2866:
leave it there. I also agree with you that two names (the official name and the common name) are quite sufficient, and the least confusing, in any article where the locality hasn't got a second or third common name too (unlikely I think). I really only have two concerns, finally - one is that the official name of a place (esp. where it conveys non-obvious information) needs to be included clearly somewhere up front in an article that bears the name of the common, but not official, name. I don't know if any policy or guideline requires this (it may, but these kinds of things can be bearishly hard to find) so I'll just say it strikes me as a matter of common sense. It's like - no article about an actor or actress will get very far without mentioning their birth name. Same sort of thing here. The second is the presentation of the infoboxes. I think the form, Commmon name / entity type / formal name works well when the names, and naming conventions, are well understood by the reader. This will be true of, e.g., most cities or states. (There is not much room for confusion about what's what with "Chicago" / "City of
Chicago" or "San Francisco" / "City and County of San Francisco".) But I do not think it works well when these conventions are not widely understood or known, which is the case with Michigan townships. There is no indication in the infobox what the two names are supposed to be, and the confusion is compounded by the (automatic) formatting that makes the actual, official name less prominent than the colloquial name. Those cues are at odds with one another and the non-local reader possesses little or no external information that would make it clear. The best they can do is read the article to figure out which is the real name and which is the common one, and in my view any time you have to read the article to figure out an infobox, the infobox is a failure.
2661:"official name" field. The output was a sensible box that showed the official name at the top and the common name as "other" below. In your your edits, you added the field "name" above, put in Shelby Township, deleted "other name" and left "official name" alone. The result was a muddled mess, with the box now showing an unofficial - but common - name, then the type of entity ("Charter Township"), then the official name in smaller type below that. All with no indication of what any of those things are supposed to be. Whether or not the infobox allows that - and whether or not the change is technically defensible - the change does not improve the article. The problem is exacerbated by your other edits, which removed the official township name from the article text altogether. Perhaps this setup works for places like Chicago, where people understand that the city will have some cumbersome "official" name that no one really uses. In that case they can probably decode the infobox based on what they already know; but with a place like Shelby Township or Lyon Township (the common names for which will be familiar to a couple million Michigan residents at most, the official name to fewer still) it doesn't work. Remember - this is an encyclopedia. where people come to find out information on particular subjects. The point is to make the information we include clear, easy to find and easy to understand. Someone coming to Knowledge to find the official name of townships in Michigan can't effectively do it any longer - they'll do as I did, which is to read the article, try to make sense of it, and then continue on to the official township website (if there is one).
1693:, and includes an infobox with the header "Rick Santorum," it is perfectly clear that the subject's common name is "Rick," but that his full legal name is "Richard John Santorum." Moreover, many infoboxes for athletes (e.g., Infobbox sportsperson, Infobox swimmer, Infobox golfer) actually include a specific field for the subject's nickname, and a properly completed Persondata template will include both the subject's common name and full name. Artificial constructions such as "Richard John "Rick" Santorum," with the nickname inserted into the middle of the subject' actual legal name, only serve to break up the presentation of the actual legal name and confuse the reader. My new favorite exercise in duplicative redundancy "Christopher "Chris" Johnson" for an article titled "Chris Johnson." Why does anyone think this is necessary when the article title and infobox already include the common name? There is no logical reason for it other than some sort of need for mindless consistency.
2708:
conveys real and useful information about the legal form of township that is lost - or submerged - with the name change. Indeed I hadn't even realized that "charter" was a specific variant of township until I started looking through township articles for this discussion. I understand the preference stated in
Commonnames but wonder if the same end couldn't be achieved, and less destructively, by leaving the articles as they are (with "charter" in the name) and adding redirects from the common name. That way people who are looking for, e.g. "Lyon Township" as they know it will find it immediately, but the formal name - including the actual information added by the word "charter" - remains in place and easily accessible. Have these moves been discussed anywhere or have they all been processed as uncontroversial / administrative?
2230:
that redlink, paste in your intended text, click "show preview" to make sure everything like references and wikilinks are working correctly, put in an edit summary such as "creating page about a member of the
Michigan legislature", and click "save page". That puts your page into the Knowledge mainspace - bang, just like that. You can continue to work on it by clicking "edit". You will need to add some categories (ask me if you need help with categories) and eventually a talk page. The article will be "live" in the encyclopedia mainspace; it will also get listed at New Pages, where some Knowledge editor will patrol or curate it. They may have suggestions, but in the meantime you can continue to work on the article. Let me know if you do this and I will help you put it into shape.
2806:. I feel that this makes it less confusing to the reader. Also, the lack of clarification on what each of the names mean was not unique to my version. The version directly before mine posed this same problem. (I don't think clarification is necessary though. If I came across a random township—say "Eastfield Township"—and I saw "Charter Township of Eastfield" listed in smaller text, that would be self-evident to me that that was the official name of the municipality while "Eastfield Township" was the common name and the name that will be used throughout the article.) I do see your point with having the official name at the top of the infobox, but I was using the standard version of major cities such as
1600:
using "the..." or "of..." to check. Then 100% sure that no German French
Spanish is being picked up. On the other hand however English sources may be typographically unreliable (the original book, not the scan) for example mathematics books prior to 2000 turning Hungarian long umlauts into German short umlauts on Hungarian mathematicians. We can rely on the difference between "Universidade" and "University" as OCR and typeset issues don't arise, but we can't trust a pre-2000 book or a Google OCR of a 2010 book to get East European accents, and fortunately don't : so nearly half a million bio and geo articles are titled correctly, even when OCR or pre-2000 print may fail.
1759:, including the example of Bill Clinton. Logically, one would think that the more specific provisions of MOS:BIO would govern the formatting of biographies, but we both know that this is only one of many self-contradicting MOS provisions that represent the input of different editors, at different times, with different agendas. Clearly, the two MOS provisions need to be reconciled, and whatever the consensus outcome is it should probably be embodied in MOS:BIO, the specific MOS section that governs the formatting of biographies, not the more general MOS:LEAD. At a minimum, the two provisions need to be reconciled and cross-referenced.
787:
marks. Do you feel the same way about "refers to" and "describes"? The words "refers to" and "describes" have been getting steadily removed from the beginning of articles by a few editors, and so has "is a term," because they find it to be unnecessary or redundant. However, "is a term" has only justifiably been removed from articles that are more about the topic beyond the term. I'm not sure how not both bolding and italicizing a term in an article that begins by introducing it became standard practice on
Knowledge, but my point is that it is, and the articles often remain that way even when they go through a
2620:. In regards to the infobox, the practice of infoboxes is to put the common name at top (e.g. "Chicago"), then the classification of municipality (e.g. "City"), then the official name (e.g. "City of Chicago"). This is how I changed the Shelby Township article. (If you click "Edit Source," you can see that one spot asks for the "name" whereas the other spot asks for the "official name.") In regards to your assessment that the lede term should be the official name of the municipality—well, I agreed with you for a while until I was firmly corrected by other Wikipedians (such as
1777:
unnecessarily repetitive and sing-song result. As for the two examples provided, "Jack" is a more commonly known diminutive of John in some regions than others; "Van" is by no means a common nickname for Lavan, if indeed a common nickname for such exists anywhere. Given the conflicting MOS examples of MOS:LEAD and MOS:BIO, this still deserves an RfC to reconcile the provisions, so that a conscious choice can be made by the hundreds, if not thousands of editors who deal with biography leads daily. I can certainly abide by that, but we should not presume the outcome.
2353:
significantly more accepted than being gay or lesbian, which is why so many people come out as bisexual before coming out as gay or lesbian. To them, being at least "partly heterosexual" lessons the blow for those who are uneasy about same-sex sexual attraction; it's also less scary with regard to their own psyche, and, for some who are battling internalized homophobia, keeps them feeling that their sexual orientation is at least partly normal. People not being honest about being bisexual, somehow not realizing that they are bisexual, or otherwise rejecting the term
2571:- we now have a hodgepodge of names and wikilinks - with the township's actual, formal name subordinate to the common one - that leaves the reader entirely uncertain about what name is supposed to be what. I'm inclined to undo that and similar changes but wanted to hear your thinking first. (In that regard - edit summaries would be very helpful. Something as simple as explaining why you removed "neighborhood" from the description of Greektown would save other editors the effort of puzzling out your thinking.) Let me know your thoughts. Thanks!
707:
from most articles on
Knowledge that have terms as their titles, though, like you stated, the articles are usually more about the topic beyond the term. Above, while pointing to WP:BOLDTITLE, Robsinden pointed out that only things that would normally be italicized should be italicized. The word "gay," for example, is not something that would normally be italicized. Most of the time I see the word, it is not italicized. Contrast that with a book name, which is almost always in quotation marks or italicized.
2056:, it seems that Detroit's usual treatment of neighborhood titles is to add "Detroit" only when they need disambiguation. (Different cities handle neighborhood titling differently.) And of course, they would all stay in the "historic district" category, regardless of the name. I do suggest that you pick a place for this discussion, and direct the individual discussions there, where we could establish a pattern for what HDs have the phrase in the title and what ones don't. --
3181:
31:
907:(page 22) states, "There is no standard definition of lesbian." Not only is it often not consistently defined in the same way by women who use the term to describe their sexuality, it often is not consistently defined in the same way by researchers. The article therefore does not give a definitive definition for the concept, in the lead-in or elsewhere; among other things, it discusses different definitions. And then there are articles like
488:. I know that you are still relatively new to editing this site, so don't get discouraged by this italics topic. We all make mistakes when we start out editing Knowledge, and even after we've been editing here for a long time, and I'm not even sure that you have made a mistake on this matter. If you feel that a Welcome template will help you learn the ropes, although you mostly do grammar formatting, I'll present you with one.
329:
107:
1964:
not because I think it's a bad idea, but because I think the group of articles should be considered as a group. IMO there should be one consolidated discussion about whether to remove this phrase from all of the articles, or some of them, or none of them. Right now they all use it, which is at least consistent; I'd rather not see each article go its own way and leave a haphazard system.
245:
2987:
2459:
it's that way in general for men who identity as bisexual. Certainly, the media seems to take the gay male identity more seriously than the bisexual male identity, but it's the same with regard to the lesbian identity vs. the bisexual female identity; it's just that people are generally more accepting of same-sex sexual attraction between women than between men.
961:, we aren't supposed to start the definition off ambiguously unless it can't be avoided; by that, I mean unless it doesn't have a most common and/or authoritative definition, but rather just a few, several or many. Therefore, starting the lead sentence out as " has a range of definitions" is usually something that should be avoided. I point to the lead of the
591:
such as in these cases, but simply don't remember, I still know that it's not standard practice on
Knowledge. It's not something that WP:BOLDFACE endorses. I know that I may be a pest to you right now, or maybe even in my previous interaction with you, but I don't mean to be. Thank you for removing the quotation marks from the two aforementioned articles.
2226:
and resubmit it to AfC - but you don't have to use
Articles for Creation if you don't want. You can also use that draft as a template to add additional references, and then use "select-all" and "copy" to make a copy of it. It is best to make your draft on Knowledge rather than offline, because then you can see if the Knowledge functions are working.
2671:
but haven't come up with a bunch of stuff. Can you point me to a
Knowledge page that discusses this, to other similar township info boxes, or maybe even your exchange with BKonrad? These changes pretty plainly degrade the articles, making them less clear and less useful but I want to be sure I'm focusing on the problem where it lies. Thanks.
1895:
2114:
2814:. I feel it is rather unfair to say that my changes objectively degrade the article when the only effective difference between the two versions is that I limited the amount of names from three to two and changed the infobox layout to the standard version for major cities. To see my interaction with Bkonrad, see the edits at
1983:. I think instead of half-a-dozen unconnected individual discussions about whether to delete the phrase, there should be a discussion at some central location about whether or not to include the phrase "Historic District" for Detroit articles, and an overall consensus reached. I am neutral on what that consensus would be. --
2229:
To create an article from scratch, go to the
Knowledge "search" function and type in the intended name of your article, i.e., "Adam Zemke". (No quotes, just the name.) It will take you to some suggested other articles as well as a redlink for Adam Zemke that allows you to create the article. Click on
556:
or any terms should be in quotation marks while in boldface at the beginning of articles. This is not done on Knowledge, from what I have seen. For all articles about terms, the boldface takes the place of quotation marks. Quotation marks or italics are used for the term, where appropriate or needed,
406:
Hello, Wikipedian77. I saw that you are putting article titles, the boldface terms that are at the beginning of the leads of articles, in italics. Since I don't see this often practiced on Knowledge, except for in the cases of books, plays, films and name brands, I felt that I should present you with
1963:
Hello, Wikipedian77! I stumbled across your series of move requests to remove the phrase "historic district" from a dozen or so Detroit-related article titles. I value all the work you put into these proposals, and I think that may well be a good idea. However, I'm afraid I have been opposing them -
1776:
I will also add that neither of the examples provided (Van Cliburn, Jack Kennedy) directly address the more ridiculous examples such as "Matthew "Matt" Grevers" or "Christopher "Chris" Johnson," where application of the MOS:LEAD examples would repeat the first syllable of the first name and yield an
590:
I don't see what confusion could be caused, Wikipedian77. The two articles in question even use the wording "is a term" right after boldface. The only reason I object to having quotation marks go along with boldface in these cases is because I don't see it practiced anywhere on Knowledge. If I have,
3138:
Since I was not involved in the debate, you had stated you wanted it withdrawn, and the only !vote opposed moving, in essence agreeing with the position you now hold, I closed it for you. And before you thank me, Thank you. It gave me a nice easy thing to do my fist Non-administrative closure on.
2458:
You're welcome. And, yes, I am familiar with those aspects. For men, I know that a gay identity or homosexual identity is more accepted in the gay male community than a bisexual identity, much like being lesbian is more accepted than being bisexual in the lesbian community, but I'm not 100% sure if
2352:
was this: Hello, Wikipedian77. I don't feel that such an article is needed any more than a Homosexual (social identity) article is needed. Many people are gay or lesbian, but state that they are heterosexual or bisexual because being gay or lesbian is not widely accepted. In fact, being bisexual is
2051:
I certainly agree that there may be cases where "historic district" is necessary regardless of how the others are treated, and other cases where "Detroit" is necessary as you have already researched. Anyplace that can be legitimately regarded as a neighborhood and not just a historic district - and
1740:
As for the information in the title and the infobox, I believe there is a guideline somewhere (but I can't find it) that says that the article should be able to stand on its own, independently of its title and ancillary material. This is because Knowledge articles are often used in other contexts.
285:
If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can
2670:
If the changes you're describing result from a hard-and-fast rule, and the rule produces these confusing results, then I guess my gripe is with the rule or with the templates. I've cast about (a very tiny bit admittedly) looking for examples one way or the other - to see if it's hard & fast -
2225:
It's not that hard. Make a copy of the page you want to create; you can do it off-wiki, or use your sandbox (there should be a link to it at the very top of the page), or simply copy what you already have at the Articles for Creation site. You could go to the AfC site and add additional references
2084:
The simplest way is simply to direct all the discussions to one of the pages where discussion is already underway. Pick a page where some responses (other than mine, because mine is procedural) have already been made. Add a note to that one saying something like "this is a consolidated discussion"
1679:
There is no Knowledge policy or guideline on point, but there are a number of editors who continue to insert diminutives and other common nicknames obviously derived from the first name, middle name or surname, citing some sort of precedent that's the Knowledge way. Well, if such a policy exists,
1660:
My apologies, Macrakis. I was unsure as to the policy on this. I added a nickname in for Tim Tebow, and a user removed it for being unnecessary and obvious information. Additionally, a user on Tony Blair's article has seemingly banned the use of a nickname in his lead. Do you know if there is a WP
786:
I understand what you are stating; you feel that if the wording "is a term" is used, then the word should be in italics or in quotation marks...even when also in boldface. But if an article starts out stating "is" without "is a term," you feel that it likely shouldn't be in italics or in quotation
2236:
suggested "filling out the citations properly". The easiest way to do that is to use the "cite" link just above the edit window. Click on that, choose "web" or "news" or whatever is appropriate, and fill in the blanks. Then put your cursor at the point in the article where you want to cite it and
1803:
Hi there, just a friendly reminder that this page has a Review in Progress banner on it. This means it's a work in progress and, as a courtesy, other contributors are asked not to edit while a review is ongoing. If you'd like to provide input, please could you do this on my talk page as this will
1731:
The name of a person is presented in full if known, including any given names that are not included in the article's title or are abbreviated there. For example, the article on Calvin Coolidge gives his name as John Calvin Coolidge, Jr. If a person has a commonly known nickname, used in lieu of a
1599:
Ah, no I wasn't clear. No problem. Actually the isn't reliable, particularly with academic subjects where many university papers are classified as "English" but in reality may be a conference with papers in German French Spanish in the same binding. For this reason I usually safety check delimit
706:
Dicklyon, while using italics for terms is standard practice on Knowledge (and so is using quotation marks, judging by many Knowledge articles), it has not been my experience that it is standard practice on Knowledge to begin an article with a term both in italics and in boldface. This is evident
2865:
As I said I don't have a serious problem with the moves. I mean, I'm not sure I agree that it's the best result (for the reasons I gave) but I agree that it's consistent with Commonnames, and any confusion can be sorted in the article. I guess we just think of it differently and I'm content to
1039:
article avoids those words for its lead; it uses "is the concept," but since "afterlife," "gay" and "lesbian" are more than just concepts to people, I don't think it's wise to start off identifying them as concepts. I especially feel that way in the case of "gay" and "lesbian; that's because the
956:
article because using "is" for that article is stating that telepathy exists. Whether or not it exists is debated. That article currently uses "is the supposed," but the term "supposed" isn't at all neutral. And, again, there are cases where a term has more than one definition; in a lot of these
902:
article, is about the term and concept. So it would not be exactly accurate to start out stating "A lesbian is a woman who" or "Gay is a person who"; the terms have more than one definition, and starting out the Lesbian article with "A lesbian is a woman who" will lead to a person using "is only
2962:
complete. However, with the clearer infobox that may not be necessary. (I would also remove the modifier, "affluent", as unnecessary and slightly POV. Income stats are clear in the Demographics section below, and - well, we wouldn't use "impoverished" to describe a less fortunate area, maybe
2707:
Also, as I'm learning more about Michigan townships, I'm wondering whether redirects from the common name wouldn't be better than moving and renaming the pages. I don't feel as strongly about this as I do the foregoing, but the official name of these townships - e.g. Shelby Charter Township -
2961:
I think it's great, thanks. The only thing I'd do differently - and I do not think BKonrad would object - would be to include the formal name in lead, e.g., "West Bloomfield Township, formally 'Charter Township of West Bloomfield', is a charter township...". I think that is cleaner and more
2660:
On to townships. I'd looked at the source edits. It looked to me like the infobox template had pretty effectively accommodated the original layout, with "Shelby Township" being associated with the field "other name" (which presumably means "other than official") and its official name in the
2650:
Thanks for your response. Moving in reverse - my point about Greektown was not that the edit was suspect, but that by routinely omitting edit summaries you are putting the onus on other editors to figure out what you just did, even with the simplest of edits. You should use them. All the
338:. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.
116:. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.
1054:
However, since the Afterlife article starts out stating "In philosophy, religion, mythology, and fiction" and uses "is the concept of a realm, or the realm itself," I don't find initially identifying it as a concept as something that would be considered very objectionable in that case.
2595:, that was simply a correction of syntax. If you read the version directly before mine, it was syntactically erroneous. That was my only reason for editing the lede there, and I didn't summarize it because I assumed it to be obvious. I will make sure I include edit summaries though.
904:
1995:
I'd like to encourage you to choose a central location for the discussion, and direct all the talk pages to that discussion. I will be glad to join in the discussion, and to remove my "oppose" comments once we have some kind of systematic approach to these articles. Thanks!
1034:
Like I told another editor, I understand the point and agree that we should generally avoid using "refers to," "describes," "commonly defined as" and "defined as" or some variation of them. But there are instances where such wording is necessary. Aeusoes1 mentioned that the
1626:
Hi, you removed the nicknames "Rick" from Santorum and "Bill" from Clinton, with the comment "Nicknames should only be included in lead name when nickname is rare and uncommon. xxx is very common for yyy, and it is obvious information." I have reverted those removals.
2726:. Article name omits the (interesting but inconsequential) fact that it's a commonwealth, not a state, but the infobox shows only the official name, "Commonwealth of Pennsylvania". And the official name is featured prominently in the first sentence. Similarly,
957:
instances, there are concerns about how to get that across without having the first sentence sound like it's giving a definitive definition, even when the first definition is the most common one and the other definitions are listed right after it. After all, per
2097:. This sounds like a lot of work, but it will ultimately save you time - for example by not having to watch a dozen different pages. And you will have a lot more confidence in the result once you get it. (My hunch: all proposals will be approved.) --
2487:
Yeah, a significant number of people (researchers included) think that gay men are more solid in their sexual orientation than lesbians are; sometimes, I'm not sure what to believe with regard to the "women are more sexually fluid than men" notion.
2237:
click "add citation". That's important! If you don't click "add citation" the information will be lost and you'll have to fill it in again. Make sure that at the bottom of the page you have a heading ==References== and the code <references /: -->
627:
But quotation marks accompanying boldface is still not standard practice on Knowledge. And the Honky article shouldn't use italics, per what has already been stated above. Italics are only standard practice regarding what has been clarified above.
575:
being discussed, meaning that the primary focus is on the word itself and not its denotation. Quotation marks make that clear from the start. The lack of them, in my opinion, causes some confusion. I will remove them, however, if you feel they are
2177:
FYI. I suggest you just post your Adam Zemke article (though please do fill out the citations properly), as you don't need to submit new articles to AFC in the first place, and it's clear that it wasn't declined according to prevailing consensus.
923:, and so on; it would be extremely inappropriate to start out those articles with "is a person who" or "is a person that." So I'm not seeing how using "is a term," "is a word," "is a noun," "describes" or "refers to" can be avoided in such cases.
266:, and it was either uploaded on or after 2005-05-19, or is not used in any articles. If you agree with the deletion, there is no need to do anything. If, however, you believe that this image may be retained on Knowledge under one of the
842:
is a term most widely used in the English language to describe sexual and romantic attraction between females." This is a terrible lead, and should be rephrased (but I am not the right person to improve it), so I wouldn't take it as a
298:
292:
to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with
878:
article is not about the phrase, but about the concept of a symbol or reminder of mortality in art, so it should not be in quotes (but it is in italics because it is a foreign phase). The lead previously didn't reflect that, but I
2432:. The bisexual identity is frequently seen as a transition phase for someone who is coming out (and it frequently is); however, genuine bisexuals find it difficult to identify as bi as they are frequently accused of being simply
795:
process, so it can look odd when an article departs from this standard. Maybe Knowledge became that way due to how many dictionaries and encyclopedias introduce a term without italicizing it or putting it in quotation marks?
897:
While Knowledge is not a dictionary, I'm not sure that Knowledge articles should almost never start out stating "is a term" for an article that is about the term (or mostly about the term). The Lesbian article, like the
1570:
Well I did and have strongly supported Andrew Peter Matthew. I didn't understand your comment about whether books using "the..." were published in Brazil. I don't see what difference where they were published makes.
3001:, even if you meant well. Even making spelling and grammatical corrections in others' comments is generally frowned upon, as it tends to irritate the users whose comments you are correcting. Take a look at the
2052:
where there is not already an article for the neighborhood - could have "historic district" dropped if that is consensus, while districts that are not really neighborhoods retain it. From a look at the category
1979:. I am opposing because this is one of many current, separate proposals to drop the words "Historic District" from Detroit article titles. Currently all historic districts in Detroit use the phrase, as shown at
735:
I'll grant you that many articles staring with "X is a term" do not italicize; but they should, since any term would normally be italiicized in that context. I have seen many articles that do use italics there
2929:
How about this. . . . I will go through all Michigan municipalities (cities and townships) and change them so that the lede and the title are the common name and the infobox only states the official name. See
2554:
I've noticed that recently you've edited a few articles to remove or subordinate the official name of a place to the common, informal name used as the article title. I'm not sure that that's the intention of
1040:
attractions have been proven as existing, and using "concept" to initially define them makes it sound as though the romantic attraction, sexual attraction and/or behavior these people experience are concepts.
274:
state clearly the source of the image. If it has been copied from elsewhere on the web you should provide links to: the image itself, the page which uses it and the page which contains the license conditions.
2840:
Thanks for your patience. I know I threw a lot at you. (I was in a hurry, then I wasn't, and so my remarks were a bit disjointed.) Also I apologize if my comments seemed unfair. I wasn't intending it!
3049:
My apologies! I was not aware of this rule when it comes to move requests that you started. I will make sure to not do so again. Out of curiosity . . . what is the policy on your own user talk page? —
2085:
and then just list the recommendations you have made at the other pages, e.g. "Brush Park Historic District → Brush Park". Add a note to the other pages saying "please see consolidated discussion at
1702:
I will notify you both when the RfC is ready, so that you may freely express your opinions on point in a forum that may actually lead to a conclusion and consensus policy on which we may all rely.
537:
Like I stated in the WP:Manual of Style discussion about this: Thanks, Robsinden. I suppose that from there...it depends on what a person considers to be "things that would normally be italicized."
1732:
given name, it is presented between quote marks following the last given name or initial, as for John F. Kennedy, which has John Fitzgerald "Jack" Kennedy. The quotation marks are not put in bold.
2473:
Yet lesbians seem to have a more difficult time in society being taken seriously than gay men. Maybe that's just the struggle for gender equality though. Human sexuality is so complex! Sigh.
259:, because it is an image licensed as "for non-commercial use only," "non-derivative use" or "used with permission," it has not been shown to comply with the limited standards for the use of
2993:. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, talk pages are meant to be a record of a discussion; deleting or editing legitimate comments, as you did at
2786:
Next, in regards to your comment, the version before mine contained three names for the municipality (names 1, 2, and 3), whereas mine only contained two names (names 1 and 3). I think
872:". That article is not about the concept of the insensitivity of the rich to the suffering of the poor, but about the history and abuses of the phrase itself. On the other hand, the
834:
is a term/describes/refers to". Knowledge is not a dictionary, but an encyclopedia. Most articles are about concepts or things, not about words or phrases. You gave the example of
1926:
1638:
commonly referred to as "Rick" or even "Dick", though his opponents often called him "Tricky Dicky" (I have no idea what he was called by his family and close friends, if any).
354:
132:
2636:. Otherwise, all major cities' articles would have to be edited to the contrary. I hope I have presented myself clearly, and let me know if you have any questions or concerns. —
196:! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Knowledge and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there!
2302:
Several people have improved it already - adding categories and such - but the references still need to be put in regular format. I will add wikiprojects to the talk page. --
2990:
2037:
as it is then undistinguished from the road itself. I don't think there can be a completely universal rule for these, but I like the idea of having some kind of system.
2586:
Hey, JohnInDC! I would first like to thank you for paying close attention to edits on Knowledge. Editors like you are the ones who affirm the trust I have in Knowledge.
1129:
or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Knowledge, you might want to consider being "
3099:
Short version. You can take anything you want off your own talk page expect notices about blocks or restrictions currently in effect and sockpuppet notifications.
1235:
179:
760:. Most others that start with "X is a term" just haven't been looked at by anyone who knows or cares about style, or they'd be rewritten in most cases; like
178:
344:
122:
2094:
3063:
I hope you'll forgive my stepping in - the broad rule is, you can do what you want on your own Talk page but there are things to look out for. Check out
2412:
Thank you for your response, Flyer22. I deleted my comment because I also felt it was unnecessary. In response to your comment, you are correct in that a
1585:
Sorry, I was confused on the matter. (I didn't know Google Books only searched for English language books.) Your explanation was very clear. Thank you. —
1680:
I've never been able to find it. I am preparing an RfC to be addressed at the MOS:BIO talk page that will settle this by actual and specific consensus.
952:
Like I stated elsewhere, there is also the matter of things that are debated as existing/not existing. There has been dispute over using "is" for the
993:
article, where there was debate over its lead using both "is a term" and "refer to," is obviously another example concerning using those words; see
721:
If this matter needs to be taken to Knowledge talk:Manual of Style again, then let's take it there. Hopefully, we would get more replies this time.
480:
I'll ask about this at Knowledge:Manual of Style. I signed your username for you above. To sign your own username, all you have to do is type four
2994:
2029:
1279:
1138:
3007:
Once you star an RfC, you cannot delete it if others have commented on it. You can withdraw your request and ask an admin to close it. You can
1220:
2591:
In regards to your concerns, I understand where your confusion may arise; however, I assure you I can explain. First, in regards to my edit at
1257:
965:
article, where "commonly defined as" is currently there because there has been some edit warring over the initial sentence, even recently. See
234:
2369:
article would be needed). That's a social aspect of the topic of bisexuality and should therefore be covered in the Bisexuality article. The
1755:
Thank you for your follow-up, Macrakis. Please note that the provision of MOS:LEAD cited by you is contradicted by the examples provided by
1645:
The fact that Richard Santorum is widely known as Rick, and William Clinton as Bill, is thus not "obvious" and should stay in the article. --
868:
When in fact the article is about a word or a phrase (but not the title of a book, movie, etc.), then quotation marks are appropriate, e.g. "
502:
OK, and yeah, not in any way offended or anything like that. :) I'm not sure what a Welcome template is, but feel free to send one my way!
288:
1126:
2688:
2563:
be called, it would seem that the better practice would be to lead the article with the official name of the area. Thus for example at
2931:
2823:
2211:
Thank you. I am not familiar with the process of creating an article outside of the AfC page. Is there a page that explains all this?
1980:
1514:
252:
238:
2799:
2609:
2601:
2564:
1976:
2122:
2053:
1125:
408:
2365:, which, again, should not be split off from the Bisexuality article (unless that aspect took up so much of that article that a
2141:
Good job. Don't forget to post a "move request" and direction to the consolidated discussion on the five new pages you added. --
3221:
3216:
2963:
1917:
1466:
1275:
1253:
321:
99:
71:
66:
2998:
2528:
and I have reopened the move request with that as the move target. If you are interested, please contribute to the debate at
1330:
1270:
278:
267:
2687:(It does not appear to be hard and fast - formal names are at least permissible in leading off geographical info boxes, see
1634:
that any particular person is widely known by some nickname rather than another -- or none. For example, Richard Nixon was
1913:
1430:
1380:
1443:
1398:
1384:
1187:
452:
OK. I won't edit anymore until I get a feel for how they should be. I figured it would be OK to use italics when it's a
2608:"Shelby Charter Township." Rather, it is "Shelby Township." It may help you to know that I plan to request a move from
903:
romantically or sexually attracted to women" or "is exclusively romantically or sexually attracted to women." But like
765:
2019:
1506:
1367:
2763:
First, allow me to construct an abstraction. For any given Michigan charter township, it can go up to four names: 1)
1836:
Thank you so much for your helpful contributions to the North End article! You have found a lot of great resources! —
2529:
3188:
2815:
2541:
1462:
1358:
1308:
1304:
1197:
294:
260:
38:
2086:
2803:
2613:
2171:
1326:
1287:
416:
1813:
2818:. Removal of "Charter" from the article title has generally been seen as uncontroversial as in accordance with
1488:
1484:
1313:
1266:
438:, where it's not the boldfaced article title terms, I'm sure that it's fine to use italics or quotation marks.
201:
663:
Standard practice is to use italics, not quotation marks, when talking about a term. A lead may start with "
1605:
1576:
1546:
1406:
1295:
1262:
974:
3118:
3054:
2939:
2831:
2641:
2525:
2478:
2449:
2321:
2293:
2257:
2238:. If you like, let me know where to look at this, and I will check it before you launch into mainspace. --
2216:
2130:
2075:
2042:
1949:
1869:
1855:
1841:
1824:
1809:
1666:
1661:
policy on this? I prefer the nicknames in the names, actually, as I do see it as helpful and clarifying. —
1590:
1561:
1393:
1362:
1291:
1179:
1130:
1102:
958:
769:
697:
618:
581:
507:
471:
302:
2783:. None of the latter three are official names. (I will reference this abstraction throughout my comment.)
3197:
2521:
2510:
1782:
1707:
1501:
1452:
1448:
1439:
1435:
1134:
1116:
412:
47:
17:
2357:
can be covered in the Bisexuality article, which it already somewhat is. What you are talking about is
2252:
Thank you, MelanieN! I will let you know if I get around to creating a proper article for Adam Zemke.
2819:
2617:
2556:
1690:
1497:
1334:
1300:
1120:
2524:
article. There was no consensus for the proposed move, but some suggested the new possible title of
3159:
3086:
3068:
2967:
2892:
2731:
2709:
2692:
2672:
2572:
1389:
1375:
1321:
1226:
994:
761:
528:
2798:(the official name and common name, respectively). I therefore plan to submit a move request from
3163:
3144:
3104:
3090:
3072:
3036:
3017:
2971:
2896:
2735:
2713:
2696:
2676:
2592:
2576:
2362:
2307:
2278:
2243:
2202:
2146:
2102:
2061:
2001:
1988:
1901:
1746:
1650:
1601:
1572:
1542:
1371:
1230:
1183:
1002:
888:
777:
682:
399:
377:
208:
193:
1733:
1630:
Though Rick is a common nickname for Richard, and Bill for William, there is no way of knowing
3155:
3114:
3064:
3050:
3002:
2935:
2827:
2637:
2537:
2493:
2474:
2464:
2445:
2402:
2366:
2317:
2289:
2253:
2212:
2186:
2126:
2071:
2038:
2013:
I mostly agree with what you're saying; however, some of these historic districts cannot have
1945:
1865:
1851:
1837:
1820:
1805:
1662:
1586:
1557:
1458:
1425:
1150:
1142:
1060:
1045:
869:
801:
726:
712:
693:
633:
614:
596:
577:
562:
542:
503:
493:
467:
443:
424:
415:
policy (the policy is mostly about the naming of articles, however). It may be best to ask at
219:
3031:. If you need help with any of the technicalities, give me a shout. Always happy to help.
2441:
1778:
1703:
1141:
for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the
753:
2559:, which goes (in my reading) to article names and not the content. Whatever a place might
989:
status, used to use "generally defined as"...but currently uses "is often defined as." The
367:
145:
2358:
1510:
310:
2966:.) Thanks for an interesting discussion - I've learned a lot about Michigan townships!
3167:
3148:
3122:
3108:
3094:
3076:
3058:
3040:
3021:
2975:
2943:
2900:
2835:
2739:
2717:
2700:
2680:
2645:
2580:
2497:
2482:
2468:
2453:
2406:
2325:
2311:
2297:
2282:
2261:
2247:
2220:
2206:
2191:
2150:
2134:
2106:
2079:
2065:
2046:
2005:
1953:
1873:
1859:
1845:
1828:
1786:
1750:
1711:
1670:
1654:
1609:
1594:
1580:
1565:
1550:
1492:
1317:
1154:
1064:
1049:
990:
912:
892:
805:
781:
730:
716:
701:
686:
637:
622:
606:
600:
585:
566:
546:
532:
524:
511:
497:
475:
447:
428:
389:
314:
223:
161:
1137:
to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click
264:
3140:
3100:
3082:
3032:
3028:
3013:
2811:
2727:
2386:
2370:
2303:
2274:
2239:
2198:
2142:
2098:
2057:
1997:
1984:
1887:
1742:
1646:
1402:
1215:
998:
978:
884:
773:
737:
678:
516:
335:
256:
154:
113:
2723:
2621:
2533:
2489:
2460:
2398:
2233:
2180:
2090:
1538:
1193:
1146:
1056:
1041:
986:
916:
874:
797:
792:
788:
722:
708:
629:
592:
558:
538:
489:
439:
420:
215:
197:
2397:
is a notable term for a variety of reasons that are mentioned in the Gay article.
1934:
1916:, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to
3196:
If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the
2337:
1967:
This is the notice I have been posting at those articles as I came across them:
1639:
757:
255:
requesting that it be speedily deleted from Knowledge. This has been done under
46:
If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the
1850:
A pleasure, I've now put Detroit on my must-visit list thanks to this article!
1089:
Okay, Wikipedian77, as suggested/requested above, here is a Welcome template:
519:
is the guideline to follow. Only things that would normally be italicised per
328:
106:
2433:
2273:
No need to do this - somebody just promoted your afc draft to article status.
1833:
520:
306:
1909:
1036:
982:
953:
343:
If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at
121:
If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at
2393:
is the most notable term for same-sex sexual attraction between women, and
2437:
2121:. If you have the time, MelanieN, I would appreciate your support at the
962:
350:
To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
128:
To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
2986:
2807:
2374:
1756:
835:
2288:
Great! I will still work on the material and citations at some point.
1908:
You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to
345:
Knowledge talk:Articles for creation/Michigan Urban Farming Initiative
123:
Knowledge talk:Articles for creation/Michigan Urban Farming Initiative
2197:
If you need help with the citations, categories, etc. just ask me. --
1556:
Cool. I have not put one in before, so I will look into it. Thanks! —
908:
749:
745:
741:
2790:
is an unnecessary name in the article and that it can be limited to
1894:
1107:
If you have any questions, you can ask me on my talk page, or place
2089:." You might also call attention to that discussion at places like
1933:
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider
3005:
to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.
1642:
was known as "Will", not Bill or Willy or Billy or anything else.
673:
is ...", since the article is usually about the topic X, not term
610:
481:
1904:, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
1005:(an editor well known for removing "is a term used to describe").
571:
It seems as if quotation marks would help clarify that these are
920:
214:
This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend,
3175:
3158:, very helpful when my own Talk page started to get too big.
2378:
899:
419:'s talk page if your versions on this matter are appropriate.
25:
3027:
Actually, you don't even have to have an admin close it. See
1689:
In my opinion, when an article is titled "Rick Santorum" per
1345:
1166:
1095:
1893:
1819:
Sorry about that! I will make sure to not edit it anymore. —
327:
243:
105:
2689:
Knowledge:Manual_of_Style/Infoboxes#Geographical_infoboxes
669:
is a term...", but it would be better to reword it to be "
1924:
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the
1799:
Your edits to North End while it's listed as under review
3011:
remove another editor's comment on an article talk page.
2826:, as "Augusta Township" wasn't found anywhere in text. —
1804:
avoid potential problems with edit conflicts. Thank you
605:
Some articles do put the term in quotation marks. (See:
353:
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the
131:
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the
2760:
OK, there is a lot to respond to here, so bear with me.
2568:
2349:
2345:
1935:
880:
554:
552:
435:
359:
137:
1912:. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can
398:
Italics for article titles, the terms that are put in
2616:, after which the article will be in accordance with
2569:
showing the common name below it and in smaller type
2567:
where the infobox once led with the official name -
2520:
You recently participated in a move request for the
413:Knowledge:ITALICTITLE#Italics and other formatting
2547:Removing / subordinating official names of places
1145:field when making edits to pages. Happy editing!
997:and where the discussion about that continued at
551:Hey, Wikipedian77. I don't think that these terms
1981:Category:Historic districts in Detroit, Michigan
1119:and ask your question there. Please remember to
375:Thank you for your contributions to Knowledge!
253:File:Michigan Urban Farming Initiative logo.jpg
239:File:Michigan Urban Farming Initiative logo.jpg
153:Thank you for your contributions to Knowledge!
2722:An example that splits the difference here is
2428:) tends to be more socially accepted than the
2172:Knowledge talk:Notability#Political Notability
830:Knowledge articles should almost never start "
692:Thank you, Dicklyon. That was very helpful. —
257:section F3 of the criteria for speedy deletion
170:Wikipedian77, you are invited to the Teahouse
8:
1133:" by a more experienced editor or joining a
523:should be italicised in the lead section. --
363:. Please remember to link to the submission!
141:. Please remember to link to the submission!
2624:) that a municipality's lede should be the
2095:Knowledge talk:WikiProject Michigan/Detroit
2054:Category:Neighborhoods in Detroit, Michigan
2530:Talk:Jesus' walk on water#Requested move 2
2017:removed from their titles as comfortably.
967:The Universe is NOT everything that exists
297:. If the page is deleted, you can contact
2509:
1943:Thank you for helping improve Knowledge!
2934:for a model. How does that look to you?
752:); and a few with quotation marks, like
409:Knowledge:Manual of Style/Titles#Italics
334:Thank you for your recent submission to
190:! Thanks for contributing to Knowledge.
112:Thank you for your recent submission to
2995:Talk:West Bloomfield Township, Michigan
2070:Where would I start such a discussion?
2030:Lower Woodward Avenue Historic District
368:live chat help from experienced editors
146:live chat help from experienced editors
3194:Do not edit the contents of this page.
1798:
557:after the appearance of the boldface.
44:Do not edit the contents of this page.
1728:have explicit policy on this matter:
7:
2600:Secondly, in regards to my edits at
89:: During this time, my username was
977:in its third archive and currently
971:The difficulty of defining universe
305:the page or email a copy to you.
295:Knowledge's policies and guidelines
2932:West Bloomfield Township, Michigan
2824:Augusta Charter Township, Michigan
301:to request that the administrator
24:
3065:Knowledge:OWNTALK#User_talk_pages
2800:Shelby Charter Township, Michigan
2610:Shelby Charter Township, Michigan
2602:Shelby Charter Township, Michigan
2565:Shelby Charter Township, Michigan
2420:. However, at least for men, the
2416:tends to be more accepted than a
1977:Talk:Brush Park Historic District
3179:
2985:
2389:for same-sex sexual attraction,
2112:
1124:
1091:
177:
29:
2964:Mount Morris Township, Michigan
1236:Request administrator attention
609:.) Also, some italicize. (See:
355:Articles for creation help desk
133:Articles for creation help desk
2381:articles are separate because
1724:Actually, the Manual of Style
1:
2822:. It was decided against for
1787:18:54, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
1751:15:13, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
1734:Manual of Style, Lead Section
1712:21:22, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
1671:19:43, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
1655:03:11, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
1610:18:08, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
1595:17:55, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
1581:17:53, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
1541:I will certainly support it.
1280:Biographies of living persons
1180:The five pillars of Knowledge
1162:
1065:22:52, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
1050:22:20, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
893:20:11, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
806:08:05, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
782:07:13, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
731:06:19, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
717:06:15, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
702:05:42, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
687:05:40, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
476:02:07, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
289:the page's talk page directly
224:01:16, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
162:11:37, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
82:: December 2012 – July 2013.
2087:Talk:whatever page you chose
1991:) 21:57, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
1566:03:14, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
1551:03:10, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
1155:02:55, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
638:04:47, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
623:23:37, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
601:15:44, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
586:15:05, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
567:13:22, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
547:23:03, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
533:14:27, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
512:02:27, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
498:02:21, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
462:is a term that . . ." to "A
448:02:04, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
429:00:53, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
402:at the beginning of articles
206:
2020:Greektown Historic District
1305:Policy for non-free content
1221:New contributors' help page
456:being discussed. (Compare "
390:10:07, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
315:21:13, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
299:one of these administrators
3240:
2816:Bloomfield Hills, Michigan
2792:Charter Township of Shelby
1216:Frequently Asked Questions
1123:on talk pages by clicking
175:
2804:Shelby Township, Michigan
2614:Shelby Township, Michigan
2542:13:02, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
2498:05:19, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
2483:05:00, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
2469:04:57, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
2454:04:44, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
2407:04:32, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
2326:14:43, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
2312:23:59, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
2298:23:51, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
2283:19:52, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
2262:04:26, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
2248:01:23, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
2221:00:36, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
2207:18:28, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
2192:17:46, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
2151:23:35, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
2135:23:03, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
2107:21:10, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
2080:16:46, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
2066:20:55, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
2047:19:29, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
2023:is always referred to as
2006:21:57, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
1864:That's so great to hear!
417:Knowledge:Manual of Style
251:A tag has been placed on
3168:13:31, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
3149:04:16, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
3123:01:09, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
3109:00:53, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
3095:23:12, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
3077:23:11, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
3059:22:18, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
3041:21:31, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
3022:21:12, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
2976:11:02, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
2944:00:35, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
2901:18:35, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
2836:17:06, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
2740:13:06, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
2718:12:53, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
2701:13:18, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
2681:12:24, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
2646:06:21, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
2581:00:58, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
2125:that I started. Thanks!
1936:leaving us some feedback
1914:create articles yourself
2788:Shelby Charter Township
2765:Charter Township of XXX
2350:was planning on stating
2123:consolidated discussion
2033:should not be labelled
1954:09:59, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
1874:21:46, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
1860:10:12, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
1846:15:21, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
1829:15:20, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
1814:07:56, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
1431:Help develop an article
1245:Policies and Guidelines
766:Use–mention distinction
2526:Jesus walking on water
2418:homosexual orientation
1993:
1898:
981:at its talk page. The
332:
248:
110:
3192:of past discussions.
2767:(which is always the
2604:, the common name is
2035:Lower Woodward Avenue
1969:
1918:Articles for Creation
1897:
1888:Articles for creation
1276:What Knowledge is not
1254:Neutral point of view
1100:Hello, Wikipedian77!
985:article, which is of
336:Articles for Creation
331:
322:Articles for creation
247:
114:Articles for Creation
109:
100:Articles for creation
42:of past discussions.
18:User talk:Michipedian
2991:Welcome to Knowledge
2773:XXX Charter Township
2551:Hey, Wikipedian77 -
2522:Jesus' walk on water
2511:Jesus' walk on water
2414:bisexual orientation
2336:Your comment at the
1453:Translating articles
1363:Adopt-a-user program
1331:Conflict of interest
1271:No original research
360:reviewer's talk page
268:permitted conditions
138:reviewer's talk page
3154:I found this page,
2426:homosexual identity
1975:See my comments at
1886:Your submission at
1381:No personal attacks
762:Automotive industry
434:For instances like
320:Your submission at
202:I'm a Teahouse host
98:Your submission at
3029:WP:RFC#Ending RfCs
2891:Is this helping?
2593:Greektown, Detroit
2363:sexual orientation
1959:Historic districts
1902:North End, Detroit
1899:
1449:Join a WikiProject
1444:Requested articles
1426:Be bold in editing
1385:Resolving disputes
1188:Your first article
411:guideline and the
333:
249:
209:Visit the Teahouse
111:
3227:
3226:
3204:
3203:
3198:current talk page
3156:Knowledge:Archive
2430:bisexual identity
2015:Historic District
1530:
1529:
1526:
1525:
1522:
1521:
1368:Assume good faith
1342:
1341:
1292:Three-revert rule
1161:
1160:
870:Let them eat cake
838:, which begins: "
366:You can also get
277:add the relevant
231:
230:
226:
144:You can also get
77:
76:
54:
53:
48:current talk page
3231:
3213:
3206:
3205:
3183:
3182:
3176:
2997:, is considered
2989:
2779:, and 4) simply
2442:bisexual erasure
2120:
2116:
2115:
1938:
1537:If you put in a
1507:Useful templates
1359:Community Portal
1346:
1309:Image use policy
1258:Reliable sources
1167:
1163:
1128:
1113:
1112:
1096:
1092:
1085:Welcome template
881:just reworded it
754:Missional living
487:
484:(~), like this:
386:
385:
382:
362:
261:non-free content
246:
213:
211:
192:Be our guest at
181:
174:
173:
159:
140:
63:
56:
55:
33:
32:
26:
3239:
3238:
3234:
3233:
3232:
3230:
3229:
3228:
3209:
3180:
3113:Great, thanks!
2983:
2796:Shelby Township
2549:
2515:
2359:sexual identity
2344:With regard to
2342:
2316:Great, thanks.
2175:
2113:
2111:
1961:
1956:
1920:if you prefer.
1891:
1801:
1624:
1535:
1477:
1417:
1390:Build consensus
1351:
1327:Deletion policy
1288:Manual of Style
1246:
1208:
1198:upload an image
1172:
1171:Getting Started
1157:
1110:
1109:
1087:
959:WP:LEADSENTENCE
770:WP:WORDSASWORDS
485:
404:
395:
394:
383:
380:
378:
358:
325:
244:
242:
235:Speedy deletion
227:
212:
207:
172:
167:
166:
155:
136:
103:
59:
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
3237:
3235:
3225:
3224:
3219:
3214:
3202:
3201:
3184:
3173:
3171:
3170:
3136:
3135:
3134:
3133:
3132:
3131:
3130:
3129:
3128:
3127:
3126:
3125:
3044:
3043:
2982:
2979:
2959:
2958:
2957:
2956:
2955:
2954:
2953:
2952:
2951:
2950:
2949:
2948:
2947:
2946:
2914:
2913:
2912:
2911:
2910:
2909:
2908:
2907:
2906:
2905:
2904:
2903:
2878:
2877:
2876:
2875:
2874:
2873:
2872:
2871:
2870:
2869:
2868:
2867:
2852:
2851:
2850:
2849:
2848:
2847:
2846:
2845:
2844:
2843:
2842:
2841:
2784:
2761:
2749:
2748:
2747:
2746:
2745:
2744:
2743:
2742:
2705:
2704:
2703:
2665:
2664:
2663:
2662:
2655:
2654:
2653:
2652:
2597:
2596:
2588:
2587:
2548:
2545:
2514:
2508:
2507:
2506:
2505:
2504:
2503:
2502:
2501:
2500:
2341:
2334:
2333:
2332:
2331:
2330:
2329:
2328:
2271:
2270:
2269:
2268:
2267:
2266:
2265:
2264:
2231:
2227:
2174:
2169:
2168:
2167:
2166:
2165:
2164:
2163:
2162:
2161:
2160:
2159:
2158:
2157:
2156:
2155:
2154:
2153:
1960:
1957:
1941:
1940:
1931:
1906:
1892:
1890:
1884:
1883:
1882:
1881:
1880:
1879:
1878:
1877:
1876:
1800:
1797:
1796:
1795:
1794:
1793:
1792:
1791:
1790:
1789:
1767:
1766:
1765:
1764:
1763:
1762:
1761:
1760:
1738:
1737:
1736:
1717:
1716:
1715:
1714:
1697:
1696:
1695:
1694:
1684:
1683:
1682:
1681:
1674:
1673:
1640:William Rogers
1623:
1620:
1619:
1618:
1617:
1616:
1615:
1614:
1613:
1612:
1534:
1531:
1528:
1527:
1524:
1523:
1520:
1519:
1518:
1517:
1504:
1495:
1479:
1478:
1475:
1472:
1471:
1470:
1469:
1455:
1446:
1433:
1419:
1418:
1415:
1412:
1411:
1410:
1409:
1396:
1387:
1378:
1365:
1353:
1352:
1349:
1343:
1340:
1339:
1338:
1337:
1324:
1314:External links
1311:
1298:
1284:
1283:
1282:
1273:
1267:Citing sources
1260:
1248:
1247:
1244:
1241:
1240:
1239:
1238:
1233:
1223:
1218:
1210:
1209:
1206:
1203:
1202:
1201:
1200:
1190:
1174:
1173:
1170:
1159:
1158:
1121:sign your name
1099:
1086:
1083:
1082:
1081:
1080:
1079:
1078:
1077:
1076:
1075:
1074:
1073:
1072:
1071:
1070:
1069:
1068:
1067:
1019:
1018:
1017:
1016:
1015:
1014:
1013:
1012:
1011:
1010:
1009:
1008:
1007:
1006:
991:Glasgow effect
937:
936:
935:
934:
933:
932:
931:
930:
929:
928:
927:
926:
925:
924:
913:Faggot (slang)
855:
854:
853:
852:
851:
850:
849:
848:
847:
846:
845:
844:
817:
816:
815:
814:
813:
812:
811:
810:
809:
808:
661:
660:
659:
658:
657:
656:
655:
654:
653:
652:
651:
650:
649:
648:
647:
646:
645:
644:
643:
642:
641:
640:
403:
396:
393:
392:
372:
371:
364:
351:
348:
340:
339:
326:
324:
318:
283:
282:
275:
241:
237:nomination of
232:
229:
228:
191:
184:
182:
171:
168:
165:
164:
150:
149:
142:
129:
126:
118:
117:
104:
102:
96:
95:
94:
75:
74:
69:
64:
52:
51:
34:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
3236:
3223:
3220:
3218:
3215:
3212:
3208:
3207:
3199:
3195:
3191:
3190:
3185:
3178:
3177:
3174:
3169:
3165:
3161:
3157:
3153:
3152:
3151:
3150:
3146:
3142:
3124:
3120:
3116:
3112:
3111:
3110:
3106:
3102:
3098:
3097:
3096:
3092:
3088:
3084:
3080:
3079:
3078:
3074:
3070:
3066:
3062:
3061:
3060:
3056:
3052:
3048:
3047:
3046:
3045:
3042:
3038:
3034:
3030:
3026:
3025:
3024:
3023:
3019:
3015:
3012:
3010:
3004:
3000:
2996:
2992:
2988:
2980:
2978:
2977:
2973:
2969:
2965:
2945:
2941:
2937:
2933:
2928:
2927:
2926:
2925:
2924:
2923:
2922:
2921:
2920:
2919:
2918:
2917:
2916:
2915:
2902:
2898:
2894:
2890:
2889:
2888:
2887:
2886:
2885:
2884:
2883:
2882:
2881:
2880:
2879:
2864:
2863:
2862:
2861:
2860:
2859:
2858:
2857:
2856:
2855:
2854:
2853:
2839:
2838:
2837:
2833:
2829:
2825:
2821:
2820:WP:COMMONNAME
2817:
2813:
2812:New York City
2809:
2805:
2801:
2797:
2793:
2789:
2785:
2782:
2778:
2774:
2770:
2769:official name
2766:
2762:
2759:
2758:
2757:
2756:
2755:
2754:
2753:
2752:
2751:
2750:
2741:
2737:
2733:
2729:
2728:Massachusetts
2725:
2721:
2720:
2719:
2715:
2711:
2706:
2702:
2698:
2694:
2690:
2686:
2685:
2684:
2683:
2682:
2678:
2674:
2669:
2668:
2667:
2666:
2659:
2658:
2657:
2656:
2649:
2648:
2647:
2643:
2639:
2635:
2634:official name
2631:
2627:
2623:
2619:
2618:WP:COMMONNAME
2615:
2611:
2607:
2603:
2599:
2598:
2594:
2590:
2589:
2585:
2584:
2583:
2582:
2578:
2574:
2570:
2566:
2562:
2558:
2557:WP:Commonname
2552:
2546:
2544:
2543:
2539:
2535:
2532:. Thanks! —
2531:
2527:
2523:
2518:
2512:
2499:
2495:
2491:
2486:
2485:
2484:
2480:
2476:
2472:
2471:
2470:
2466:
2462:
2457:
2456:
2455:
2451:
2447:
2443:
2439:
2435:
2431:
2427:
2423:
2419:
2415:
2411:
2410:
2409:
2408:
2404:
2400:
2396:
2392:
2388:
2387:umbrella term
2384:
2383:homosexuality
2380:
2376:
2372:
2371:Homosexuality
2368:
2364:
2360:
2356:
2351:
2347:
2339:
2335:
2327:
2323:
2319:
2315:
2314:
2313:
2309:
2305:
2301:
2300:
2299:
2295:
2291:
2287:
2286:
2285:
2284:
2280:
2276:
2263:
2259:
2255:
2251:
2250:
2249:
2245:
2241:
2235:
2232:
2228:
2224:
2223:
2222:
2218:
2214:
2210:
2209:
2208:
2204:
2200:
2196:
2195:
2194:
2193:
2189:
2188:
2183:
2182:
2173:
2170:
2152:
2148:
2144:
2140:
2139:
2138:
2137:
2136:
2132:
2128:
2124:
2119:
2110:
2109:
2108:
2104:
2100:
2096:
2092:
2088:
2083:
2082:
2081:
2077:
2073:
2069:
2068:
2067:
2063:
2059:
2055:
2050:
2049:
2048:
2044:
2040:
2036:
2032:
2031:
2026:
2022:
2021:
2016:
2012:
2011:
2010:
2009:
2008:
2007:
2003:
1999:
1992:
1990:
1986:
1982:
1978:
1974:
1968:
1965:
1958:
1955:
1951:
1947:
1944:
1937:
1932:
1929:
1928:
1923:
1922:
1921:
1919:
1915:
1911:
1905:
1903:
1896:
1889:
1885:
1875:
1871:
1867:
1863:
1862:
1861:
1857:
1853:
1849:
1848:
1847:
1843:
1839:
1835:
1832:
1831:
1830:
1826:
1822:
1818:
1817:
1816:
1815:
1811:
1807:
1788:
1784:
1780:
1775:
1774:
1773:
1772:
1771:
1770:
1769:
1768:
1758:
1754:
1753:
1752:
1748:
1744:
1739:
1735:
1730:
1729:
1727:
1723:
1722:
1721:
1720:
1719:
1718:
1713:
1709:
1705:
1701:
1700:
1699:
1698:
1692:
1691:WP:COMMONNAME
1688:
1687:
1686:
1685:
1678:
1677:
1676:
1675:
1672:
1668:
1664:
1659:
1658:
1657:
1656:
1652:
1648:
1643:
1641:
1637:
1633:
1628:
1621:
1611:
1607:
1603:
1602:In ictu oculi
1598:
1597:
1596:
1592:
1588:
1584:
1583:
1582:
1578:
1574:
1573:In ictu oculi
1569:
1568:
1567:
1563:
1559:
1555:
1554:
1553:
1552:
1548:
1544:
1543:In ictu oculi
1540:
1533:Saint Matthew
1532:
1516:
1512:
1508:
1505:
1503:
1499:
1496:
1494:
1490:
1486:
1483:
1482:
1481:
1480:
1476:Miscellaneous
1474:
1473:
1468:
1464:
1460:
1457:Cleaning up:
1456:
1454:
1450:
1447:
1445:
1441:
1437:
1434:
1432:
1428:
1427:
1423:
1422:
1421:
1420:
1414:
1413:
1408:
1407:Mailing lists
1404:
1400:
1397:
1395:
1391:
1388:
1386:
1382:
1379:
1377:
1373:
1369:
1366:
1364:
1360:
1357:
1356:
1355:
1354:
1350:The Community
1348:
1347:
1344:
1336:
1332:
1328:
1325:
1323:
1319:
1315:
1312:
1310:
1306:
1302:
1299:
1297:
1296:Sock puppetry
1293:
1289:
1286:
1285:
1281:
1277:
1274:
1272:
1268:
1264:
1263:Verifiability
1261:
1259:
1255:
1252:
1251:
1250:
1249:
1243:
1242:
1237:
1234:
1232:
1231:make requests
1228:
1227:ask questions
1224:
1222:
1219:
1217:
1214:
1213:
1212:
1211:
1205:
1204:
1199:
1195:
1191:
1189:
1185:
1181:
1178:
1177:
1176:
1175:
1169:
1168:
1165:
1164:
1156:
1152:
1148:
1144:
1140:
1136:
1132:
1127:
1122:
1118:
1114:
1106:
1105:to Knowledge!
1104:
1098:
1097:
1094:
1093:
1090:
1084:
1066:
1062:
1058:
1053:
1052:
1051:
1047:
1043:
1038:
1033:
1032:
1031:
1030:
1029:
1028:
1027:
1026:
1025:
1024:
1023:
1022:
1021:
1020:
1004:
1000:
996:
995:its talk page
992:
988:
984:
980:
976:
972:
968:
964:
960:
955:
951:
950:
949:
948:
947:
946:
945:
944:
943:
942:
941:
940:
939:
938:
922:
918:
914:
910:
906:
901:
896:
895:
894:
890:
886:
882:
877:
876:
871:
867:
866:
865:
864:
863:
862:
861:
860:
859:
858:
857:
856:
841:
837:
833:
829:
828:
827:
826:
825:
824:
823:
822:
821:
820:
819:
818:
807:
803:
799:
794:
790:
785:
784:
783:
779:
775:
771:
767:
763:
759:
755:
751:
747:
743:
739:
738:Hacker (term)
734:
733:
732:
728:
724:
720:
719:
718:
714:
710:
705:
704:
703:
699:
695:
691:
690:
689:
688:
684:
680:
676:
672:
668:
667:
639:
635:
631:
626:
625:
624:
620:
616:
612:
608:
604:
603:
602:
598:
594:
589:
588:
587:
583:
579:
574:
570:
569:
568:
564:
560:
555:
553:
550:
549:
548:
544:
540:
536:
535:
534:
530:
526:
522:
518:
517:MOS:BOLDTITLE
515:
514:
513:
509:
505:
501:
500:
499:
495:
491:
483:
479:
478:
477:
473:
469:
466:is a . . .")
465:
461:
460:
455:
451:
450:
449:
445:
441:
437:
433:
432:
431:
430:
426:
422:
418:
414:
410:
401:
397:
391:
388:
387:
374:
373:
369:
365:
361:
356:
352:
349:
346:
342:
341:
337:
330:
323:
319:
317:
316:
312:
308:
304:
300:
296:
291:
290:
280:
279:copyright tag
276:
273:
272:
271:
269:
265:
262:
258:
254:
240:
236:
233:
225:
221:
217:
210:
205:
203:
199:
195:
189:
183:
180:
176:
169:
163:
160:
158:
152:
151:
147:
143:
139:
134:
130:
127:
124:
120:
119:
115:
108:
101:
97:
92:
88:
85:
84:
83:
81:
73:
70:
68:
65:
62:
58:
57:
49:
45:
41:
40:
35:
28:
27:
19:
3210:
3193:
3187:
3172:
3137:
3115:Wikipedian77
3051:Wikipedian77
3008:
3006:
3003:welcome page
2999:bad practice
2984:
2960:
2936:Wikipedian77
2828:Wikipedian77
2795:
2791:
2787:
2780:
2777:XXX Township
2776:
2772:
2768:
2764:
2724:Pennsylvania
2638:Wikipedian77
2633:
2629:
2625:
2605:
2560:
2553:
2550:
2519:
2516:
2513:move request
2475:Wikipedian77
2446:Wikipedian77
2429:
2425:
2422:gay identity
2421:
2417:
2413:
2394:
2390:
2382:
2354:
2343:
2318:Wikipedian77
2290:Wikipedian77
2272:
2254:Wikipedian77
2234:User:Postdlf
2213:Wikipedian77
2185:
2179:
2176:
2127:Wikipedian77
2117:
2091:Talk:Detroit
2072:Wikipedian77
2039:Wikipedian77
2034:
2028:
2024:
2018:
2014:
1994:
1972:
1970:
1966:
1962:
1946:Libby norman
1942:
1925:
1907:
1900:
1866:Wikipedian77
1852:Libby norman
1838:Wikipedian77
1821:Wikipedian77
1806:Libby norman
1802:
1725:
1663:Wikipedian77
1644:
1635:
1631:
1629:
1625:
1587:Wikipedian77
1558:Wikipedian77
1536:
1515:User scripts
1489:Disambiguity
1424:
1416:Things to do
1403:IRC channels
1394:Village pump
1207:Getting Help
1143:edit summary
1108:
1101:
1088:
973:discussions
970:
966:
917:Dyke (slang)
875:memento mori
873:
839:
831:
694:Wikipedian77
674:
670:
665:
664:
662:
615:Wikipedian77
578:Wikipedian77
576:unnecessary.
572:
504:Wikipedian77
468:Wikipedian77
463:
458:
457:
453:
405:
376:
357:, or on the
287:
284:
250:
194:the Teahouse
188:Wikipedian77
187:
185:
156:
135:, or on the
91:Wikipedian77
90:
86:
79:
78:
60:
43:
37:
3186:This is an
3067:for more.
2626:common name
2361:vs. actual
2338:Bisexuality
1779:Dirtlawyer1
1704:Dirtlawyer1
1440:Peer review
1436:Maintenance
1194:edit a page
1135:WikiProject
905:this source
758:Going Dutch
400:WP:BOLDFACE
286:also visit
36:This is an
2434:bi-curious
2367:WP:SPINOUT
1502:Talk pages
1498:User pages
1485:Categories
1335:Notability
1301:Copyrights
1225:Where to:
1111:{{helpme}}
525:Rob Sinden
521:MOS:ITALIC
3222:Archive 3
3217:Archive 2
3211:Archive 1
2981:July 2013
2561:generally
2517:Hi there
2348:, what I
2340:talk page
2025:Greektown
1927:help desk
1910:Knowledge
1622:Nicknames
1467:Vandalism
1376:Etiquette
1322:Vandalism
1117:talk page
1037:Afterlife
1003:talk page
983:Anarchism
954:Telepathy
80:Archive 1
72:Archive 3
67:Archive 2
61:Archive 1
3160:JohnInDC
3141:Gtwfan52
3101:Gtwfan52
3087:JohnInDC
3083:this too
3069:JohnInDC
3033:Gtwfan52
3014:Gtwfan52
2968:JohnInDC
2893:JohnInDC
2732:JohnInDC
2710:JohnInDC
2693:JohnInDC
2673:JohnInDC
2573:JohnInDC
2440:. (See:
2438:closeted
2355:bisexual
2304:MelanieN
2275:MelanieN
2240:MelanieN
2199:MelanieN
2143:MelanieN
2099:MelanieN
2058:MelanieN
1998:MelanieN
1985:MelanieN
1743:Macrakis
1647:Macrakis
1632:a priori
1399:Signpost
1372:Civility
1192:How to:
1184:Tutorial
1115:on your
999:Aeusoes1
963:Universe
885:Macrakis
774:Dicklyon
679:Dicklyon
157:Excirial
3189:archive
2808:Chicago
2622:Bkonrad
2534:Amakuru
2490:Flyer22
2461:Flyer22
2399:Flyer22
2391:lesbian
2385:is the
2375:Lesbian
2181:postdlf
1757:MOS:BIO
1459:General
1147:Flyer22
1131:adopted
1103:Welcome
1057:Flyer22
1042:Flyer22
840:Lesbian
836:lesbian
798:Flyer22
764:. See
723:Flyer22
709:Flyer22
630:Flyer22
607:wetback
593:Flyer22
559:Flyer22
539:Flyer22
490:Flyer22
464:lesbian
459:Lesbian
440:Flyer22
421:Flyer22
216:HostBot
198:Osarius
39:archive
2771:), 2)
2027:, but
1973:Oppose
909:Nigger
843:model.
750:Yuppie
746:Midget
742:A-list
482:tildes
303:userfy
270:then:
3009:never
2775:, 3)
2651:time!
1539:WP:RM
1511:Tools
1493:Stubs
987:WP:GA
793:WP:FA
789:WP:GA
611:honky
573:terms
307:NtheP
16:<
3164:talk
3145:talk
3119:talk
3105:talk
3091:talk
3073:talk
3055:talk
3037:talk
3018:talk
2972:talk
2940:talk
2897:talk
2832:talk
2810:and
2794:and
2736:talk
2730:.
2714:talk
2697:talk
2691:.)
2677:talk
2642:talk
2632:the
2628:and
2577:talk
2538:talk
2494:talk
2479:talk
2465:talk
2450:talk
2444:.)
2424:(or
2403:talk
2377:and
2346:this
2322:talk
2308:talk
2294:talk
2279:talk
2258:talk
2244:talk
2217:talk
2203:talk
2187:talk
2147:talk
2131:talk
2118:Done
2103:talk
2093:and
2076:talk
2062:talk
2043:talk
2002:talk
1989:talk
1950:talk
1870:talk
1856:talk
1842:talk
1825:talk
1810:talk
1783:talk
1747:talk
1726:does
1708:talk
1667:talk
1651:talk
1606:talk
1591:talk
1577:talk
1562:talk
1547:talk
1463:Spam
1318:Spam
1151:talk
1139:here
1061:talk
1046:talk
979:here
975:here
969:and
921:Slut
889:talk
883:. --
802:talk
778:talk
768:and
727:talk
713:talk
698:talk
683:talk
634:talk
619:talk
613:.) -
597:talk
582:talk
563:talk
543:talk
529:talk
508:talk
494:talk
486:~~~~
472:talk
454:term
444:talk
436:this
425:talk
407:the
311:talk
220:talk
87:Note
3085:.
3081:Oh
2781:XXX
2630:not
2606:not
2436:or
2395:gay
2379:Gay
1636:not
1001:'s
900:Gay
791:or
772:.
677:.
384:yya
186:Hi
3166:)
3147:)
3121:)
3107:)
3093:)
3075:)
3057:)
3039:)
3020:)
2974:)
2942:)
2899:)
2834:)
2802:→
2738:)
2716:)
2699:)
2679:)
2644:)
2612:→
2579:)
2540:)
2496:)
2481:)
2467:)
2452:)
2405:)
2373:,
2324:)
2310:)
2296:)
2281:)
2260:)
2246:)
2219:)
2205:)
2190:)
2149:)
2133:)
2105:)
2078:)
2064:)
2045:)
2004:)
1996:--
1952:)
1872:)
1858:)
1844:)
1834:PS
1827:)
1812:)
1785:)
1749:)
1741:--
1710:)
1669:)
1653:)
1608:)
1593:)
1579:)
1564:)
1549:)
1513:•
1509:•
1500:•
1491:•
1487:•
1465:•
1461:•
1451:•
1442:•
1438:•
1429:•
1405:•
1401:•
1392:•
1383:•
1374:•
1370:•
1361:•
1333:•
1329:•
1320:•
1316:•
1307:•
1303:•
1294:•
1290:•
1278:•
1269:•
1265:•
1256:•
1229:•
1196:•
1186:•
1182:•
1153:)
1063:)
1048:)
919:,
915:,
911:,
891:)
804:)
780:)
756:,
748:,
744:,
740:,
729:)
715:)
700:)
685:)
636:)
621:)
599:)
584:)
565:)
545:)
531:)
510:)
496:)
474:)
446:)
427:)
381:at
379:Pr
313:)
263:.
222:)
204:)
3200:.
3162:(
3143:(
3117:(
3103:(
3089:(
3071:(
3053:(
3035:(
3016:(
2970:(
2938:(
2895:(
2830:(
2734:(
2712:(
2695:(
2675:(
2640:(
2575:(
2536:(
2492:(
2477:(
2463:(
2448:(
2401:(
2320:(
2306:(
2292:(
2277:(
2256:(
2242:(
2215:(
2201:(
2184:(
2145:(
2129:(
2101:(
2074:(
2060:(
2041:(
2000:(
1987:(
1971:*
1948:(
1939:.
1930:.
1868:(
1854:(
1840:(
1823:(
1808:(
1781:(
1745:(
1706:(
1665:(
1649:(
1604:(
1589:(
1575:(
1560:(
1545:(
1149:(
1059:(
1044:(
887:(
832:X
800:(
776:(
736:(
725:(
711:(
696:(
681:(
675:X
671:X
666:X
632:(
617:(
595:(
580:(
561:(
541:(
527:(
506:(
492:(
470:(
442:(
423:(
370:.
347:.
309:(
281:.
218:(
200:(
148:.
125:.
93:.
50:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
