928:
between closing per the majority and closing per the strongest argument. But when there is a real dispute on what argument is relevant, the closer is not to decide between them , but close according to what most people in the discussion say. If he has a strong view on the matter, he should join the argument instead of closing, and try to affect consensus that way. Both I and stifle have closed keep when we personally would have preferred delete, and vice-versa. The keep arguments were not absurd or irrelevant: there can be a genuine dispute over the strength of the sources, which is often a matter of judgment--and there's no way to settle that except to see what the community thinks. If I wanted a place where my view of proper content would prevail, I'd start a blog or become an editor of some conventional publication.
340:
1157:
and good faith of others. Outside of unverifiable articles, hoaxes, vandalism, attacks, and spam, anything of interest to more than a few people is rather sticky in the long run. But there are 3.2 million other articles to play with and waiting for improvement, and many more waiting to be written. And if you're like me, you enjoy wikidrama for entertainment purposes, and then, back to the
1377:
144:
475:
accusing people of deletionism, since many editors will just discount your arguments from start if you start accusing people of stuff, ok?). Other option is registering an account and creating in your userspace a version of that article that doesn't actually suck, trying to follow the style of the "Heavy Metal" episode article. Cheers. --
886:
Sure, those two unnamed people can change their minds. And sure, my friends on this side of the monitor think I'm doing a fine job on
Knowledge (XXG). That's not the point: find a serious reason to nominate this article for deletion, or find something else you can do that will improve the quality of
474:
If you want to argue that the episodes should stay at wikipedia, then I suggest that you go at the page I linked above and explain why they are good-quality articles and why they are not just plot summaries, using reasoned arguments and addressing the concerns raised by editors (and, if posible, not
92:
As a deletionist, I would like to see your opinion about that player. I know that may be you will not support delete, I just want to know why this article must be kept. He has never played in senior's national team and plays in a weak amature league. Just a note, if that player is kept (which seems
1156:
Thanks for your response. My own opinion is that wikipedia is no different than any other large organization. Idiocy, mediocrity, brilliance, and randomness abound. Rules are means to ends, and are rarely enforced uniformly anywhere; the only thing on which one can hope to rely is the good word
1007:
or any other unwritten law. The law is what judges say, or are likely to say, about an issue. I am an inclusionist - by that I mean I have no problem with marginally notable articles on
Knowledge (XXG). Daily runs the struggle between enlightenment and ignorance. Due to the inherent biases of
927:
and renominate in 3 or 4 months is not improved. I think insisting on an overturn instead is a little pointy. The assumption in closing is that after discarding non-arguments, the consensus view will be the correct one, and that any neutral admin would agree. Thus there is in theory no difference
579:
Regarding my talk page... I don't know.. it's been under siege, today. Someone blanked it, then that blanking was reverted, and my own User page has had the subst:afd1 tag added to it. I don't know where this is coming from. One of the edits said something about /b/. That's 4chan. Maybe I'm being
185:
and disruptive. There are a lot of decent articles nominated and a small number of reviewers; your placing a nomination such as this may mean that someone else's article doesn't get reviewed because the reviewer actually read your bad-faith nomination. I'm oing to delete the nomination, and I
1437:
experienced patrollers are being accorded the the new right without the need to apply, and if you have significant previous experience of patrolling new pages, we strongly encourage you to apply for the new right as soon as possible - we need all the help we can get, and we are now providing a
688:
to try to discount those who disagree with you. (this theory is supported by taking a look at your edit history with AFDs). That clearly does not apply to my input on the AFD, as I gave several reasons as to why I felt the article should be kept. But apparently you overlooked all that somehow.
1108:
for the record, no reason being given, and it being apparent to everyone who commented that the band was quite notable, it was closed as a speedy keep )not by me, buyt by another administrator) . We have enough problems here with getting rid of the many actually unnotable articles, without
523:? I can't find it, which is probably because I'm hopeless at visual grep. Incidentally, I was unaware of the trollish comments above - I'm mildly irritated that I'm effectively feeding them, but I still don't think merge-and-redirect is a useful outcome for that particular article.
1012:, they tend to be either inclusionists or "get along" type of people - or both. Deletionists want to get rid of things here - "fluff" or "cruft". Both inclusionists and deletionists have to pick their battles. That being said, an often-heard complaint is that
411:
238:. Then you turn around and nominate it for featured article, because it "establishes notability better than almost any I've ever seen." That is more than sufficient evidence to stop the assumption of good faith. AGF is not a blanket prescription for naiveté.
775:
It isn't just me. Looking through your edit history, you have a bad habit of trying to discredit and debase anyone who disagrees with you, never trying to work through conflicts in a way that would compromise anything of what you believe.
659:
Interesting topic that. Obviously I have not participated in many of these; I find it difficult to articulate my arguments as well as others, so that's a bit of a hindrance for me. I will probably stick to observing things in the future.
546:
on the merger (quite easy really, just check the history of the articles). I'm sorry that you see my comments as 'trollish', but I wouldn't be able to continue pointing these things out if I didn't have a bit of humor.
1038:
Just a reminder--when you nominate for deletion, whether CSD prod or afd, you must indicate this in the article summary, so that authors, and other people (including us overworked admins) can easily find the edit.
398:
Nominated for deletion, the consensus wound up being to keep it. Not to redirect it but to keep it. Then, the nominator, having failed in his attempt to delete it, merges it, despite consensus to the contrary, into
1343:
Well actually, I was attempting to respond to your original post when you changed your post which resulted in a edit conflict and considerable subsequent confusion. Our subsequent discussion strongly resembles
1063:
604:
Please keep things civil at AfD discussions. Because deleting articles is a contentious issue, it's important to hold ourselves to even higher standards than normal during discussions on the topic.
86:
452:
415:
868:
I'm having a hard time taking you seriously. First you nominate this article for deletion because "I don't like it". Then you claim you can nominate it because "Consensus can change". Do you have
1295:
1180:
1135:
223:
1245:
1387:. We're currently recruiting help to clear a massive backlog (30000+ articles), and we need your help! If you have a spare moment, please join and sort an article or tell your friends.
1255:
1222:
901:
It seems like you had a string of sensible nominations, but have lately taken to nominating things you just do not like. I'll gladly support nominations of vanity pages and spam.
460:
I also noticed that, picking one of the deleted episodes at random, they appear to have been articles of low quality, full of plot details and theorizing about in-universe stuff
721:
are actual policies. They're essays written by editors that reflect a way of doing things, and are neither enforced or necessarily shared by all or most editors. Please stop
961:
At this point, after 4 nominations have been closed successfully, I think it appears to be safely notable. In fact, 3 nominations in 6 months, all closing with
1084:
395:
287:
1329:
i will keep that in mind although at the time no one had responded so it is not as if my edit suddenly made replies (of which there were none) off topic
65:
414:
for deletion and fails in his attempt. This
Cyberman does not give up and changes his tactics yet again into merging the article, save that one.. Into
290:, the first thing listed under "What RfA contributors look for and hope to see" is a strong edit history. My advice there would be to withdraw that.
25:
to
Knowledge (XXG)! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
1090:
Hi. I notice that you nominated this article for deletion, but didn't explain why. Could you come over to the debate and leave a rationale? Thanks.
152:
1442:
1433:
Under the new rule, you may find that you are temporarily unable to mark new pages as reviewed. However, this is nothing to worry about - most
1134:
Howdy
Misterdiscreet, I don't think we've crossed paths before until a few recent AfDs. You've made some wacky noms, thinking particularly of
1426:
is being updated and improved. The documentation and tutorials have also been revised and given a facelift. Most importantly a new user group
1454:
1384:
1096:
493:
I was unable to find the commentary again :( It was the exact same text as the IP posted above. Maybe it was deleted by the poster. --
378:
sent from the future to delete our current knowledge. He is often seen nominating numerous articles for deletion for the sake of it.
283:
1404:
1206:
639:
individually - say your piece, move on and let others have their say. Again, just offering a suggestion - no criticism implied.
49:
1450:
286:, I will assume good faith and simply tell you that a user with under fifty edits will not be successfully promoted at RFA. At
34:
22:
752:. It's generally not a great way to work with other editors if you're constantly attacking, belittling and undermining them.
219:
68:
on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out
786:
762:
735:
699:
436:
1190:, as the discussion has closed. If you do not think this AfD has been handled appropriately, you can submit an appeal at
1191:
54:
1277:
going to ignore what i write then maybe i should do the exact opposite of what you suggest - maybe i should just say
1265:". and that is not something i added after your message to me - that was there in the beginning in all my afds. see
1423:
260:
is quite persuasive. He won the Afd and I lost, so obviously, I must be wrong and it would behoove me to repent
29:
1422:
In order to better control the quality of new pages, keep out the spam, and welcome the genuine newbies, the
1278:
61:
608:
is pushing the boundaries of that a bit. It also adds nothing to the discussion, being a weak restatement of
222:, you'd see that one only needs to assume good faith when there is not strong evidence to the contrary. You
850:
424:
1158:
718:
685:
69:
1056:
498:
480:
609:
44:
1400:
1393:
1202:
1195:
297:
245:
714:
1330:
1282:
581:
562:
261:
205:
982:
853:, & treated accordingly. Feel free to consider this a serious warning about your behavior. --
631:. Your comments are taken into consideration by the closing admin even if they're not prefaced by
548:
428:
379:
235:
1229:. I've spotted a few AfDs you've posted where the only rationale was an appeal to previous AfDs.
1166:
1143:
969:
is a notable product. Looking over the history of the article in the past two months, I can see
827:
191:
160:
126:
1013:
802:
749:
279:
182:
116:
108:
1353:
1320:
1303:
1234:
1091:
1074:
1021:
1003:
is notable according to the people who make
Knowledge (XXG). Consensus here works a bit like
990:
951:
906:
892:
877:
858:
835:
810:
783:
759:
732:
696:
670:
644:
617:
570:
552:
542:, I myself cannot find it. What I can find is evidence on the mergers themselves and previous
528:
432:
421:
With these methods the
Cyberman is able to initiate backroom methods achieve total deletion.
383:
148:
1000:
966:
494:
476:
178:
171:
1261:
1250:
1226:
1066:
1009:
978:
970:
943:
939:
628:
412:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles_for_deletion/Heavy_Metal_(Terminator:_The_Sarah_Connor_Chronicles)
231:
227:
202:
830:- we might agree on an AfD for once! Looks like it's been long enough since the last one.
292:
240:
539:
520:
464:
805:
helpful to read. Remember - what we do here is all about making a better encyclopedia.
543:
400:
405:
http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=App_Store&diff=238484696&oldid=237711348
1162:
1139:
1116:
1046:
187:
156:
122:
77:
39:
447:
I saw a comment on
Slashdot about this matter, and I came here to check and, eh, to
226:, primarily for a lack of notability, and also claiming poor sources, violations of
111:
has at least 2 references and these are actually the report of 2 important media in
1349:
1316:
1299:
1230:
1070:
1017:
986:
947:
902:
888:
873:
854:
831:
806:
777:
753:
726:
690:
661:
640:
613:
566:
524:
339:
1062:
I removed your speedy, because there are lots of Ghits, including news hits. See
1376:
403:. Later, another user comes along and deletes it, saying it's "not important" =
257:
1315:
is inappropriate - you should strike through if you wish to retract a comment.
1458:
1409:
1357:
1345:
1338:
1324:
1307:
1290:
1238:
1211:
1170:
1147:
1120:
1100:
1078:
1050:
1025:
1004:
994:
955:
910:
896:
881:
862:
839:
814:
794:
770:
743:
707:
674:
648:
621:
589:
574:
556:
532:
502:
484:
453:
Talk:List_of_Terminator:_The_Sarah_Connor_Chronicles_episodes#Episode_articles
440:
387:
329:
303:
269:
251:
213:
195:
164:
132:
97:
80:
872:
serious complaint about this article, or are you just trying to annoy me? --
516:
94:
565:, actually, but we cleared it up on the article talk page in the meantime.
920:
Hello again. I think a fellow admin said it best at the deletion review:
463:, and that they were still low quality after some editors removed all the
1111:
1041:
375:
635:. This, by the way, is also why it's not really polite to reply to each
143:
849:
Then find a serious reason to nominate it for deletion, or you will be
455:, so it seems that Misterdiscreet's deletions were actually warranted.
93:
so) all the players in the world will be accepted in this wikipedia.--
107:
973:, especially with additional citations, and therefore it is likely
112:
76:
on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome! --
282:
as well. You'd do well to forget this and move on. And regarding
87:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Steven
Douglas (footballer)
1281:
since it is not as if anyone will ever read what i write anyway
392:
Samples of his deletions can be fond through out the wikiverse:
119:. Can this be the reason for keeping this article? Thanks a lot
1296:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles_for_deletion/Isotopically_pure_diamond
942:, then please wait another month or two and re-nominate it for
451:
if necessary. However, I see that the deletion was deciced at
1181:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Habari (3rd nomination)
1136:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Habari (3rd nomination)
416:
Talk:List_of_Terminator:_The_Sarah_Connor_Chronicles_episodes
1375:
1246:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/2002 Tampa plane crash
1256:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/2009 Orlando shooting
1223:
Knowledge (XXG):Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions
538:
I am unable to reference the location that information on
1441:
Find out more about this exiting new user right now at
1312:
1271:
1268:
1266:
1187:
965:
seems to indicate a very clear, ongoing consensus that
605:
467:
461:
404:
275:
1449:
and be sure to read the new tutorial before applying.
186:
strongly warn you against further acts of disruption.
274:
AFD is not a "win-or-lose" process. Frankly, I find
1370:
We could use your help dealing with these articles!
362:
354:
349:
322:
151:, which wasn't included with your recent edit to
1438:dynamic, supportive environment for your work.
1085:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Mini Viva
977:to be deleted anytime soon. There are lots of
922:
288:Knowledge (XXG):Guide to requests for adminship
1248:? maybe you missed the part where i said "per
1016:, but I have not seen that in the years here.
612:. Take this as a helpful hint, not criticism.
1383:Hi there! Thought you might be interested in
8:
1258:"? let me quote the first two words again. "
1065:. If you still want it deleted, take it to
713:Another thing that you should know: Neither
60:I hope you enjoy editing here and being a
1138:. What's your AfD philosophy? Cheers.--
147:Hello. Please don't forget to provide an
374:It is my opinion that Misterdirect is a
153:Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles
319:
7:
1424:current system we introduced in 2011
971:significant improvements and updates
684:I think that you rely to heavily on
177:Misterdirect, your FA nomination of
115:, this has proved the importance of
944:the discussion and deletion process
801:Speaking of essays, you might find
515:Can you point out where you listed
72:, ask me on my talk page, or place
30:The five pillars of Knowledge (XXG)
748:And I would suggest that YOU read
344:The 2006 redesign of the Cybermen.
14:
1010:the way administrators are picked
410:The same Cybermen then nominates
224:nominated an article for deletion
220:Knowledge (XXG):Assume good faith
218:If you actually bothered to read
338:
142:
1192:Knowledge (XXG):Deletion review
887:Knowledge (XXG)'s content. --
590:01:21, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
575:18:05, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
557:17:11, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
533:16:43, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
503:19:02, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
485:14:51, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
441:13:35, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
388:13:39, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
368:Cybus Industries (2006 series)
366:Cyber Empire (original series)
304:05:05, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
1:
1459:04:29, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
1254:this is no more notable than
1109:indiscriminate nominations.
649:06:42, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
622:17:01, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
270:20:37, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
252:20:22, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
214:19:28, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
196:19:15, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
1415:New deal for page patrollers
999:After all is said and done,
120:
81:06:18, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
50:How to write a great article
561:My request was directed at
21:Hello, Misterdiscreet, and
1474:
1451:MediaWiki message delivery
1410:20:03, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
1358:21:11, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
1339:16:55, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
1325:13:49, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
1308:18:36, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
1291:15:57, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
1244:really? which ones? maybe
1239:15:04, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
995:00:06, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
956:23:48, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
911:00:55, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
897:23:11, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
882:22:57, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
863:22:48, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
840:09:43, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
815:04:13, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
795:21:52, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
771:21:26, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
744:03:54, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
708:03:46, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
675:19:25, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
1398:
1273:. and if people like you
1225:recently? In particular,
1212:15:26, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
1200:
1171:03:05, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
1148:00:09, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
1121:08:29, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
1101:14:38, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
1079:04:34, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
1051:19:52, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
627:Don't forget that AfD is
337:
327:
165:15:09, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
133:03:34, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
70:Knowledge (XXG):Questions
1334:
1286:
585:
265:
209:
98:10:52, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
1221:Have you had a look at
1026:20:12, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
350:In-universe information
1385:WikiProject Notability
1380:
936:
1379:
1057:Gordon Brothers Group
985:on Knowledge (XXG).
725:them like policies.
1419:Hi Misterdiscreet,
563:User:Misterdiscreet
1445:New Page Reviewers
1430:has been created.
1412:
1391:
1381:
1217:Arguments to avoid
828:Alodia Gosiengfiao
580:targeted by them?
35:How to edit a page
1428:New Page Reviewer
1392:
1373:
1313:Changing comments
1099:
427:comment added by
372:
371:
170:FA nomination of
1465:
1408:
1396:
1388:
1210:
1198:
1095:
940:change consensus
934:
780:
756:
729:
693:
667:
664:
443:
342:
320:
300:
295:
256:What can I say?
248:
243:
155:. Thank you. --
146:
131:
75:
1473:
1472:
1468:
1467:
1466:
1464:
1463:
1462:
1417:
1394:
1390:
1382:
1372:
1298:, for example.
1279:I don't like it
1219:
1196:
1184:
1179:Latest edit to
1131:
1088:
1060:
1036:
1014:this is a cabal
983:fringe theories
938:If you want to
935:
932:
847:
825:
791:
778:
767:
754:
740:
727:
704:
691:
682:
665:
662:
657:
602:
600:AfD discussions
513:
449:deliver justice
422:
345:
318:
298:
293:
246:
241:
175:
140:
105:
90:
73:
55:Manual of Style
12:
11:
5:
1471:
1469:
1416:
1413:
1389:
1374:
1371:
1368:
1367:
1366:
1365:
1364:
1363:
1362:
1361:
1360:
1331:Misterdiscreet
1310:
1283:Misterdiscreet
1218:
1215:
1188:your last edit
1186:I've reverted
1183:
1177:
1176:
1175:
1174:
1173:
1151:
1150:
1130:
1127:
1126:
1125:
1124:
1123:
1087:
1082:
1059:
1054:
1035:
1032:
1031:
1030:
1029:
1028:
930:
918:
917:
916:
915:
914:
913:
846:
843:
824:
821:
820:
819:
818:
817:
799:
798:
797:
787:
763:
736:
700:
681:
678:
656:
653:
652:
651:
601:
598:
597:
596:
595:
594:
593:
592:
582:Misterdiscreet
512:
509:
508:
507:
506:
505:
488:
487:
471:
470:
457:
456:
370:
369:
367:
364:
360:
359:
356:
352:
351:
347:
346:
343:
335:
334:
325:
324:
317:
314:
313:
312:
311:
310:
309:
308:
307:
306:
262:Misterdiscreet
206:Misterdiscreet
174:
168:
139:
136:
104:
101:
89:
84:
66:sign your name
58:
57:
52:
47:
42:
37:
32:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1470:
1461:
1460:
1456:
1452:
1448:
1447:
1446:
1439:
1436:
1431:
1429:
1425:
1420:
1414:
1411:
1406:
1402:
1397:
1386:
1378:
1369:
1359:
1355:
1351:
1347:
1342:
1341:
1340:
1336:
1332:
1328:
1327:
1326:
1322:
1318:
1314:
1311:
1309:
1305:
1301:
1297:
1294:
1293:
1292:
1288:
1284:
1280:
1276:
1272:
1269:
1267:
1264:
1263:
1257:
1253:
1252:
1247:
1243:
1242:
1241:
1240:
1236:
1232:
1228:
1224:
1216:
1214:
1213:
1208:
1204:
1199:
1193:
1189:
1182:
1178:
1172:
1168:
1164:
1160:
1155:
1154:
1153:
1152:
1149:
1145:
1141:
1137:
1133:
1132:
1128:
1122:
1118:
1114:
1113:
1107:
1106:
1105:
1104:
1103:
1102:
1098:
1093:
1086:
1083:
1081:
1080:
1076:
1072:
1068:
1064:
1058:
1055:
1053:
1052:
1048:
1044:
1043:
1034:about tagging
1033:
1027:
1023:
1019:
1015:
1011:
1006:
1002:
998:
997:
996:
992:
988:
984:
980:
976:
972:
968:
964:
960:
959:
958:
957:
953:
949:
945:
941:
929:
926:
921:
912:
908:
904:
900:
899:
898:
894:
890:
885:
884:
883:
879:
875:
871:
867:
866:
865:
864:
860:
856:
852:
844:
842:
841:
837:
833:
829:
822:
816:
812:
808:
804:
800:
796:
792:
790:
784:
781:
774:
773:
772:
768:
766:
760:
757:
751:
747:
746:
745:
741:
739:
733:
730:
724:
720:
716:
712:
711:
710:
709:
705:
703:
697:
694:
687:
679:
677:
676:
672:
668:
654:
650:
646:
642:
638:
634:
630:
626:
625:
624:
623:
619:
615:
611:
607:
599:
591:
587:
583:
578:
577:
576:
572:
568:
564:
560:
559:
558:
554:
550:
545:
541:
537:
536:
535:
534:
530:
526:
522:
518:
511:Article merge
510:
504:
500:
496:
492:
491:
490:
489:
486:
482:
478:
473:
472:
468:
466:
462:
459:
458:
454:
450:
446:
445:
444:
442:
438:
434:
430:
426:
419:
417:
413:
408:
406:
402:
397:
393:
390:
389:
385:
381:
377:
365:
361:
357:
353:
348:
341:
336:
332:
331:
326:
321:
315:
305:
302:
301:
296:
289:
285:
281:
277:
273:
272:
271:
267:
263:
259:
255:
254:
253:
250:
249:
244:
237:
233:
229:
225:
221:
217:
216:
215:
211:
207:
204:
200:
199:
198:
197:
193:
189:
184:
180:
173:
169:
167:
166:
162:
158:
154:
150:
145:
137:
135:
134:
130:
128:
124:
118:
114:
110:
102:
100:
99:
96:
88:
85:
83:
82:
79:
71:
67:
63:
56:
53:
51:
48:
46:
43:
41:
38:
36:
33:
31:
28:
27:
26:
24:
19:
18:
1444:
1443:
1440:
1434:
1432:
1427:
1421:
1418:
1348:discussion.
1274:
1259:
1249:
1220:
1185:
1110:
1092:UltraExactZZ
1089:
1061:
1040:
1037:
974:
962:
937:
924:
923:
919:
869:
848:
826:
788:
764:
737:
722:
719:WP:JUSTAVOTE
701:
686:WP:JUSTAVOTE
683:
680:WP:JUSTAVotE
658:
636:
632:
606:This comment
603:
514:
448:
420:
409:
394:
391:
373:
328:
291:
239:
201:So much for
176:
149:edit summary
141:
121:
106:
103:Re:Macauplus
91:
59:
20:
16:
15:
1262:WP:NOT#NEWS
1251:WP:NOT#NEWS
610:WP:NOEFFORT
544:discussions
495:Enric Naval
477:Enric Naval
423:—Preceding
363:Affiliation
258:User:Morydd
1395:Explodicle
1197:Explodicle
1005:common law
851:disruptive
845:Re: Habari
823:Suggestion
715:WP:POKEMON
629:not a vote
330:Doctor Who
138:June 20008
74:{{helpme}}
62:Wikipedian
40:Help pages
979:odd stuff
517:I Am Rich
401:App Store
396:I am Rich
236:WP:TRIVIA
117:Macauplus
109:Macauplus
64:! Please
1163:Milowent
1140:Milowent
803:WP:TRUTH
750:WP:CIVIL
723:treating
437:contribs
425:unsigned
376:Cyberman
323:Cybermen
316:Cyberman
188:Karanacs
157:TreyGeek
78:Ghewgill
45:Tutorial
17:Welcome!
1435:current
1317:Orpheus
1300:Orpheus
1231:Orpheus
1159:project
1129:Inquiry
1071:Bearian
1018:Bearian
987:Bearian
948:Bearian
925:sustain
903:Bearian
889:llywrch
874:llywrch
855:llywrch
832:Orpheus
807:Orpheus
789:Contrib
779:Rwiggum
765:Contrib
755:Rwiggum
738:Contrib
728:Rwiggum
702:Contrib
692:Rwiggum
641:Orpheus
614:Orpheus
567:Orpheus
549:Ash-Fox
525:Orpheus
429:Ash-Fox
380:Ash-Fox
358:Cyborgs
278:rather
23:welcome
1350:Boghog
1227:WP:WAX
1067:WP:AfD
1001:Habari
967:Habari
633:delete
280:pointy
234:, and
232:WP:COI
228:WP:NOR
203:WP:AGF
183:pointy
179:Habari
172:Habari
1117:talk
1047:talk
666:76764
655:Reply
540:WP:PM
521:WP:PM
465:WP:OR
299:shtak
294:Pagra
247:shtak
242:Pagra
113:Macau
1455:talk
1354:talk
1346:this
1335:talk
1321:talk
1304:talk
1287:talk
1270:and
1260:per
1235:talk
1194:. --
1167:talk
1144:talk
1075:talk
1022:talk
991:talk
981:and
963:keep
952:talk
907:talk
893:talk
878:talk
859:talk
836:talk
811:talk
671:Talk
645:talk
637:keep
618:talk
586:talk
571:talk
553:talk
529:talk
499:talk
481:talk
433:talk
384:talk
355:Type
333:race
284:this
276:this
266:talk
210:talk
192:talk
181:was
161:talk
127:talk
123:b.cx
95:KRBN
1275:are
1161:!--
1112:DGG
1097:Did
1042:DGG
975:not
933:DGG
870:any
717:or
519:on
1457:)
1356:)
1337:)
1323:)
1306:)
1289:)
1237:)
1169:)
1146:)
1119:)
1077:)
1069:.
1049:)
1024:)
993:)
954:)
946:.
931:—
909:)
895:)
880:)
861:)
838:)
813:)
793:)
769:)
742:)
706:)
673:)
663:DP
647:)
620:)
588:)
573:)
555:)
531:)
501:)
483:)
439:)
435:•
418:.
407:.
386:)
268:)
230:,
212:)
194:)
163:)
1453:(
1407:)
1405:C
1403:/
1401:T
1399:(
1352:(
1333:(
1319:(
1302:(
1285:(
1233:(
1209:)
1207:C
1205:/
1203:T
1201:(
1165:(
1142:(
1115:(
1094:~
1073:(
1045:(
1020:(
989:(
950:(
905:(
891:(
876:(
857:(
834:(
809:(
785:/
782:(
761:/
758:(
734:/
731:(
698:/
695:(
669:(
643:(
616:(
584:(
569:(
551:(
527:(
497:(
479:(
469:.
431:(
382:(
264:(
208:(
190:(
159:(
129:)
125:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
