555:
get an obviously legitimate website to stay on
Knowledge (XXG). I mean, the sheer size of its membership database should be enough to have it listed here, I'm just confused as to the entry process of websites here. I mean, if I had a few hours, I'm sure I could find many websites on the list of social networks that, other than casual mentions on random news articles, don't belong here at all (according to your view that each article needs news articles as references). It's just disparaging, that's all, and I think instead of immediately trying to delete things, you guys should improve Knowledge (XXG) by fixing articles to make them acceptable, rather than just immediately deleting them. I mean, what if I am researching dating sites for a school project and I miss FaceTheJury (a definite for my list) and it's not on Knowledge (XXG)? Sure, Knowledge (XXG) isn't really perfect for school projects, but it SHOULD be a better choice than winging a project with just ones on imagination. Anyway, I digress.
590:
research, What
Knowledge (XXG) is not, and Biographies of living persons." It also states that popularity does not preclude the inclusion of an article. My question is, how can one have an article made when it has somehow gone "under the radar" of popular culture? This is extremely disconcerting to me because I know for a fact FaceTheJury is a very active, online community with many, many members (reported by itself and by Big-Boards.com) to have more than 500,000 members. That alone should fit the criteria of being notable, no? Help me to understand how an article can be added when it has, like I mentioned, "flown under the radar" by some odd reason.
412:
795:
believe that people are being biased in their actions. But at a certain point you have to deal with that you are in the minority and do not have a consensus. It can help to take on more "administrative" tasks like contributing to AFD discussions, or new page patrol, to take part in discussions regarding pages that you are not personally involved in. That way you can learn more about the various guidelines, and how they are applied in different cases.
1006:
931:
676:
of this magnitude should have a prominent, large-scale website such as this listed and there is absolutely no logical reason to state otherwise. Now, I know there are logical, rule-based people who are out there who agree with me, and luckily I'm sure one of them will find a way to keep this article on
Knowledge (XXG). If not, it's a true shame, and I will stop using Knowledge (XXG) because of this bizarre censorship.
153:
217:
585:. I am just one opinion, which is why the article is currently up and receiving a deletion discussion. You are making assumptions regarding "obvious" though. We have very clearly spelled out standards, which I have linked you several times. If you think you meet those standards, please link to the specific passages of the guildelines and policies, and indicate how you satisfy them.
1046:
821:
750:. However, the editors who regularly edit those pages may have some standards for inclusion in their lists that I am not aware of. (The second page for example says it only lists forums that have wikipedia pages of their own) I would start on the talk pages of those articles and see what people think, rather than just adding the information
291:
than helping to build on them, especially when it is obvious that the entry I made is legitimate and "noteworthy." (About as noteworthy as "vampirefreaks.com." Now, someone help me or feel disgusted with yourselves for being abusive towards new CONTRIBUTORS to
Knowledge (XXG) and being more of a detractor to this wonderful website.
980:. The only explanation you gave for it being "not notable" was that there were "no sources". I found many very quickly, and presented them at the AFD, and can find more upon request. Wondered if you had any other sort of problem with the topic. If you do, please include it at the AFD discussion. Thanks.
912:
Honestly, Knowledge (XXG) can be extremely confusing with how it arbitrarily keeps or deletes articles. Some ridiculously petty and horrible articles are kept, while others that have completely logical information are deleted. So, I am sorry yours randomly got deleted, but I have no real power here
339:
I was attempting to cite another source, but it is being blocked for some reason. It doesn't make sense, because that website seems to compare, very logically, all different types of websites online. I'm baffled as to the types of "moderators" or whatever are trying to delete my article rather than
951:
I don't know if you're being sarcastic or not, but I want to state for the record that as the original nominator for this article to be deleted, I do not nor have I ever worked for Apple. It was not nominated for deletion because of its success or failure in the market, nor is its success or failure
675:
I have already proven that this article has passed WP:Notability with two references that "take notice" of the website. One of those references is mysteriously "black listed" and the other one apparently doesn't fit the criteria because one person on this talk page says it doesn't. An encyclopedia
612:
I think the answer is - It cannot. If there are no reliable sources about it, then it is in fact not notable for the purposes of wikipedia. Per the notability guideline : "Determining notability does not necessarily depend on things like fame, importance, or popularity—although those may enhance the
554:
Seven references to basically the same exact story, that's not really "notable" to me at all; so, who's to judge what is and is not "notable" on
Knowledge (XXG)? You guys? It seems that way, since you are the ones trying to delete this. I just don't have the time and energy to figure out a way to
889:
Thank you for your reference and attempt to save our page for "Jetset
Magazine." Unfortunately it has been deleted, Despite not being sold on Newstands, Jetset Magazine is a private publication with an exclusive membership. Aside from the facts, our page was still deleted. Anything you can do again
445:
I have no produced the same exact amount of "notability" as the entry for
VampireFreaks.com. So, logically speaking, if VampireFreaks.com has not been deleted, nor should FaceTheJury.com. I provided a link to a crime that was committed and attached to FaceTheJury.com, similar to VampireFreaks.com
794:
so that you can be involved in wikipedia more productively in the future. I have certainly been involved with such pages in the past, and generally I try to find additional sources. At a more general level - there have been numerous times when I disagree with the way a policy is being enforced, or
698:
Nothing is happening "because" I am deciding anything. I am trying to help you by informing you of general policies and previous consensus. As I mentioned, you are free to go to the reliable sources noticeboard to try and get bigboards judged reliable - but I think you will not be successful. The
359:
Find(the) best (dot) com is for some reason being black-listed. Looking over the site, I have no idea why it would be black-listed. I am simply being logical, I have used
Knowledge (XXG) for many, many years, and a website such as FTJ should be listed on Knowledge (XXG). For a dating site to be
290:
There are many listings for obscure dating sites on
Knowledge (XXG) and this one is definitely notable. I am adding more references as we speak and have donated money to Knowledge (XXG). There is something very wrong with Knowledge (XXG) users who are more concerned with deleting entries rather
589:
Luckily, WP: Notability states that "These notability guidelines only outline how suitable a topic is for its own article or list. They do not directly limit the content of an article or list. For
Knowledge (XXG)'s policies regarding content, see Neutral point of view, Verifiability, No original
469:
You do understand that this article is not about "me," right? This article is about a dating website, not a human being. Why would you say "find a bunch more articles talking about you"? This place is beginning to look very, very anti-academic, and that truly disappoints me, seeing as how I
384:
Good job finding the herald reference. Unfortunately that article is not actually about facethejury so fails the portion of the notability guideline. Specifically ""Significant coverage" means that sources address the subject directly in detail, so no original research is needed to extract the
368:. Regarding needing a news source - yes, that is exactly the policy of wikipedia. We are not a site to be used to promote a website. We are site to find information about topics which are ALREADY notable (by someone else noting it). Please read the policies I have linked to you several times.
613:
acceptability of a subject that meets the guidelines explained below." A site can be important without being notable (true for people, companies, websites, books, etc). It can also be notable, without being important (if some newspaper or magazine writers happen to like it).
699:
fundamental problem is you think that you have "proved", that things are "obvious", that we are "censoring". There can be differences of opinions on things. When a large number of people tell you you need to rethink something, or are incorrect - sometimes they are right.
1073:
located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you.
848:
located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you.
810:
Fascinating. I can't wait to add more to the community and to ensure that things like this particular scenario are watched more closely in the future. Knowledge (XXG) should have articles on everything in existence, not just things featured in news papers.
360:
listed ONLY because it has a news story about it, doesn't make sense. That's not logical. What about a new website that is launched? It has to somehow make the news before it is granted an entry on Knowledge (XXG)? This is not logical, at all.
508:
How on Earth is VampireFreaks.com still here and FaceTheJury.com is up for deletion? It's just a double-standard, I suppose. I have given enough criteria (big-boards.com) to justify keeping my legitimate, yet small, article on Knowledge (XXG).
179:
until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.
492:
I apologize for saying "you". I had assumed that you are in some way associated with the website. I think you and I have very different definitions of "academic". Expecting special consideration because you donated? Yah. thats academic.
250:
According to WP:BOLD I made an article that was sorely missing from Knowledge (XXG) and no one is helping me improve the article and only trying to delete it. This is against Knowledge (XXG)'s policies of "being bold."
183:
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article.
1105:
for why. It is often that links go dead, and removing text due to the link being dead is usually an invalid move and detrimental to this site; most of the times, the links can be easily replaced. You should use
764:
Another good idea, thank you. Have you ever run into this particular problem before? Finding something that should, in your opinion, be added to Knowledge (XXG), only to be told it is not notable?
385:
content. Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention but it need not be the main topic of the source material." You would need to find some sources saying what a great resource FTJ is etc.
1013:
317:
as I mentioned before. Please show specifically how you have complied with the policies I posted to you previously, and you will get a lot more help than attacking everyone.
1009:
Thanks for helping to make MMA articles on wikipedia better! In September 168 people made a total of 956 edits to MMA articles. I noticed you havn't listed yourself on the
646:
article for deletion just because we "want it gone"; we do not feel the article passes notability guidelines at the moment and so we initiated a deletion discussion. --
255:
Being bold does not mean you get to be bold and cannot be reverted. It means be bold and see what happens. What is happening is your article being deleted. Please read
1017:
864:
220:
Please stop. Continuing to remove maintenance templates from pages on Knowledge (XXG) without resolving the problem that the template refers to, may be considered
176:
634:
an excuse for keeping the article, If you feel that VampireFreaks.Com should be deleted, and you have Knowledge (XXG) policies to support it, then list it at
1152:
165:
581:
exists. If someone notices them they may be deleted in the future. You may nominate them for deletion yourself if you feel like it. Who is to judge is via
1010:
78:
944:
48:
977:
913:
other than my "vote," which (according to Knowledge (XXG)) isn't even really a vote, but more-so a "part of a discussion" in any articles lifespan.
536:
83:
718:
also, if you wish to try and petition directly for the notability of the site (which is seperate than the article for deletion) you could do so via
937:
930:
1142:
742:
Although you likely cannot justify a full article for this site, it may be possible to add some informatino about the site to a page such as
1148:
1138:
897:
771:
743:
683:
597:
562:
516:
477:
26:
419:. They are all blogs, or website directory sites, or sites like alexa that report on every website, and do not help contribute at all to
1069:
1063:
844:
838:
719:
112:
on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out
1064:
839:
1070:
845:
68:
1145:). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles.
73:
42:
22:
660:
198:
130:
408:
There are 0 google news hits for facethejury (compare to match.com, eharmony.com etc which have many many google news hits.
34:
64:
on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:
627:
454:
links discussing it. You have one. Find a bunch more articles talking about you, and then you can approach notability.
225:
169:
301:
attacks is a good way to get yourself in trouble. Other sites that perhaps should not exist do have pages. Please see
365:
344:
What site are you trying to link to? Some sites that are well known for being problematic are blocked pre-emptively.
1129:
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Knowledge (XXG) appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited
405:
So, I did some sdearches to see if I could help you out, and I must say I think your outlook does not look good.
259:
962:
88:
901:
775:
687:
601:
566:
520:
481:
256:
105:
29:. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as
747:
535:
references to it. If you want you could try to get bigboards judged to be a reliable source by going to the
1054:
893:
829:
767:
679:
593:
578:
558:
512:
473:
302:
263:
109:
986:
1102:
1050:
825:
582:
113:
298:
98:
221:
914:
648:
186:
118:
1107:
875:
800:
755:
727:
704:
654:
642:
above is disrespectful and rude. We are willing to help you with the article. We do not nominate
618:
544:
498:
459:
431:
390:
373:
349:
322:
275:
236:
192:
160:
144:
124:
30:
1168:
1115:
1079:
1005:
981:
854:
639:
267:
1026:
635:
57:
532:
451:
416:
314:
305:. If you feel those sites should be deleted, you may nominate them for deletion. It is
52:, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type
423:
420:
1159:
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these
1130:
958:
871:
796:
751:
723:
700:
691:
614:
605:
570:
540:
524:
494:
485:
463:
455:
427:
386:
369:
345:
318:
271:
232:
93:
1164:
1160:
1111:
1075:
850:
790:
be included in wikipedia (at this time). I am merely trying to help you understand
1061:( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button
836:( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button
722:
but again, I think you will not be successfull. But I am pointing out the option.
577:
You are very right that there are many sites with pages that probably shouldn't.
230:
removing deletion templates from an article, before the discussion is completed.
1022:
1172:
1119:
1083:
1030:
991:
966:
905:
879:
858:
804:
779:
759:
731:
708:
667:
622:
548:
502:
435:
394:
377:
353:
326:
279:
240:
205:
137:
638:
and if consensus is to delete, it's deleted. Also, your misunderstanding of
954:
270:. You do not get to 'demand' anything. That is not how wikipedia works.
1134:
450:
Vampirefreaks has been associated with multiple events, and had 5 or 6
364:
you can find more information about why that site was blacklisted here
890:
to assist us in establishing this page would be much appreciated.
340:
help me. It is very upsetting to see people being so un-academic.
40:
There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called
1058:
833:
1053:
and Knowledge (XXG) pages that have open discussion, you should
828:
and Knowledge (XXG) pages that have open discussion, you should
415:
none of the source are major editorial websites that would meet
309:
that your site is legitimate and noteworthy, which you need to
1016:
page. Take a look, sign up, and don't forget to say hi on the
224:. Further edits of this type may result in your account being
46:. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the
947:
at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
929:
164:
is suitable for inclusion in Knowledge (XXG) according to
539:
but I believe you will not be successful in that effort.
1049:
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to
824:
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to
1133:, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page
1098:
1094:
158:
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article
943:
Message added 00:54, 26 September 2012 (UTC). You can
976:
Hi, just wondered if you had any further thoughts at
865:Knowledge (XXG):Articles_for_deletion/Eduard_Davis
177:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Facethejury
1101:that you made generally should not be done. Read
936:Hello, LogicalCreator. You have new messages at
1125:Disambiguation link notification for September 6
952:a valid reason for it to be kept or deleted.
33:, may not conform to some of Knowledge (XXG)'s
786:To be clear, I think this particular article
8:
978:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Mobage
537:Knowledge (XXG):Reliable sources/Noticeboard
116:or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!
938:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/IOS 6
286:To delete this article would be disturbing.
104:I hope you enjoy editing here and being a
166:Knowledge (XXG)'s policies and guidelines
1000:
441:This entry now should stay; here's why.
1110:instead when encountering dead links.
720:Knowledge (XXG):Notability/Noticeboard
1089:Removing text supported by dead links
7:
744:Comparison_of_online_dating_websites
531:Vampirefreaks has multiple multiple
262:and specifically how they relate to
470:donated money to Knowledge (XXG).
335:Adding is disabled for some reason?
89:The five pillars of Knowledge (XXG)
1093:Hello, LogicalCreator. Edits like
25:to Knowledge (XXG)! Thank you for
14:
175:The article will be discussed at
1068:
1062:
1044:
1004:
843:
837:
819:
215:
151:
401:lack of sources for facethejury
1011:WikiProject Mixed martial arts
992:15:23, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
967:00:54, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
366:Knowledge (XXG):Spam_blacklist
246:I demand that my article stay.
1:
1173:11:24, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
79:Biographies of living persons
1084:06:42, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
805:15:46, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
780:15:31, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
760:15:14, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
732:14:52, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
709:14:50, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
692:14:28, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
668:05:20, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
623:18:15, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
606:18:06, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
571:17:51, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
549:17:43, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
525:17:38, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
503:17:25, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
486:17:05, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
464:16:40, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
446:and its killings reference.
436:16:02, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
395:16:33, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
378:16:21, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
354:15:57, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
327:15:57, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
280:15:39, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
241:15:17, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
206:14:46, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
138:14:01, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
84:How to write a great article
37:, and may soon be deleted.
1031:04:03, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
885:Jetset Magazine | Thank You
411:in the main google results
49:New contributors' help page
21:Hello, LogicalCreator, and
1188:
880:07:29, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
906:20:52, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
859:11:52, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
114:Knowledge (XXG):Questions
1120:08:59, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
918:
870:Responded to you there.
168:or whether it should be
748:List_of_internet_forums
934:
933:
1161:opt-out instructions
440:
1143:fix with Dab solver
69:Starting an article
1151:• Join us at the
1108:Template:Dead link
945:remove this notice
935:
628:WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS
222:disruptive editing
74:Your first article
43:Your first article
27:your contributions
1156:
1040:Your recent edits
1037:
1036:
896:comment added by
815:Your recent edits
770:comment added by
682:comment added by
596:comment added by
561:comment added by
515:comment added by
476:comment added by
1179:
1146:
1139:check to confirm
1072:
1066:
1048:
1047:
1008:
1001:
989:
984:
965:
948:
908:
847:
841:
823:
822:
782:
738:one other option
694:
666:
663:
657:
651:
608:
573:
527:
488:
260:WP:Verifiability
219:
218:
204:
201:
195:
189:
155:
154:
136:
133:
127:
121:
62:
56:
1187:
1186:
1182:
1181:
1180:
1178:
1177:
1176:
1153:DPL WikiProject
1127:
1091:
1057:by typing four
1055:sign your posts
1045:
1042:
999:
987:
982:
974:
953:
949:
942:
927:
891:
887:
868:
832:by typing four
830:sign your posts
820:
817:
765:
740:
677:
661:
655:
649:
647:
591:
556:
510:
471:
443:
403:
337:
288:
266:, particularly
248:
228:from editing.
216:
213:
199:
193:
187:
185:
156:
152:
149:
131:
125:
119:
117:
60:
54:
12:
11:
5:
1185:
1183:
1126:
1123:
1090:
1087:
1041:
1038:
1035:
1034:
998:
995:
973:
970:
941:
928:
926:
923:
915:LogicalCreator
911:
898:70.184.104.106
886:
883:
867:
862:
816:
813:
808:
807:
772:108.87.142.131
739:
736:
735:
734:
714:
712:
711:
684:108.87.142.131
673:
672:
671:
670:
598:108.87.142.131
587:
586:
563:108.87.142.131
552:
551:
517:108.87.142.131
506:
505:
478:108.87.142.131
467:
466:
442:
439:
402:
399:
398:
397:
381:
380:
357:
356:
336:
333:
332:
331:
330:
329:
287:
284:
283:
282:
257:WP:Reliability
247:
244:
212:
209:
150:
148:
143:Nomination of
141:
110:sign your name
102:
101:
96:
91:
86:
81:
76:
71:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1184:
1175:
1174:
1170:
1166:
1162:
1157:
1154:
1150:
1144:
1140:
1136:
1132:
1131:Jack (Tekken)
1124:
1122:
1121:
1117:
1113:
1109:
1104:
1100:
1096:
1088:
1086:
1085:
1081:
1077:
1071:
1065:
1060:
1056:
1052:
1039:
1033:
1032:
1028:
1024:
1019:
1015:
1012:
1007:
1003:
1002:
996:
994:
993:
990:
985:
979:
971:
969:
968:
964:
960:
956:
946:
939:
932:
924:
922:
920:
916:
909:
907:
903:
899:
895:
884:
882:
881:
877:
873:
866:
863:
861:
860:
856:
852:
846:
840:
835:
831:
827:
814:
812:
806:
802:
798:
793:
789:
785:
784:
783:
781:
777:
773:
769:
762:
761:
757:
753:
749:
745:
737:
733:
729:
725:
721:
717:
716:
715:
710:
706:
702:
697:
696:
695:
693:
689:
685:
681:
669:
664:
658:
652:
645:
641:
637:
633:
629:
626:
625:
624:
620:
616:
611:
610:
609:
607:
603:
599:
595:
584:
580:
579:WP:OTHERSTUFF
576:
575:
574:
572:
568:
564:
560:
550:
546:
542:
538:
534:
530:
529:
528:
526:
522:
518:
514:
504:
500:
496:
491:
490:
489:
487:
483:
479:
475:
465:
461:
457:
453:
449:
448:
447:
438:
437:
433:
429:
425:
422:
418:
414:
409:
406:
400:
396:
392:
388:
383:
382:
379:
375:
371:
367:
363:
362:
361:
355:
351:
347:
343:
342:
341:
334:
328:
324:
320:
316:
312:
308:
304:
303:WP:OTHERSTUFF
300:
296:
295:
294:
293:
292:
285:
281:
277:
273:
269:
265:
264:WP:Notability
261:
258:
254:
253:
252:
245:
243:
242:
238:
234:
231:
227:
223:
210:
208:
207:
202:
196:
190:
181:
178:
173:
171:
167:
163:
162:
146:
142:
140:
139:
134:
128:
122:
115:
111:
107:
100:
97:
95:
92:
90:
87:
85:
82:
80:
77:
75:
72:
70:
67:
66:
65:
63:
59:
51:
50:
45:
44:
38:
36:
32:
28:
24:
19:
18:
1158:
1128:
1103:WP:Dead link
1092:
1043:
1021:
1014:Participants
983:Sergecross73
975:
950:
910:
892:— Preceding
888:
869:
818:
809:
791:
787:
766:— Preceding
763:
741:
713:
678:— Preceding
674:
643:
631:
592:— Preceding
588:
583:WP:CONSENSUS
557:— Preceding
553:
511:— Preceding
507:
472:— Preceding
468:
444:
410:
407:
404:
358:
338:
310:
306:
289:
249:
229:
214:
211:January 2012
182:
174:
159:
157:
147:for deletion
103:
53:
47:
41:
39:
20:
16:
15:
307:not obvious
299:WP:PERSONAL
161:Facethejury
145:Facethejury
31:Facethejury
1163:. Thanks,
1051:talk pages
972:Mobage AFD
826:talk pages
788:should not
106:Wikipedian
94:Help pages
35:guidelines
1147:Read the
108:! Please
1099:this one
1095:this one
963:evidence
925:Talkback
894:unsigned
872:86.** IP
797:Gaijin42
768:unsigned
752:Gaijin42
724:Gaijin42
701:Gaijin42
680:unsigned
662:contribs
615:Gaijin42
594:unsigned
559:unsigned
541:Gaijin42
513:unsigned
495:Gaijin42
474:unsigned
456:Gaijin42
428:Gaijin42
387:Gaijin42
370:Gaijin42
346:Gaijin42
319:Gaijin42
272:Gaijin42
233:Gaijin42
200:contribs
132:contribs
99:Tutorial
17:Welcome!
1165:DPL bot
1135:Android
1112:Flyer22
1076:SineBot
851:SineBot
640:WP:BOLD
297:Making
268:WP:CORP
226:blocked
170:deleted
23:welcome
1059:tildes
1023:Kevlar
1020:page.
997:WP:MMA
988:msg me
834:tildes
636:WP:AFD
313:using
58:helpme
650:Bryce
533:WP:RS
452:WP:RS
417:WP:RS
315:WP:RS
311:prove
188:Bryce
120:Bryce
1169:talk
1116:talk
1097:and
1080:talk
1027:talk
1018:talk
959:talk
919:talk
902:talk
876:talk
855:talk
801:talk
776:talk
756:talk
728:talk
705:talk
688:talk
656:talk
619:talk
602:talk
567:talk
545:talk
521:talk
499:talk
482:talk
460:talk
432:talk
424:WP:N
421:WP:V
413:here
391:talk
374:talk
350:talk
323:talk
276:talk
237:talk
194:talk
126:talk
1149:FAQ
1067:or
955:GSK
842:or
792:why
746:or
644:any
632:not
630:is
1171:)
1141:|
1118:)
1082:)
1074:--
1029:)
961:â—Ź
957:â—Ź
921:)
904:)
878:)
857:)
849:--
803:)
778:)
758:)
730:)
707:)
690:)
659:|
621:)
604:)
569:)
547:)
523:)
501:)
484:)
462:)
434:)
426:.
393:)
376:)
352:)
325:)
278:)
239:)
197:|
172:.
129:|
61:}}
55:{{
1167:(
1155:.
1137:(
1114:(
1078:(
1025:(
940:.
917:(
900:(
874:(
853:(
799:(
774:(
754:(
726:(
703:(
686:(
665:)
653:(
617:(
600:(
565:(
543:(
519:(
497:(
480:(
458:(
430:(
389:(
372:(
348:(
321:(
274:(
235:(
203:)
191:(
135:)
123:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.