: 113: 108: 107: 105: 102: 97: 94: 93: 88: 86: 82: 77: 75: 71: 67: 66:User talk:Lar 61: 57: 56: 49: 42: 36: 30: 19: 18:User talk:Lar 6635:send/receive 6603:send/receive 6569:send/receive 6558: 6514: 6468: 6397: 6312: 6277: 6272: 6253: 6238: 6178: 6175: 6164: 6148: 6107: 6102: 6064: 6058: 6044: 6041: 6001: 5991: 5981: 5978: 5896: 5886: 5864: 5849: 5844: 5819: 5760: 5756: 5721: 5708: 5678: 5599: 5581: 5566: 5565: 5559: 5517: 5514: 5509: 5504: 5499: 5494: 5473:86.44.30.199 5458:86.44.30.199 5426:86.44.31.179 5421: 5416: 5415:Hi, whoever 5414: 5379: 5365: 5350: 5310: 5264: 5243:send/receive 5202:send/receive 5187:send/receive 5178: 5173: 5145:send/receive 5137: 5098: 5031: 4993: 4991: 4958: 4885: 4846: 4822:w:es:Voltcan 4780: 4684: 4676:watchlisted. 4605: 4545: 4525: 4515: 4511:w:es:Voltcan 4506:w:fr:Voltcan 4495: 4460:bananabucket 4457: 4452:YellowMonkey 4449: 4447: 4417: 4384:/talk to me/ 4375: 4373: 4341: 4338:Just curious 4302: 4296: 4287: 4264: 4219: 4193: 4163:Mervyn Emrys 4149:Mervyn Emrys 4127: 4123: 4111:Mervyn Emrys 4089: 4088:Roger that. 4053: 3967: 3953: 3942: 3928: 3923: 3915: 3911: 3904: 3898:Mervyn Emrys 3895: 3892:Mervyn Emrys 3876: 3869:encyclopedia 3810: 3765: 3698: 3551: 3543: 3538:Good grief. 3517: 3513: 3488: 3484: 3445: 3441: 3440: 3306: 3260: 3243: 3237: 3231: 3225: 3219: 3214: 3191: 3115: 3079: 3077: 2989: 2980: 2941: 2846:(apparently) 2822: 2741: 2704: 2676: 2674: 2631: 2625: 2621: 2587: 2541: 2516: 2502: 2496: 2490: 2484: 2478: 2461: 2455: 2449: 2443: 2437: 2419: 2394: 2367: 2366:Guys... You 2327: 2308: 2131:User:Dynaguy 2109: 2034: 1990: 1986: 1983: 1980: 1942: 1904: 1786: 1770: 1765: 1762: 1722: 1711: 1642: 1639: 1587: 1456: 1451: 1428: 1216: 1198: 1185: 1178: 1134: 1126: 1122: 1119: 1088: 1080: 1068: 646: 100: 78: 73: 69: 63: 59: 53: 52: 34: 5999:ism schism 5995:ism schism 5552:23 December 4779:that reads 4777:User:TLazzo 4685:really busy 4448:That's me. 4124:Please, no. 3745:Dynablaster 3703:Dynablaster 3658:Dynablaster 3560:Dynablaster 3493:Dynablaster 3404:Dynablaster 3380:Dynablaster 3315:Dynablaster 3244:Dynablaster 3232:Dynablaster 3220:Dynablaster 3196:Dynablaster 3124:Dynablaster 3097:Dynablaster 2764:—Preceding 2471:Dynablaster 2423:is not for 2401:Dynablaster 2338:Dynablaster 2275:Dynablaster 2245:Basically, 2152:Dynablaster 2088:Steelbeard1 2057:Steelbeard1 2042:Steelbeard1 1997:Ottava Rima 1350:RfC by now. 1271:Dana boomer 1250:Please see 1199:Please see 1052:RFA Archive 68:from about 6334:Wikisource 6269:Ya seen... 5675:Poll close 4747:PortionPac 4687:. Cheers, 4550:. Cheers, 4303:Sandstein 4261:WikiThanks 3920:WT:ACE2008 3873:disruption 3114:. Please, 2983:True 12345 2977:True 12345 2942:unit block 2938:Unit block 2552:Carcharoth 2500:page moves 2459:page moves 2267:Check User 1033:Archive 84 1023:Archive 83 1013:Archive 82 1003:Archive 81 993:Archive 80 983:Archive 79 964:Archive 78 954:Archive 77 944:Archive 76 934:Archive 75 924:Archive 74 905:Archive 73 895:Archive 72 885:Archive 71 875:Archive 70 865:Archive 69 855:Archive 68 845:Archive 67 835:Archive 66 825:Archive 65 815:Archive 64 805:Archive 63 795:Archive 62 776:Archive 61 766:Archive 60 756:Archive 59 746:Archive 58 736:Archive 57 726:Archive 56 716:Archive 55 706:Archive 54 696:Archive 53 686:Archive 52 676:Archive 51 666:Archive 50 647:Archive 49 637:Archive 48 627:Archive 47 617:Archive 46 607:Archive 45 597:Archive 44 587:Archive 43 577:Archive 42 567:Archive 41 557:Archive 40 547:Archive 39 537:Archive 38 518:Archive 37 508:Archive 36 498:Archive 35 488:Archive 34 478:Archive 33 468:Archive 32 458:Archive 31 448:Archive 30 438:Archive 29 428:Archive 28 418:Archive 27 408:Archive 26 398:Archive 25 388:Archive 24 378:Archive 23 368:Archive 22 349:Archive 21 339:Archive 20 329:Archive 19 319:Archive 18 309:Archive 17 299:Archive 16 289:Archive 15 279:Archive 14 269:Archive 13 259:Archive 12 249:Archive 11 239:Archive 10 41:Archive 50 35:Archive 49 29:Archive 48 5807:Guettarda 5685:my policy 5583:BorgQueen 5411:BLP board 5372:Politizer 5229:talkpage. 5181:.) - Dan 5073:rootology 4964:rootology 4789:same vein 4424:my policy 4267:Kafka Liz 4226:Kafka Liz 4054:Unrelated 3947:Thegroove 3865:sanctions 3856:WP:MEDCAB 2997:WP:VANISH 2981:Lar, hi, 2946:Gwen Gale 2897:Gwen Gale 2748:Gwen Gale 2711:Gwen Gale 2517:Unrelated 2506:block log 2465:block log 2430:Coruscant 2421:CheckUser 1945:Kafka Liz 1432:Montanabw 1364:Montanabw 1337:Montanabw 1304:Montanabw 1261:Montanabw 1252:Talk:Mare 1224:Montanabw 1221:. FYI. 1205:Jehochman 229:Archive 9 219:Archive 8 209:Archive 7 199:Archive 6 189:Archive 5 179:Archive 4 169:Archive 3 159:Archive 2 149:Archive 1 6273:...this 5989:Mattnad 5985:Mattnad 5725:contribs 5715:Casliber 5711:ta-daaaa 5662:contribs 5617:contribs 5381:contribs 5054:unperson 4794:Cheers, 4291:contribs 3971:contribs 3957:contribs 3908:contribs 2993:contribs 2831:Cheers, 2778:contribs 2766:unsigned 2742:Thanks. 2687:BrownBot 2626:thousand 2622:hundreds 2482:contribs 2441:contribs 1766:Suppport 1712:anything 1681:Bishonen 1648:Bishonen 1137:SilkTork 1057:Howcheng 6517:MBisanz 6471:MBisanz 6441:NOINDEX 6398:greatly 6309:Noindex 6280:MBisanz 6200:Rjecina 6181:Rjecina 6160:example 6112:Collect 6067:Collect 6006:Collect 5855:Best, 5761:Arcayne 5523:Collect 5360:at the 4843:- Grawp 4531:db-spam 4501:Voltcan 4491:Voltcan 4370:Commons 4281:Scootey 3879:MBisanz 3400:WP:NPOV 2634:ЯEDVERS 2618:WP:DENY 2425:fishing 1977:Moulton 1787:another 6631:Dank55 6599:Dank55 6565:Dank55 6256:Daniel 6050:02:11 6047:02:15 5650:seicer 5605:seicer 5267:WT:DYK 5261:WT:DYK 5239:Dank55 5198:Dank55 5183:Dank55 5174:that's 5141:Dank55 4345:Durova 4317:Seicer 3961:Naerii 3934:bitten 3916:wasn't 3798:JJJ999 3718:JJJ999 3681:JJJ999 3636:JJJ999 3597:JJJ999 3579:JJJ999 3522:JJJ999 3457:JJJ999 3423:JJJ999 3358:JJJ999 3336:JJJ999 3285:JJJ999 3248:JJJ999 3183:JJJ999 3157:JJJ999 3116:please 3092:JJJ999 2397:JJJ999 2354:JJJ999 2330:JJJ999 2247:JJJ999 2202:JJJ999 2167:JJJ999 2116:JJJ999 1314:WP:MfD 6508:INDEX 6485:INDEX 6462:INDEX 6452:INDEX 6431:INDEX 6412:INDEX 5307:Hello 4606:after 3871:from 3796:on... 3112:WP:OR 2488:count 2447:count 2368:don't 2181:diffs 2086:Yup. 1742:Peter 1608:Peter 1564:Peter 1536:Peter 1509:Peter 1478:Peter 1443:Peter 1405:Peter 1377:Peter 1354:Peter 1187:Peter 16:< 6436:and 6260:talk 6241:here 6204:talk 6185:talk 6116:talk 6093:talk 6071:talk 6010:talk 5811:talk 5719:talk 5687:) ++ 5683:per 5656:talk 5611:talk 5596:RFAR 5587:talk 5556:2008 5527:talk 5477:talk 5462:talk 5430:talk 5318:talk 5172:Now 5105:talk 5037:Wily 5032:hope 4999:Wily 4994:also 4924:talk 4920:John 4892:talk 4888:John 4426:) ++ 4422:per 4285:talk 4271:talk 4230:talk 4222:this 4167:talk 4153:talk 4115:talk 3965:talk 3951:talk 3943:does 3924:does 3902:talk 3802:talk 3749:talk 3722:talk 3707:talk 3699:have 3685:talk 3679:ban. 3662:talk 3640:talk 3601:talk 3583:talk 3564:talk 3556:diff 3548:diff 3546:". ( 3526:talk 3497:talk 3481:diff 3477:diff 3461:talk 3427:talk 3408:talk 3384:talk 3362:talk 3340:talk 3319:talk 3311:diff 3289:talk 3252:talk 3200:talk 3188:diff 3161:talk 3128:talk 3120:diff 3101:talk 3084:NPOV 3074:NPOV 2987:talk 2950:talk 2901:talk 2893:this 2774:talk 2752:talk 2715:talk 2691:talk 2682:you. 2675:The 2556:talk 2548:here 2544:here 2519:. ++ 2510:are 2494:logs 2476:talk 2469:and 2453:logs 2435:talk 2405:talk 2358:talk 2342:talk 2315:talk 2279:talk 2271:diff 2263:diff 2259:diff 2255:diff 2251:this 2206:talk 2171:talk 2156:talk 2120:talk 2092:talk 2061:talk 2046:talk 2001:talk 1993:this 1949:talk 1939:Ping 1911:talk 1868:talk 1853:talk 1821:talk 1813:this 1778:talk 1685:talk 1652:talk 1505:this 1452:your 1275:talk 1132:of: 6614:Lar 6581:Lar 6532:NE2 6492:NE2 6419:NE2 6365:Lar 6355:NE2 6338:Lar 6323:NE2 6292:Lar 6214:Lar 6126:Lar 6021:Lar 5954:Lar 5909:Lar 5867:Lar 5780:Lar 5736:Lar 5689:Lar 5630:Lar 5550:On 5441:Lar 5422:did 5417:you 5394:Lar 5330:Lar 5290:Lar 5271:\ / 5213:Lar 5157:Lar 5134:VPP 5117:Lar 5062:c) 5015:Lar 4934:Lar 4903:Lar 4861:Lar 4760:Lar 4698:Lar 4644:Lar 4580:Lar 4563:Lar 4473:Lar 4428:Lar 4397:Lar 4378:abf 4353:Lar 4321:Lar 4241:Lar 4200:Lar 4132:Lar 4094:Lar 4058:Lar 4028:Lar 3992:Lar 3912:was 3875:. 3612:Lar 3552:not 3540:DGG 3264:Lar 3238:JJJ 3226:JJJ 3139:Lar 3038:Lar 3021:Lar 2921:Lar 2895::) 2850:Lar 2787:Lar 2726:Lar 2650:Lar 2600:Lar 2567:Lar 2521:Lar 2377:Lar 2310:DGG 2290:Lar 2216:Lar 2185:Lar 2165:it. 2135:Lar 2071:Lar 2012:Lar 1960:Lar 1922:Lar 1879:Lar 1831:Lar 1796:Lar 1723:BMW 1695:Lar 1664:Lar 1643:you 1617:Lar 1590:Lar 1546:Lar 1518:Lar 1488:Lar 1461:Lar 1386:Lar 1373:at. 1318:Lar 1285:Lar 1235:Lar 1158:Lar 1130:RfA 87:. 6637:) 6616:: 6612:++ 6605:) 6583:: 6579:++ 6571:) 6513:. 6511:}} 6505:{{ 6488:}} 6482:{{ 6465:}} 6459:{{ 6455:}} 6449:{{ 6444:}} 6438:{{ 6434:}} 6428:{{ 6415:}} 6409:{{ 6367:: 6340:: 6294:: 6276:? 6262:) 6251:. 6216:: 6206:) 6187:) 6128:: 6118:) 6095:) 6073:) 6023:: 6012:) 5956:: 5911:: 5869:: 5865:++ 5813:) 5782:: 5768:() 5738:: 5727:) 5691:: 5659:| 5653:| 5632:: 5628:++ 5614:| 5608:| 5589:) 5576:. 5558:, 5554:, 5529:) 5479:) 5464:) 5443:: 5432:) 5396:: 5332:: 5328:++ 5320:) 5292:: 5281:) 5277:| 5245:) 5215:: 5204:) 5189:) 5159:: 5147:) 5119:: 5107:) 5088:) 5082:)( 5017:: 5013:++ 4979:) 4973:)( 4936:: 4926:) 4905:: 4894:) 4863:: 4762:: 4700:: 4646:: 4642:++ 4582:: 4565:: 4534:}} 4528:{{ 4475:: 4464:) 4430:: 4399:: 4355:: 4323:: 4273:) 4243:: 4232:) 4202:: 4169:) 4155:) 4134:: 4117:) 4096:: 4092:++ 4081:ka 4078:on 4075:El 4060:: 4030:: 4026:++ 4018:ka 4015:on 4012:El 4010:-- 3994:: 3981:ka 3978:on 3975:El 3929:do 3804:) 3751:) 3724:) 3709:) 3697:I 3687:) 3664:) 3642:) 3614:: 3610:++ 3603:) 3585:) 3566:) 3528:) 3499:) 3489:me 3463:) 3429:) 3410:) 3386:) 3364:) 3342:) 3321:) 3307:is 3291:) 3266:: 3254:) 3202:) 3192:me 3163:) 3141:: 3137:++ 3130:) 3103:) 3061:ka 3058:on 3055:El 3040:: 3023:: 3011:ka 3008:on 3005:El 2952:) 2923:: 2903:) 2852:: 2789:: 2776:• 2754:) 2728:: 2717:) 2693:) 2652:: 2602:: 2569:: 2558:) 2550:. 2523:: 2407:) 2379:: 2360:) 2344:) 2317:) 2292:: 2281:) 2218:: 2208:) 2187:: 2173:) 2158:) 2137:: 2122:) 2094:) 2073:: 2063:) 2048:) 2014:: 2003:) 1962:: 1951:) 1924:: 1913:) 1881:: 1870:) 1855:) 1833:: 1823:) 1798:: 1780:) 1697:: 1690:. 1683:| 1666:: 1657:. 1650:| 1619:: 1592:: 1548:: 1520:: 1507:. 1490:: 1463:: 1388:: 1320:: 1287:: 1277:) 1237:: 1160:: 1145:. 39:| 27:← 6633:( 6622:c 6620:/ 6618:t 6601:( 6589:c 6587:/ 6585:t 6567:( 6404:. 6373:c 6371:/ 6369:t 6346:c 6344:/ 6342:t 6300:c 6298:/ 6296:t 6258:( 6222:c 6220:/ 6218:t 6202:( 6183:( 6134:c 6132:/ 6130:t 6114:( 6091:( 6069:( 6029:c 6027:/ 6025:t 6008:( 5962:c 5960:/ 5958:t 5917:c 5915:/ 5913:t 5875:c 5873:/ 5871:t 5809:( 5788:c 5786:/ 5784:t 5744:c 5742:/ 5740:t 5722:· 5717:( 5697:c 5695:/ 5693:t 5638:c 5636:/ 5634:t 5585:( 5525:( 5475:( 5460:( 5449:c 5447:/ 5445:t 5428:( 5402:c 5400:/ 5398:t 5376:/ 5338:c 5336:/ 5334:t 5316:( 5298:c 5296:/ 5294:t 5279:※ 5275:⁂ 5273:( 5241:( 5221:c 5219:/ 5217:t 5200:( 5185:( 5165:c 5163:/ 5161:t 5143:( 5125:c 5123:/ 5121:t 5103:( 5085:T 5079:C 5076:( 5066:. 5041:D 5023:c 5021:/ 5019:t 5003:D 4976:T 4970:C 4967:( 4942:c 4940:/ 4938:t 4922:( 4911:c 4909:/ 4907:t 4890:( 4869:c 4867:/ 4865:t 4791:. 4768:c 4766:/ 4764:t 4706:c 4704:/ 4702:t 4652:c 4650:/ 4648:t 4588:c 4586:/ 4584:t 4571:c 4569:/ 4567:t 4481:c 4479:/ 4477:t 4456:( 4436:c 4434:/ 4432:t 4405:c 4403:/ 4401:t 4361:c 4359:/ 4357:t 4329:c 4327:/ 4325:t 4293:) 4288:· 4283:( 4269:( 4249:c 4247:/ 4245:t 4228:( 4208:c 4206:/ 4204:t 4165:( 4151:( 4140:c 4138:/ 4136:t 4113:( 4102:c 4100:/ 4098:t 4066:c 4064:/ 4062:t 4036:c 4034:/ 4032:t 4000:c 3998:/ 3996:t 3968:· 3963:( 3954:· 3949:( 3905:· 3900:( 3800:( 3768:: 3747:( 3720:( 3705:( 3683:( 3660:( 3638:( 3620:c 3618:/ 3616:t 3599:( 3581:( 3562:( 3524:( 3495:( 3459:( 3425:( 3406:( 3382:( 3360:( 3338:( 3317:( 3287:( 3272:c 3270:/ 3268:t 3250:( 3198:( 3186:( 3159:( 3147:c 3145:/ 3143:t 3126:( 3099:( 3046:c 3044:/ 3042:t 3029:c 3027:/ 3025:t 2999:. 2990:· 2985:( 2948:( 2929:c 2927:/ 2925:t 2899:( 2858:c 2856:/ 2854:t 2795:c 2793:/ 2791:t 2772:( 2750:( 2734:c 2732:/ 2730:t 2713:( 2689:( 2658:c 2656:/ 2654:t 2638:❞ 2630:❝ 2608:c 2606:/ 2604:t 2575:c 2573:/ 2571:t 2554:( 2529:c 2527:/ 2525:t 2508:) 2503:· 2497:· 2491:· 2485:· 2479:· 2474:( 2467:) 2462:· 2456:· 2450:· 2444:· 2438:· 2433:( 2403:( 2385:c 2383:/ 2381:t 2356:( 2340:( 2313:( 2298:c 2296:/ 2294:t 2277:( 2224:c 2222:/ 2220:t 2204:( 2193:c 2191:/ 2189:t 2169:( 2154:( 2143:c 2141:/ 2139:t 2118:( 2090:( 2079:c 2077:/ 2075:t 2059:( 2044:( 2020:c 2018:/ 2016:t 1999:( 1968:c 1966:/ 1964:t 1947:( 1930:c 1928:/ 1926:t 1909:( 1887:c 1885:/ 1883:t 1866:( 1851:( 1839:c 1837:/ 1835:t 1819:( 1804:c 1802:/ 1800:t 1776:( 1728:Δ 1718:♪ 1703:c 1701:/ 1699:t 1672:c 1670:/ 1668:t 1625:c 1623:/ 1621:t 1598:c 1596:/ 1594:t 1554:c 1552:/ 1550:t 1526:c 1524:/ 1522:t 1496:c 1494:/ 1492:t 1469:c 1467:/ 1465:t 1394:c 1392:/ 1390:t 1326:c 1324:/ 1322:t 1293:c 1291:/ 1289:t 1273:( 1243:c 1241:/ 1239:t 1166:c 1164:/ 1162:t 1141:* 125:e 118:t 111:v 43:→ 31:|

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