1143:. Wise words for you to consider also when people have a disagreement with your edits. As for the proverb can I suggest that you write more carefully because it seems I and others at my talk page initially also came to the conclusion that "dog" appeared to be a slur reference towards other editors - my point being the English language is the medium used at this project to convey messages to others and if it is necessary for you to come back later to explain what you meant then you probably didn't make the best choice of words in the first instance. Make sense?--
832:. I restrained to discuss the political themes, which aren’t relevant to the topic, but I answered to the other their objections which made an end of some of their arguments, but not terminated reverts. Originally they deleted 3 alternative names, then they started to delete only two. The argue about all reverts wasn’t in the talk page of the article, nevertheless that I ask them to express their arguments in the talk page -
1007:
678:
427:
251:
1211:
376:, without exception, over the course of the last month. You have made no effort to form a consensus on the article's talk page, despite the fact that no less than three different users have an apparent concern with your edits. You were asked to stop this sort of edit warring by Luna Santin above - you did not do so, but continued to act as though you
862:
with my opponents and defended their political motivated POV. He forced his own opinion and does not comply with the fact that I am the one who presents the sources and tries to comply with the rules
Knowledge (XXG). (I can present cases in which I showed moderation and resolved Knowledge (XXG) disputes through talks and conceding -
352:]) The only explanation by Future Perfect at Sunrise was "tendentious editing". There weren't some arguments for this judgement. This is a personal view of Future Perfect at Sunrise. I looked over his edits and I state that a big part of them are tendentious. I didn't noticed some serious problems between him and
979:. Maybe, hasting to defend your colleague Future Perfect at Sunrise, you didn't notice that after it I didn't made some edits - nevertheless that some editors deleted important info with relevant sources. Also maybe you didn't notice, that there were editors who supported my efforts to find more neutral way -
763:
Of course, the edit war is a fact, but is it enough reason for blocking of namely that editor who tried to keep the rules (well grounded information etc)? The question is: Did I violated some
Knowledge (XXG) rule defending a concrete article from attempts of three users to delete sourced info without
1155:
Agreed! My knowledge of
English is less than yours. In this discussion I also made mistakes due to the inability to express and understand, as needed. Therefore, your suggestion for more attention when we choice our words is acceptable for me. If, however, it happened to make some lapse, please give
945:
Please note Males that a re-warning is not required in the case of an editor returning to behaviour that they were previously blocked for - however in this case the edit summaries provided by editors other than Fut.Perf. provided you with enough caution to not re-enter material - which nevertheless
893:
Along with my ask for taking a stand on my case, I would like to know in how many cases some of the administrators acknowledged that another administrator acted rashly. I wanted to be unlock, not because I feel guilty about something, but by the principal reasons that this is not the way to resolve
873:
When I made my request unblock, an other administrator, User:Hersfold didn’t made very profound examination of the case. He noticed one old warning in my talk page made by Luna Santin on the occasion of other articles and decided that I was warned yet and Future
Perfect at Sunrise just finished the
861:
against me, the editor with different perspective from his POV, is only one of the evidences. The administrator didn’t warning me, he didn’t warning some of the other sides and he didn’t offer some solution, he just blocked me “for revert-warring and tendentious editing” for 24 hours. Thus he sided
579:
Her warning said "multiple articles" and was left
January 22nd, right in the middle of your edit warring on the MM article (as I said, you were reverting every edit made during the month of January). Regardless of how it was worded, you received a warning about edit warring and should have stopped.
930:
I believe that you are familiar with the fact that I am asserting you are biased. Your first blocking, when you blocked namely me, not my opponents, when you define my reverts as "tendentious", for me is the evidence. Your attempt to gag me again is the other evidence. Why didn't you warning me,
827:
In 8 January I added 3 new alternative names (or variants) in the article
Macedonian Muslims. I grounded this information with references and since them I continued to add more references. Some users who don’t accept this information, obviously due to the political reasons started to delete it –
775:
Yes, the edit war you have participated in is enough for you to be blocked as a preventative measure. Blaming the blocker does not remove the facts, which two other administrators above have also detailed. Your block is only 24 hours - sit it out! Indeed if you return another unblock request
894:
this dispute. Unfortunately nobody wants to comment the blocking in essence and the right of all editors to be equal. I have nothing against the various forms of corporate ethics, but I would be very happy if there is at least one administrator who will see the situation fairly and profoundly.
524:
the article, I just protected my edit from irregulary attempts (by 3, maybe connected users with one POV, who refused to explain their action in the talk page, as i asked them) to be deleted. I continue to insist about clean-fingured attitude to all involving parts and to oportunity to find a
516:, different articles and the situatuion there was OK. There was a dicussion about these articles and a solution(Everybody can see - his/her note was from 12:18, 22.01.2008 and my actively involving in Macedonian Muslims was since 17:07, 22.01.2008). I was blocked for my edits on
764:
any argumentation in the talk page? Who deserve to be blocked? Who is the vandal? It is a controversy of a point of principle. The hasty blocking by one administrator as the action made by Future
Perfect (who is biased on these themes) don't stops the edit wars and emotions.
931:
first? Why didn't you warning some from the other users? Why didn't you protect the article until to building eventual consensus? I don't want to offend you, but I really think that it isn't fair to use the power of the administrator to advance one/your POV.--
356:
POV users, but I noticed problems between him and users with other, nonmacedonistic POV. It seems that the only reason for my blocking is the personal POV of one administrator. I think that there aren't any reasons for blocking - from formal or other nature)
599:
I hope for more profound entering into the problem, including the actions by the administrator who blocked me, as i state, irregulary. The articles in which I've been involved, when Luna Santin wrote me, aren't connected with this blocking. They
916:
I've blocked you again. It's generally not a good idea to go back continuing the same edit war for which you were blocked, right after coming off the last block. You are still engaged in stubborn, sterile revert-warring against consensus.
1292:. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose
1233:
1124:". Perhaps we should not be so tense, if we want to understand others and to avoid additional charges. Maybe I am a naive man, but I am thinking that the tolerance means to be able to accept disagreement.--
967:
blocked an editor (i.e. me) with a contrary POV. (Nevertheless that until this moment the administrator didn't made some edits in the concrete article).Then this disputable blocking is an argument against
1097:
Per Fut.Perf's kind comment and explanation at my talk page, whilst I think that this may be thought of differently by others, you not feeling offended is enough for me to lift this block. I will do so
897:
In my opinion this is not a meaningless test or cause for the loss of valuable time. For me as editor without long experience It shows the principles, which can reduce tensions in some edit wars.--
1225:. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Knowledge (XXG)'s criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "
857:
His argument that all we violated 3PR was fake. Now, since I seen the POV of this administrator, I can assert that the choice of administrator made by my opponent wasn’t accidental. His action
971:
The second problem is why some of the other administrators denied to look profoundly: The only caution by some other editor after my first blocking, until I stop my edits in the article is
828:
originally the argument was that this information is outdated, then that it is only
Bulgarian one and finally they pointed out some political reasons. In considerable part of their reverts
776:
following the posting of this response I will protect your page from further disruptive unblock requests and if necessary increase your block period on the basis of further disruption. — --
624:
Unlike Future
Perfect, Luna Santin paid attention to all involved editors and maybe this was one of the reasons for finding of solution. In her action weren't included editors from article
1232:
Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to
885:, but It seems that here administrators never recognize their errors. Everybody can assess the situation and decide whether Hersfol was superficial or not performing his duties.
854:
On 3 February one of my opponents who wasn’t in the situation for a while wrote to one administrator - Future
Perfect at Sunrise with offer to block all of us (3 users) -
819:
Complaint about blocking and following actions by some administrators. A big part of the actions in the case are apparent from the discussion in the previous section.
1176:
807:
template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired.
572:
template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired.
418:
template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired.
520:. In the last two weeks these edits included not only reverts, they included improving with providing of new references. I never had any pretentions to
874:
process. Then I proved that the warning by Luna Santin concerns other articles (in which all completed successfully), that in the time of her warning (
368:
This block was based on your actions; what others did or did not do is not relevant here. What is relevant is that you have single-handedly reverted
130:
process. If this sort of revert battling continues, there's a pretty good chance that one or more of the involved users could wind up blocked. –
1116:"Dog does not eat dogs" shows that maybe I was right, when I used it. I didin't mean "dog" in a direct sense. As it is pointed in the article
792:
557:
403:
1317:
985:. However, my objections about abuse power of one administrator (Future Perfect at Sunrise) who is involved in these themes are actual.--
1080:
921:
241:
718:
512:
Please, note that the previous ask by Luna Santin can't be a reason for action by other administrator (Luna Santin paid attention for
467:
291:
22:
1200:
975:- with a very "substantial" argument: "Stop wasting everybodys time!". Then the other opponent, made his revert with call to find
1313:
1222:
1204:
1077:
918:
337:
238:
1049:
1218:
1304:
describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to
1023:
1014:
691:
440:
264:
1309:
713:
462:
286:
685:
434:
258:
122:
across several articles; please note that it's typically much better to make appropriate use of talk pages to build
690:
Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the
439:
Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the
263:
Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the
184:
1182:. The source you have added for the more precise date is fine by me and certainly an improvement to the article
1041:
1038:- come back to be a part of this community without further attack or risk being blocked for considerably longer.
96:
Thanks for creating it, it's looking good already! And yeah, sure, I'll give it a copyedit as soon as I can :)
959:
The first question that is important for me is the accuracy of the first block about "tendentious" edits in
656:
correct warning by Luna Santin about other articles isn't connected with retribution made by Future Perfect,
101:
26:
1035:
344:, but why was I blocked? Why weren't blocked those users who deleted sourced info, had improper language (
81:
66:
1305:
180:
140:
1257:. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --
1262:
841:. I maintain that I kept good manners regardless of the improper language of two of my opponents –
658:
who, I want to underline, obviously is baised. Practically, I can't see any reason for this blocking.
1281:
1272:
199:
732:
536:
Clearly an edit war on this editor's part and no statement to the effect that it will not continue.
481:
305:
203:
1301:
1285:
960:
625:
517:
373:
341:
234:
104:
98:
1194:
21:
Thank you for defending the Bulgarian nature of my native Kostur dialect from the Makedonisti.
1190:
1144:
1099:
1061:
947:
777:
542:
77:
62:
1297:
1289:
1243:
You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the
1055:
855:
801:
566:
412:
152:
132:
1300:, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
1293:
1254:
1244:
1237:
1226:
521:
377:
123:
1258:
1006:
127:
119:
654:. Where did you seen "right in the middle of your edit warring on the MM article"? The
1217:
An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for
1247:
template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.
581:
381:
1186:
537:
580:
That's common sense; please don't try to wikilawyer things, as it won't help you.
156:
1210:
846:. No one administrator wasn’t in any way in this discussion until my blocking.
661:
P.S. In this moment the only important thing to me is honesty from all sides.--
1157:
1125:
986:
932:
898:
696:
662:
445:
353:
269:
214:
160:
38:
179:
I am returning the note. Every problem I wrote about in 2007 still remains.
863:
652:
http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Macedonian_Muslims&action=history
340:
without violating of some rule from my side. There was a revert warring on
1048:
after the block expires. If you believe this block is unjustified you may
348:] and refused to explain their arguments in the talk page, as I insisted (
1121:
1288:
is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Knowledge (XXG)
1117:
1113:
198:
Sorry, mea culpa. I think it must have been very late when I did that.
1179:
sourced to Demetriades book on the topography of Ottoman Thessaloniki
1234:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/List of Macedonians (Bulgarian)
58:
380:
the article. This is not acceptable, and is why you were blocked. —
1156:
me some credit of trust - I don't want to insult anybody.Regards,--
882:) I had only 3 edits for 14 days in the article Macedonian Muslims
629:
1321:
1266:
1165:
1149:
1133:
1104:
1083:
1066:
994:
952:
940:
924:
906:
782:
670:
593:
547:
393:
244:
222:
207:
188:
168:
145:
108:
85:
70:
46:
30:
628:. (Actually, you can compare her words to me and to other side -
1072:
Hmm, honestly, I wouldn't have blocked for this. See my comment
963:. An administrator with particular POV on Macedonian question,
1175:
Hi, Males. Late last month, I added several sentences on the
1209:
1005:
676:
425:
249:
57:
I provided a response on my discussion page regarding the
789:
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please
554:
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please
400:
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please
809:
Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
574:
Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
420:
Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
1183:
1180:
1073:
983:
980:
976:
972:
883:
844:
842:
839:
836:
833:
746:
742:
736:
727:
723:
709:
705:
701:
651:
617:
612:
606:
495:
491:
485:
476:
472:
458:
454:
450:
319:
315:
309:
300:
296:
282:
278:
274:
946:
you did again - thus resulting in this second block.--
1112:
Thank you. However, I think that rashly blocking for
631:
and then to look what happened with relevant argues.)
1185:. Let me know if I can be of further help. Regards,
684:
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an
433:
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an
257:
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an
233:
24hrs for revert-warring and tendentious editing on
76:
Take a look at my response when you get the chance.
1280:You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
1141:tolerance means to be able to accept disagreement
8:
1028:referring to Future Perfect at Sunrise as a
1171:Bulgarian Men's High School of Thessaloniki
1170:
151:Thank you for your reminder. You can see
1253:This is an automatic notification by a
638:) I had only 3 edits in MM - 17:29,
7:
118:I notice you seem to be engaged in
14:
1306:review the candidates' statements
1024:Knowledge (XXG)'s blocking policy
1223:List of Macedonians (Bulgarian)
1205:List of Macedonians (Bulgarian)
1312:. For the Election committee,
1282:Arbitration Committee election
1273:ArbCom elections are now open!
338:User:Future Perfect at Sunrise
1:
1322:13:57, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
1195:19:52, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
1166:16:18, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
1150:22:28, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
1134:13:39, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
1105:23:29, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
1084:22:18, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
1067:21:14, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
1018:from editing for a period of
995:15:27, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
953:23:33, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
941:14:59, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
925:08:02, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
907:14:57, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
783:06:40, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
671:21:42, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
594:21:23, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
548:02:02, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
394:19:53, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
245:06:18, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
223:19:18, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
208:19:10, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
189:19:04, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
169:15:11, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
146:12:18, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
109:18:15, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
86:15:03, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
71:21:07, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
47:05:28, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
31:15:17, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
1308:and submit your choices on
1227:What Knowledge (XXG) is not
1221:. The nominated article is
1177:Bulgarian Men's High School
830:they didn’t point a reasons
688:, who declined the request.
437:, who declined the request.
261:, who declined the request.
175:Bulgarian Action Committees
1337:
1314:MediaWiki message delivery
1240:with four tildes (~~~~).
793:guide to appealing blocks
558:guide to appealing blocks
404:guide to appealing blocks
1267:01:20, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
1161:
1129:
990:
936:
902:
666:
218:
164:
42:
1214:
1120:, proverbs "are often
1010:
681:
611:Gorani_(ethnic_group)
430:
254:
126:via Knowledge (XXG)'s
1286:Arbitration Committee
1245:articles for deletion
1213:
1040:. You are welcome to
1009:
733:change block settings
680:
482:change block settings
429:
306:change block settings
253:
1236:. Please be sure to
650:2009 (Minor edit).-
1290:arbitration process
1058:|Your reason here}}
1052:by adding the text
1022:in accordance with
889:General application
634:Until her warning (
608:) protected by her.
37:That's all right!--
1302:arbitration policy
1238:sign your comments
1215:
1147:
1102:
1064:
1050:contest this block
1011:
961:Macedonian Muslims
950:
780:
682:
626:Macedonian Muslims
518:Macedonian Muslims
431:
374:Macedonian Muslims
342:Macedonian Muslims
255:
235:Macedonian Muslims
128:dispute resolution
1145:
1100:
1062:
948:
778:
646:2009 and 03:20,
546:
370:every single edit
336:I was blocked by
1328:
1059:
806:
800:
752:
750:
739:
721:
719:deleted contribs
679:
571:
565:
540:
501:
499:
488:
470:
468:deleted contribs
428:
417:
411:
325:
323:
312:
294:
292:deleted contribs
252:
153:User talk:Ddirec
144:
137:
1336:
1335:
1331:
1330:
1329:
1327:
1326:
1325:
1310:the voting page
1276:
1208:
1173:
1092:
1069:
1053:
1034:as detailed at
1003:
965:without warning
914:
891:
880:22 January 2009
871:
852:
825:
817:
812:
804:
798:
797:, then use the
786:
766:
740:
730:
716:
699:
692:blocking policy
677:
577:
569:
563:
562:, then use the
551:
527:
489:
479:
465:
448:
441:blocking policy
426:
423:
415:
409:
408:, then use the
397:
359:
313:
303:
289:
272:
265:blocking policy
250:
231:
196:
177:
133:
131:
116:
94:
55:
19:
12:
11:
5:
1334:
1332:
1279:
1275:
1270:
1207:
1203:nomination of
1198:
1172:
1169:
1153:
1152:
1110:
1109:
1108:
1107:
1091:
1088:
1087:
1086:
1012:You have been
1004:
1002:
999:
998:
997:
969:
957:
956:
955:
913:
910:
890:
887:
870:
867:
851:
848:
824:
821:
816:
813:
787:
773:
769:Decline reason
761:
757:Request reason
754:
675:
674:
673:
659:
642:2009, 17:29,
632:
621:
620:
614:
609:
602:
601:
589:
586:
552:
534:
530:Decline reason
510:
506:Request reason
503:
424:
398:
389:
386:
366:
362:Decline reason
334:
330:Request reason
327:
248:
230:
227:
226:
225:
195:
192:
176:
173:
172:
171:
115:
112:
93:
90:
89:
88:
54:
51:
50:
49:
18:
17:Kostur Dialect
15:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1333:
1324:
1323:
1319:
1315:
1311:
1307:
1303:
1299:
1295:
1291:
1287:
1283:
1274:
1271:
1269:
1268:
1264:
1260:
1256:
1252:
1248:
1246:
1241:
1239:
1235:
1230:
1228:
1224:
1220:
1212:
1206:
1202:
1199:
1197:
1196:
1192:
1188:
1184:
1181:
1178:
1168:
1167:
1163:
1159:
1151:
1148:
1142:
1138:
1137:
1136:
1135:
1131:
1127:
1123:
1119:
1115:
1106:
1103:
1096:
1095:
1094:
1093:
1089:
1085:
1082:
1079:
1075:
1071:
1070:
1068:
1065:
1057:
1051:
1047:
1046:contributions
1045:
1039:
1037:
1032:
1029:
1025:
1021:
1017:
1016:
1008:
1001:February 2009
1000:
996:
992:
988:
984:
981:
978:
974:
970:
966:
962:
958:
954:
951:
944:
943:
942:
938:
934:
929:
928:
927:
926:
923:
920:
911:
909:
908:
904:
900:
895:
888:
886:
884:
881:
877:
868:
866:
864:
860:
856:
849:
847:
845:
843:
840:
837:
834:
831:
822:
820:
814:
811:
810:
803:
796:
794:
785:
784:
781:
772:
770:
765:
760:
758:
753:
748:
744:
738:
734:
729:
725:
720:
715:
711:
710:global blocks
707:
706:active blocks
703:
698:
693:
689:
687:
686:administrator
672:
668:
664:
660:
657:
653:
649:
645:
641:
637:
633:
630:
627:
623:
622:
618:
615:
613:
610:
607:
604:
603:
598:
597:
596:
595:
592:
591:
590:
587:
584:
576:
575:
568:
561:
559:
550:
549:
544:
539:
533:
531:
526:
523:
519:
515:
509:
507:
502:
497:
493:
487:
483:
478:
474:
469:
464:
460:
459:global blocks
456:
455:active blocks
452:
447:
442:
438:
436:
435:administrator
422:
421:
414:
407:
405:
396:
395:
392:
391:
390:
387:
384:
379:
375:
371:
365:
363:
358:
355:
351:
349:
347:
345:
343:
339:
333:
331:
326:
321:
317:
311:
307:
302:
298:
293:
288:
284:
283:global blocks
280:
279:active blocks
276:
271:
266:
262:
260:
259:administrator
247:
246:
243:
240:
236:
228:
224:
220:
216:
212:
211:
210:
209:
205:
201:
193:
191:
190:
186:
182:
174:
170:
166:
162:
158:
154:
150:
149:
148:
147:
142:
138:
136:
129:
125:
121:
113:
111:
110:
107:
106:
103:
100:
91:
87:
83:
79:
75:
74:
73:
72:
68:
64:
60:
52:
48:
44:
40:
36:
35:
34:
32:
28:
24:
16:
1277:
1251:Please note:
1250:
1249:
1242:
1231:
1216:
1174:
1154:
1140:
1122:metaphorical
1111:
1043:
1033:
1030:
1027:
1019:
1013:
964:
915:
896:
892:
879:
875:
872:
858:
853:
829:
826:
823:The edit war
818:
808:
790:
788:
774:
768:
767:
762:
756:
755:
728:creation log
695:
683:
655:
647:
643:
639:
636:12:08, 22.01
635:
583:
582:
578:
573:
555:
553:
535:
529:
528:
513:
511:
505:
504:
477:creation log
444:
432:
419:
401:
399:
383:
382:
369:
367:
361:
360:
354:Macedonistic
335:
329:
328:
301:creation log
268:
256:
232:
197:
178:
134:
120:edit warring
117:
114:Edit warring
97:
95:
92:Nikola Milev
78:Deucalionite
63:Deucalionite
56:
23:76.69.91.129
20:
157:Talk:Tetovo
135:Luna Santin
1298:topic bans
1259:Erwin85Bot
912:Re-blocked
724:filter log
648:11 January
605:Strumica (
525:solution.
473:filter log
297:filter log
194:Chekalarov
33:Kostolata
1294:site bans
1139:Agreed -
1090:Unblocked
1078:Fut.Perf.
1060:below. --
977:consensus
919:Fut.Perf.
869:Appealing
815:Complaint
791:read the
743:checkuser
702:block log
644:8 January
640:8 January
556:read the
492:checkuser
451:block log
402:read the
316:checkuser
275:block log
239:Fut.Perf.
200:Kostolata
124:consensus
61:article.
1219:deletion
1020:72 hours
850:Blocking
714:contribs
616:Tetovo (
463:contribs
372:made to
287:contribs
105:Bozhinov
53:Response
1187:Aramgar
1114:proverb
1056:unblock
1015:blocked
802:unblock
737:unblock
567:unblock
538:Toddst1
486:unblock
413:unblock
310:unblock
229:Blocked
1284:. The
1098:now.--
1044:useful
865:etc.)
181:Nikola
59:Variko
1158:Males
1126:Males
1042:make
987:Males
933:Males
899:Males
876:12:18
795:first
697:Males
663:Males
600:were:
560:first
514:other
446:Males
406:first
378:owned
270:Males
215:Males
161:Males
99:Todor
39:Males
1318:talk
1263:talk
1229:").
1191:talk
1162:talk
1130:talk
1118:here
1074:here
1036:here
1026:for
991:talk
973:this
937:talk
903:talk
859:only
667:talk
588:fold
585:Hers
543:talk
388:fold
385:Hers
219:talk
213:) --
204:talk
185:talk
165:talk
155:and
141:talk
82:talk
67:talk
43:talk
27:talk
1278:Hi,
1255:bot
1201:AfD
1031:dog
968:me.
747:log
694:).
522:own
496:log
443:).
350:],
320:log
267:).
159:.--
1320:)
1296:,
1265:)
1193:)
1164:)
1146:VS
1132:)
1101:VS
1076:.
1063:VS
1054:{{
993:)
982:,
949:VS
939:)
905:)
878:,
838:,
835:,
805:}}
799:{{
779:VS
771::
759::
741:•
735:•
731:•
726:•
722:•
717:•
712:•
708:•
704:•
669:)
570:}}
564:{{
532::
508::
490:•
484:•
480:•
475:•
471:•
466:•
461:•
457:•
453:•
416:}}
410:{{
364::
346:],
332::
314:•
308:•
304:•
299:•
295:•
290:•
285:•
281:•
277:•
237:.
221:)
206:)
187:)
167:)
84:)
69:)
45:)
29:)
1316:(
1261:(
1189:(
1160:(
1128:(
1081:☼
989:(
935:(
922:☼
901:(
751:)
749:)
745:(
700:(
665:(
619:)
545:)
541:(
500:)
498:)
494:(
449:(
324:)
322:)
318:(
273:(
242:☼
217:(
202:(
183:(
163:(
143:)
139:(
102:→
80:(
65:(
41:(
25:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.