User talk:Nat/Archives 5

327:

reviewing it I'm sorry to say your block appears to me misguided and heavy handed to me. You treated in exactly the same way someone who reverted 4 times removing sourced material from an article as the person who did so only 3. While I agree that 3RR is not a license to revert three times, blocks of people who have not broken the rule should be exercised carefully, especially when dealing with a long term contributor. At the very least I would have expected you to leave a message explaining politely why you felt a block was in order when he had not broken the 3RR rule rather than leaving him only an automated Twinkle message. I think you could resolved this matter much better and created a lot less ill feeling had you talked to Jeffpw and reminded him that edit warring (even that short of 3RR) should be avoided rather than hitting him with a block, which is an indelible mark on a contributor's record here. There is an element of diplomacy to being a good administrator - those who feel they have been treated unfairly by those with power over them will understanbly feel resentful.

65:

debate was fragmented, with different polls taking place on different pages, with different formats, etc, so it was hard to tell what exactly people were pronouncing themselves in favor of. However, this in itself I think is a problem. I think there should be a discussion on the talk page of the specific article to see how its active users feel specifically about this move. In that case, if the majority favors the move and only one obstinate user refuses to budge, the move can be made, as indeed consensus does not require unanimity. However, looking at past discussions, multiple users expressed an opposition to moving the

660:"China is called Zhongguo (中國 or 中国) in Mandarin Chinese. The first character zhōng (中) means "middle" or "central," while guó (国 or 國) means "state". The term is commonly literally translated into English as "Middle Kingdom", but is also sometimes translated as "Central Kingdom". In ancient times the name referred to the "Central States" along the Yellow River valley and was not associated with any single political entity. The nomenclature gradually evolved to mean the lands under direct imperial rule. 2360:...My guinea pigs and the "A"s through "K"s having felt this message was OK to go forward with (or at least not complained bitterly to me about it :) ), today it's the turn of the "L"s through "O"s! I'm hoping that more of you chaps/chapettes will point to their own criteria instead of mine :)... it's flattering but a bit scary! :) Also, you may want to check back to the table periodically, someone later than you in the alphabet may have come up with a nifty new idea. ++ 2319:

themselves subject to recall went to similar detail. It is not necessary to adopt the exact same conditions, steps, criteria, etc. It's just helpful to have SOME. Those are mine, fashion yours as you see fit, I would not be so presumptuous as to say mine are right for you. In fact I urge you not to just adopt mine, as I do change them from time to time without notice, but instead develop your own. You are very welcome to start with mine if you so wish, though.

873: 31: 1397:) to explain the specific problems they have with the almost 4,000 bytes of sourced material they keep deleting. As you can see at the talk there, there has been little in the way of substantive response. Anyway, I'm sure that this would be clear to you in your review of the matter, but I thought would be explicit anyway. Thanks for hearing me out and have a great day! 431: 809: 818: 652:"The stalemate of the last Chinese Civil War has resulted in two political states using the name China: the People's Republic of China (PRC), commonly known as China, which controls mainland China, Hong Kong, and Macau; and the Republic of China (ROC), commonly known as Taiwan, which controls the island of Taiwan and its surrounding islands." 402:

good has come out of it. I see you've just recently become an admin. Your communication with me on my page shows me you have the necessary qualities to do a good job of it. It is certainly something I would never attempt. I am a good contributer, but don't think I would have the patience to do your job well. So, hats off to you.

2218:

I made some changes to the article called "The Republic of China" to make it more politically neutral. I understand that trying to call Taiwan a country is your poilitical position, but according to the rules of The Knowledge, the articles here should be neutral and impersonal. Most of the countries

1454:

which as you can see he reverted as "trolling", something he has done with such messages from me, and others before. I don't think it's fair to characterize my editing as edit-warring when we are in fact talking about the deletion of sourced material without any real explanation or any willingness to

1332:

I must say I’d find it distressing to see an editor blocked without warning who was staying within the rules and not attempting to game the system, while one who was went off scot free. I really think it sends the wrong message, and encourages folks to use the 3rr board as weapon, as has been done in

89:

report and an ongoing edit war. If you believe that there is sufficient consensus for a move, then an administrator should probably make the move and make an announcement on the talk page that this is the the decision that closest represents consensus and to urge users not to try to revert the change

2310:

But recent events have suggested that this low structure approach may not be entirely effective. More than one of the recent recalls we have seen have been marred by controversy around what was going to happen, and when. Worse, they were marred by some folk having the perception, rightly or wrongly,

2255:

had used “a punitive measure rather than a preventive measure”. I’ve looked at it, and I can’t see how you’ve come to that conclusion, or why it is that you unblocked Pedro (and please note, I am not asking for you to overturn your unblock). Pedro has been here over a year, and just recently filed a

1990:

had recently added some OR material which, while being a valid assessment, is sourced only to scripture (and therefore can be considered to be unsourced in the manner presented). This isn't pressing, but Juanholanda is endorsing only one viewpoint (as you could probably see, he continues to deny the

1498:

R. friend was in conflict with Domer48 and then R. friend revert to "his version" and blocks Domer48 without warning or an official report or without anything said to any of the editors on "his side". Surely this is not the correct procedure that an admin in conflict with another editor should take.

405:

When my partner in this incident returns, I will definitely discuss the changes on the talk page further and not engage in any sort of edit warring--not out of fear for blocking, but because these sorts of incidents just lead to stress for everyone, and Knowledge is supposed to be a joy. I will also

64:

Hi Nat. The problem though is that I don't think it's just a matter of one user against the community. I admit that I am not very familiar with this debate, however I tried to look at various places where this issue was discussed, and I got the impression that no consensus existed. First of all, the

2318:

page, I have given pretty concrete definitions of the criteria for recall, and of the choices I can make, and of the process for the petition, and of the process for other choices I might make (the modified RfC or the RfAr). I think it would be very helpful if other admins who have voluntarily made

2262:

Sometimes I’ve seen people unblocked from a 3rr block with a summary along the lines of “User promised to be good”, but I don’t see him doing that here at all. Oh, in fact, as I’m in the middle of composing this note, I see that Pedro has gone right back to edit-warring on the page, making the same

2153:

The user appear to have comply changed. He has been spending quite a bit of time expanding the article as requested by yourself. He is very civil and thrives on the advise I have given him for improvement for the article. He has placed another unblock request on his talk page. Please could you look

665:

English and many other languages use various forms of the name "China" and the prefix "Sino-" or "Sin-". These forms are thought to derive from the name of the Qin Dynasty that first unified the country (221–206 BCE). The pronunciation of "Qin" is similar to "Chin", which is considered the possible

401:

Thank you for the kind message on my talk page. It was unexpected, and certainly welcomed. For my part, this incident is over. Please believe me, though, that I truly thought I had followed policy and had not violated the rules. This was a learning experience for both of us, it seems, so maybe some

647:

article already, but I think there is some editing that needs to be fixed. First, there is a user that changed "mainland China" to China proper, which as you know, it is a historic term used by western historians, not a substitute for the original term. I think it is best to revert the sentence

1449:

Well IronDuke, you are of course entitled to your opinion, but I respectfully disagree, quite deeply actually. You will notice that the five edits you point to, make modifications in response to the concerns of other editors (as raised in edit summaries, since they never bothered to use the talk

1429:

Actually, Tiamut, I'm not trying to get you blocked, simply pointing out that what you did on the article is clearly, demonstrably more like edit-warring than what Armon was doing. I think the best thing to do would be to unblock Armon, as he violated no rule, and was not warned. If none of that

1233:

Did you read what I wrote? Armon was warned about 3RR a few weeks ago, and self-reverted. So he knows about 3RR. Further warnings about 3RR are a courtesy, not a requirement. Also, Armon has been editing Knowledge since February 2006 and well knows about 3RR since he has been editing contentious

751:

Hey Nat, just checking to make sure you're not stressed out. It seems like someone was being very impolite to you and your mom. I think you should semi-protect your talk page and perhaps file a checkuser request because I feel that a few editors are behind this from how they word their comments.

352:

In future I would strongly advise you to make more conservative use of blocks and to consider the feelings of those you choose to block. Again, I think any block of this sort would warrant a person message not a Twinkle notification. I'm going to assume that this incident is an isolated one, and

2337:

I apologise if this message seems impersonal, but with over 130 members in the category, leaving a personal message for each of you might not have been feasible, and I feel this is important enough to violate social norms a bit. I hope that's OK. Thanks for your time and consideration, and best

2306:

and I, and others, first developed this category well over a year ago, we visualized it as a simple idea. A low hassle, low bureaucracy process. We also visualized it as a process that people would come to trust, in fact as a way of increasing trust in those admins who chose to subscribe to the

303:

Hey, did you lock the Michael Redd page before over an edit war? It is unlocked now, but I ask that you please lock it again. The people are at it again. The one makes the changes that I think are correct, which would be to not have the citations, and he has left his reasoning on the discussion

344:

My apologies for the mistake with the pronoun. I think your block was a bad call in this case. You would have achieved exactly the same in this case by leaving Jeffpw a talkpage message reminding him of the need to avoid edit warring in general. I do not like receiving correspondence from good

326:

I would like to know on what basis you blocked this editor? Edit warring is bad but blocks should be used as a last resort. Editors subject to them (especially in cases such as these where no warning was given first) are usually offended and it can result in us losing valuable contributors. On

1455:

engage in discussion to come to some sort of consensus (i.e. vandalism and disruptive editing). So please don't make equivalencies between my behaviour and that of Timeshifter's (who made no reverts and used the talkpage extensively) vs that of Tewfik and Armon. There really is no comparison.

2322:

But do something. If you have not already, I urge you to make your process more concrete, now, while there is no pressure and you can think clearly about what you want. Do it now rather than later, during a recall when folk may not react well to perceived changes in process or commitment.

2333:

Do you have to do these things? Not at all. These are suggestions from me, and me alone, and are entirely up to you to embrace or ignore. I just think that doing this now, thinking now, documenting now, will save you trouble later, if you should for whatever reason happen to be recalled.

1502:

Domer48 should be unblocked, R. friend should have a sever wrap across the knuckles and then if needed an official report should be filed to determine if any blocks are warranted. I hope you have time to look at this situation with a fresh pair of eyes as it seems pretty unjust to me.

189:

and try to build a consensus for the position that Canada should be somehow exempted from using the same templates as other countries even though there's nothing about the Canadian electoral context that would actually require an entirely different infobox format. But you don't have a

1130:. I am not involved in any dispute, so I feel quite weird getting a message. But anyway, I looked at the page and it seems like editors are edit warring. Since you are an admin, can you look into the dispute and do something about it (protection may be needed, in my opinion)? Thanks. 1275:

Nat, I’m a bit confused. You seem to have blocked Armon for only three reverts, without warning him to lay of the article first, which I think would be only fair. On top of this, even if Armon were edit-warring, surely there was someone helping him out by reverting/edit warring-with

1369:, and without having filed a 3RR report to boot. To be clear, the edits in question are not simple reverts and are genuine good faith edits designed to improve the article. I have also used the talk there throughout this process, with both Timeshifter and myself pratically begging 1583:

Thanks. I assume anything we find on Wiki is ok to use on Wiki given the licensing. I thought you had something pretty cool, especially the links to the statistics. I'm still not sure how it all works. The bottom three icons are a mystery to me. Thanks again for fixing it.

2069:

Hi. You offered him a conditional unblock. Since then I have been in discussion with this user, mainly on his talk page. I wondered if you could come and leave a message clarifying some things. The user appears to think that as he has moved house, he is allowed to create a

281:

Then the appropriate response is to raise your concerns on the talk page of the standard infobox and see if they can be integrated into a design improvement of some sort, because the issues you raised are in no way unique to Canadian elections and hence don't justify any

90:

and if they wish to bring up later if they want to try to reach consensus for an alternative. Leaving the article in limbo, when one side thinks consensus exists and the other does not is probably the worst alternative as it is a sure recipe for an edit war.

1055:. I'm trying to make an FA push - it's not been nominated yet, but it's listed for peer review. One editor insists on inflating the article with criticism of the book when plenty of criticism was already offered and the article was in a balanced state. 622:. The constant blanking, adding "xxx eats poop" randomly and so forth were symptoms of this. I've unblocked since it wasn't vandalism in the main namespace, but to be honest if he had vandalised anywhere else he would've received an immediate block. 1827:

I got it to load. We have conflicting reports. One link says "university status" another says "university college status." I suggest we take this discussion to the List of Uni in Canada talk page so we can invite others to talk about it with us.

353:

doesn't reflect your general approach to making blocks, as such I consider this matter closed. Though I think it would be a good idea for you to apologise to Jeffpw for not seeking a more diplomatic route to making your point about edit warring.

2311:

that the admin being recalled was trying to change the rules, avoid the process, or in other ways somehow go back on their word. This is bad. It's bad for you the admin, bad for the trust in the process, and bad for the community as a whole.

998:, the guy is obsessed with changing numbers about Romanian economy and this account is new and didn't edit anything else. Do you have any suggestion, is there a quick edit template for checkuser/sockpuppets? Sorry for bothering you. -- 252:

meet, not any random time that an individual editor dislikes the standard appearance for aesthetic reasons. (And no, the number of small parties contesting Canadian elections is not a unique need — UK elections make us look like

516:(which I G11'd again). I'm not really sure how to proceed since you were the unblocking admin and I've never handled an unblock request before. I would really appreciate it if you could let me know what to do. Thanks! 233:— it's not like they magically look any different on a US or UK or Mexican or New Zealand election than they do on ours. Oh, and that special hardcoded "major parties contesting this election and their leaders" box on 2269:

I wouldn’t even bother you with this, but I’m concerned that in the area of Israel/Palestine edits, both sides need to be treated equally, otherwise it just ratchets up the tension. Thanks for your attention.

345:

contributors stressed and upset by heavy handed admin action. I also think you were disproportionate in your sanctions of the two editors concerned. Your assumption of "baiting" is in my opinion a failure to

1239: 1090:

I beg you, please tag the socks when you indef block them! I spent 30 minutes of my life I'll never get back checking all the socks found by Checkuser, to see whether or not they were already blocked ;) --

447: 69:

page, and although Thor was the most vocal, among those in favor of the move, also only two users actively pushed for the move. But as I've said, I only looked at this debate today, and I might be wrong.

376:

is not the way to deal with an editor upset about the fact you have blocked him. The idea that you are unconcerned with editors leaving the project as a result your decision to block them is astounding.

1603:

Noting that you had blocked him for civility issues arising out of edit-warring, I thought maybe you might want to take a gander at some rather uncivil statements made in both article edit summaries (

1635:) . I think maybe he's just having a 'wrong side of the bed week', but the comments seem to have moved beyond simple dissent and straight on the uncivil and personal attack side. Your thoughts? - 1154:

Thank you for your questions in my currently on-going RfA. I would like to inform you that I have indeed answered your questions and would be happy to see what you think to my responses. Thanks,

349:

of a committed editor. I cannot see how you thought this block would in anyway make Knowledge a better place, unless you think Jeffpw wanting to cease contributing to this project would do so.

1536:. By all means, if I make the same revert again anytime soon, block me. But don't punish those other editors because of an edit war between me and Saintjust, let them improve the article. 1450:

page). You will also note that I twice invited both Armon and Tewfik to discuss what their specific concerns with the material was, and that they failed to respond substantively. I even left

1874:

Could you please change the main article's featured article image to Image:Tikse monastery.jpg since this image is clearer, less blurry, more appealing and shows the same subject. Thanks.

656:

Second, the "etymology" section has too many unreferenced and newly added materials added by user Aranherunar, I think it would be best to revert to the original version as well (below).

441: 2330:

as a resource for the benefit of all. If you use someone else's by reference rather than copy, I suggest you might want to do as Cacharoth did, and give a link to a specific version.

1430:

matters, my question is why is the person edit-warring with him, (who herself has a history of blocks for 3rr violations and edit-warring) not blocked? I think it's a fair question.

509:

The user that you unblocked for a username change did not follow the instructions on changing their username properly. Instead, they created a new user account for themselves, (see

2350: 2327: 905:" link (it is located at the very top of any Knowledge page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any 1662:

I reverted your edits in regards to this organization. It's not a full University, and thus doesn't qualify for inclusion where you've tried to place it. That's why places likes

901:

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "

2326:

Further, I suggest that after you document your process, that you give a reference to it for the benefit of other admins who may want to see what others have done. List it in

2219:(at least 170 out of 190) recognize Taiwan as a part of PRC and the Republic of China as history. So please, respect the opinion of International community and my time also. 682:. It really needs a lot of copyedits and references. Thanks! I know that you are busy, but a response would be great, I was hoping that you could help with the edits.-- 2346: 2293: 2074:, I have explained that this is block evasion, but the user disagrees. I am not sure what course of action should be taken on the new account, or existing. Thank you. 1027:

Well, I have to eat my words this form seemed pretty easy to fill in, now I only hope there's enough evidence, not sure that using a proxy is enough proof... --

2307:

notion of recall. The very informal approach to who is qualified to recall, what happens during it, and the process in general were all part of that approach.

894:

if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Knowledge (see

890:, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Knowledge. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. 1771:

I can't access that article. You should know that a site that requires registration isn't acceptable as a source. You're an admin. You should know better.

618:

To be honest I did have doubts after making the block. We do allow editors to do whatever they like in the sandbox, but it seems to me that the editor was

373:

I'm becoming increasingly concerned about the way you are handling this - "If you feel the need to review your participation on Knowledge, so be it."

1656: 826:

Wishing you and yours the very best of the holiday season. May the coming year bring you peace, joy, health and happiness. God bless us, every one!

1663: 229:

cover properly, like Australia with its 2PP issues. We can't refuse to use them just because three or four Canadian editors dislike the way they

118:

Actually I'll take that back, you might have been too involved to make the move. I made it myself and will explain my decision on the talk page.

732:

how did you do that thing to the pics on the land camera article? I added two pre-uploaded SX-70 photos and want them in those little frames...

2041: 1324:

I note also that Tiamut has been blocked three times on related topics for violating 3rr, and once for edit warring, as recently as September,

910: 1136: 800: 2349:. This is a voluntary category, and you should not be in it if you do not want to be. If you did not list yourself, you may want to review 2314:

I think a way to address this issue is to increase the predictability of the process in advance. I have tried to do that for myself. In my

2023: 902: 974:. We already know who he is and he's banned, just revert him, block him, and ignore him. Why nobody has blocked him yet, I do not know. 878: 146:

page being lumped with the other 'Commonwealth realm' pages; as though he felt it was a sneaky way of making the 16 monarchies appear as

781: 494: 1178:

has left me a message saying "User:Nat is just a piece of shit, ignore him." I thought you might like to know, as I consider this a

1013:

OK, thanks, I guess I will familiarize myself with that checkuser form... man... why all Knowledge forms are a pain in the butt? --

718: 304:

board. The other one keeps reverting edits without reading the rationale in the discussions. I was hoping you could look into this.

1564:

why'd you delete A City Warning? They meet WP:BAND. They have a RECORDING CONTRACT therefore they are notable. Afd if you must.

1495:

I have just had a look at this situation and I have to say that I am amazed at the stance to you have taken with regards to this.

1211:

The individual was warned after the fact, as this is the case, I am assuming that he/she did not know about 3RR before. Therefore

150:(which legally, they are). Most regrettable, that he couldn't resolve his 'ownership issues' concerning British related articles. 1546: 1068: 437: 85:

Ok, as I said, this is not an issue I am very interested in or am very familiar with. I only intervened while responding to a

234: 177:

election articles, and "this information is already present in the article" is not a valid reason to remove it as the whole

409:

Once again, thank you, and I look forward to interacting with you--in a more positive way--in the future. Yours sincerely,

488: 484: 1380: 1284:

has reverted, by my count, five times in 29 hours. This falls under the category of both edit-warring and system-gaming.

1235: 1991:

ambiguity of the word commonly translated as "brother"- a word which, even in English, has several possible meanings.--

1394: 543:

I temp full protected your page due to the mass amount of attacks. Feel free to put it back to normal when you want.

525: 185:

to provide a quick overview summary of the article's content. If you don't like it, you're perfectly welcome to go to

1518: 1052: 1044: 922: 895: 38: 2244:

Please know that I’m not trying to antagonize you in any way, but I am concerned about your recent lifting of the

932:

Heay Nat, do you know who I'm? Guess, one of your neighbors... Seems you got lots of enemies here, good luck man.

2369: 1914: 1909: 1139: 1081: 2018: 1918: 990:

How can I check a sockpuppet without having to make a complicated checkuser case? For example in this instance

979: 918: 882:. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Knowledge under a 701:

the user on his talk page about his concerns and I see no valid reason to unprotect the page, especially when

2315: 2200: 737: 955:. Recently there are several anonymous users vandalizing the page, and that is not good for a GA. Thanks!-- 1901: 1569: 310: 1508: 1265: 1250: 1127: 760: 714: 2248: 2192: 1987: 937: 710: 679: 2166: 2140: 2115: 2086: 1542: 1132: 1064: 687: 1860:

2) another editor reverts my edit. (that editor had not made any edits to the page in several days)

502: 2013: 1191: 1163: 1028: 1014: 999: 975: 914: 853: 852:

Happy Holidays too! (I reverted to anther version your talk page I didn't know you are online) --

384: 360: 334: 2223: 2063: 2053: 1833: 1818: 1804: 1790: 1776: 1761: 1736: 1718: 1700: 1686: 1671: 1032: 1018: 1003: 857: 733: 628: 528: 480: 213:

We can't step outside of Knowledge's standardization efforts because of personal preferences. We

1996: 1710: 1643: 1565: 1489: 203: 155: 1785:

The brief part I did read said "university college status" meaning... NOT A FULL UNIVERSITY.

1681:

That doesn't matter. It's a purely religious institution and has the name "College" as well.

2227: 1960: 1879: 1589: 1529: 1504: 1374: 1261: 1246: 887: 872: 831: 764: 753: 66: 2128:

Thanks. A if he hadn't put the helpme tags on his page, probably would have not noticed ;)

2156: 2130: 2105: 2076: 1537: 1533: 1388: 1366: 1059: 683: 619: 522: 513: 123: 109: 95: 75: 1753: 566:

Also, that header of your's makes it next to impossible to do proper rollbacks and such.

2303: 1183: 1155: 995: 891: 671: 598: 576: 553: 379: 355: 329: 186: 2302:

I am leaving you this message because recent events have given me concern. When Aaron

2071: 2365: 2271: 2100: 2049: 1829: 1814: 1800: 1786: 1772: 1757: 1732: 1714: 1696: 1682: 1667: 1431: 1354: 1334: 1221: 1179: 1175: 1109: 1092: 624: 346: 269: 268:

the alternative Canadian elections template, and are consequently having a bit of an

244:

articles on Knowledge. We create distinct templates for Canadian topics when we have

47: 17: 1986:

Hello- thank you for protecting the page. However, you've done so on a bad version-

1353:

Hey Nat: Did you get my last message? I'd appreciate it if you could respond to it.

799: 2010:

I see. Sorry for not informing you. If you see fit to protect it again, please do.

1992: 1636: 883: 675: 287: 273: 199: 151: 1940:

is not readily apparent. Could you point out the dispute in question? Thanks. --

1935: 1813:

I mean this in the nicest, best possible good faith way. The page wouldn't load.

512:), and then reposted the previously deleted content of the IMC-OnAir userpage at 1976: 1955: 1945: 1875: 1585: 1456: 1398: 1370: 1281: 956: 933: 827: 460: 430: 410: 320: 46:

If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the

2372: 2276: 2231: 2174: 2148: 2123: 2094: 2057: 2030: 2000: 1980: 1965: 1949: 1905: 1883: 1837: 1822: 1808: 1794: 1780: 1765: 1740: 1722: 1704: 1690: 1675: 1650: 1593: 1573: 1551: 1512: 1478: 1436: 1420: 1384: 1359: 1339: 1269: 1254: 1226: 1196: 1168: 1144: 1112: 1095: 1073: 1036: 1022: 1007: 991: 961: 952: 941: 867:

Orphaned non-free media (Image:St Micheal's College University of Toronto.jpg)

861: 835: 817: 780: 741: 721: 691: 633: 605: 583: 560: 533: 517: 466: 413: 388: 364: 338: 313: 290: 276: 207: 159: 127: 119: 113: 105: 99: 91: 79: 71: 1858:

1) If I edit text (not an undo) that had been stable for days, on a page and

1731:

Universities is clouding your judgment. You cannot turn a rabbit into a hen.

1365:

Hi Nat! I noticed that IronDuke is trying to get me blocked for my edits at

674:

article back to older version as well, before the vandalism by the likes of

590: 568: 545: 142:

I tend to agree Nat, Tharky seemed to mainly be upset with the idea of the

1524:

Page protection for that article is problematic. As you can see from the

2361: 2283: 1713:. Tyndale and the other one are only religious seminaries. Nothing more. 1216: 2040:

Since you protected the page, I thought you should be aware that I have

1528:, other editors have been making edits to the article as well, notably 1238:

articles for a long time. Also, quoting you from a comment higher up; "

1126:

on my talk page from an editor who is involved in a content dispute on

1105:

By the way, your link to "sysop" is not working, it should probably be

808: 2252: 1972: 1941: 1799:

Granting a degree != University. Ontario Colleges too award degrees.

1207:

Hello. I copied your comment and my reply from the 3RR notice board:

240:

Templates are supposed to be as standard a format as possible across

666:

root of the word "China"." (don't forget to add on the references)

2045: 1897: 1889: 644: 448:

Knowledge:Requests for mediation/Premier of the Republic of China

286:

Canadian entitlement to exempt ourselves from standard formats.

2345:

NOTE: You are receiving this message because you are listed in

1971:

Oh well, just remember, no good deed ever goes unpunished ;) --

225:

something unique about our elections that the standard infobox

86: 25: 2353:

to determine who added you, and ask them why they added you.

971:

He's not just adding his crap, he's also deleting my comments

406:

leave a message on his page apologizing for my part in this.

816: 807: 798: 2251:, especially the edit summary where you wrote that admin 194:

prerogative to override Knowledge standards just because

2264: 2257: 2245: 1931: 1927: 1923: 1695:

Still not a University. Saying so doesn't make it one.

1632: 1628: 1624: 1620: 1616: 1612: 1608: 1604: 1525: 1451: 1325: 1318: 1311: 1304: 1297: 1290: 1123: 1106: 1056: 972: 706: 698: 510: 374: 2347:

the Knowledge administrators open to recall category

879:

Image:St Micheal's College University of Toronto.jpg

446:You can find more information on the case subpage, 2154:over the changes and review his block. Thank you. 909:will be deleted after seven days, as described on 866: 1866:Is my first edit considered a revert? (#1 above) 237:was at least 58 times uglier than the infobox is. 2259:, so it isn’t that he’s unaware of the policy. 260:Can you honestly tell me that your reaction has 1709:Your evidence doesn't mean anything. It's just 951:Hi Nat. I'm wondering if you can semi-protect 588:MrZ Man got the revert, I just got the socks. 493:If you have questions about this bot, please 8: 1058:Please take a look and see what you think. 2282:A request for your consideration regarding 257:when it comes to organizing small parties.) 2288: 1954:Hello, the edit-warring has resumed. FYI. 994:I'm almost 100% sure it's a sockpuppet of 425: 169:The infobox is a standard format which is 1657:Tyndale University College & Seminary 1289:Revision as of 00:52, 18 December 2007: 1174:Just a heads up but a user that goes by 495:contact the Mediation Committee directly 2294:Knowledge administrators open to recall 2189:Thanks for you time and understanding! 1664:University College of the Fraser Valley 1317:Revision as of 19:48, 16 December 2007 1310:Revision as of 19:59, 16 December 2007 1303:Revision as of 11:07, 17 December 2007 1296:Revision as of 23:03, 17 December 2007 1203:User:Armon reported by User:Timeshifter 620:disrupting the sandbox to prove a point 440:to which you were are a party has been 747:Wow, those comments aren't nice at all 44:Do not edit the contents of this page. 2263:edit he was blocked for reinserting: 1852:What constitutes an edit vs. a revert 648:back to the older version (below). 7: 1619:) before accusing me of harassment ( 2211:Regarding Republic of China article 643:Hi, I noticed that you blocked the 1240:3RR is not an entitlement, but an 24: 1327:, so does not require a warning. 1051:I wonder if you could help with 871: 779: 429: 221:format infoboxes unless there's 29: 1895:Hi. The reason for protecting 1452:a message on Tewfik's talk page 248:needs that the standard format 1490:User_talk:Domer48#Remove_block 422:Request for mediation accepted 235:Ontario general election, 2007 1: 2031:19:00, 29 December 2007 (UTC) 2001:06:13, 28 December 2007 (UTC) 1981:04:21, 28 December 2007 (UTC) 1966:23:30, 27 December 2007 (UTC) 1950:20:46, 27 December 2007 (UTC) 1884:04:08, 26 December 2007 (UTC) 1838:06:33, 28 December 2007 (UTC) 1823:06:32, 28 December 2007 (UTC) 1809:06:19, 28 December 2007 (UTC) 1795:06:17, 28 December 2007 (UTC) 1781:06:13, 28 December 2007 (UTC) 1766:06:08, 28 December 2007 (UTC) 1741:05:40, 28 December 2007 (UTC) 1723:05:27, 28 December 2007 (UTC) 1705:05:17, 28 December 2007 (UTC) 1691:05:59, 24 December 2007 (UTC) 1676:05:54, 24 December 2007 (UTC) 1651:17:49, 21 December 2007 (UTC) 1594:14:51, 21 December 2007 (UTC) 1574:12:36, 19 December 2007 (UTC) 1552:05:25, 19 December 2007 (UTC) 1513:17:28, 18 December 2007 (UTC) 1479:19:51, 18 December 2007 (UTC) 1437:15:39, 18 December 2007 (UTC) 1421:15:34, 18 December 2007 (UTC) 1360:15:01, 18 December 2007 (UTC) 1340:01:45, 18 December 2007 (UTC) 1270:23:20, 17 December 2007 (UTC) 1255:22:34, 17 December 2007 (UTC) 1227:21:41, 17 December 2007 (UTC) 1197:18:38, 17 December 2007 (UTC) 1169:23:46, 16 December 2007 (UTC) 1145:20:06, 16 December 2007 (UTC) 1113:14:34, 16 December 2007 (UTC) 1096:12:42, 16 December 2007 (UTC) 1074:07:36, 16 December 2007 (UTC) 1037:06:47, 16 December 2007 (UTC) 1023:06:35, 16 December 2007 (UTC) 1008:06:28, 16 December 2007 (UTC) 986:How can I check a sockpuppet? 962:21:07, 15 December 2007 (UTC) 942:20:41, 15 December 2007 (UTC) 923:20:22, 15 December 2007 (UTC) 896:our policy for non-free media 862:03:37, 15 December 2007 (UTC) 836:20:02, 14 December 2007 (UTC) 765:04:54, 14 December 2007 (UTC) 742:23:32, 13 December 2007 (UTC) 722:09:09, 13 December 2007 (UTC) 692:02:27, 12 December 2007 (UTC) 678:and the massive new edits by 314:16:47, 30 November 2007 (UTC) 264:to do with the fact that you 208:01:44, 28 November 2007 (UTC) 160:16:17, 27 November 2007 (UTC) 128:15:48, 27 November 2007 (UTC) 114:15:36, 27 November 2007 (UTC) 100:15:31, 27 November 2007 (UTC) 80:04:40, 27 November 2007 (UTC) 1236:Israeli-Palestinian conflict 911:criteria for speedy deletion 634:04:38, 8 December 2007 (UTC) 606:04:10, 8 December 2007 (UTC) 584:03:12, 8 December 2007 (UTC) 561:03:06, 8 December 2007 (UTC) 534:18:58, 5 December 2007 (UTC) 467:17:15, 4 December 2007 (UTC) 457:For the Mediation Committee, 414:11:47, 3 December 2007 (UTC) 389:17:20, 2 December 2007 (UTC) 365:15:24, 2 December 2007 (UTC) 339:13:45, 2 December 2007 (UTC) 291:22:44, 3 December 2007 (UTC) 277:18:24, 3 December 2007 (UTC) 2373:00:04, 5 January 2008 (UTC) 2277:16:09, 4 January 2008 (UTC) 2232:14:57, 4 January 2008 (UTC) 2175:19:22, 3 January 2008 (UTC) 2149:20:11, 2 January 2008 (UTC) 2124:19:54, 2 January 2008 (UTC) 2095:15:17, 2 January 2008 (UTC) 2058:06:48, 2 January 2008 (UTC) 1862:3) I later revert his edit. 1856:Just a question about 3RR. 1666:aren't listed for example. 886:. However, it is currently 746: 505:unblock for username change 491:to perform case management. 483:, an automated bot account 2388: 1727:Your insistence that they 1611:) and his user talk page ( 1519:The Rape of Nanking (book) 1086:(or just any tag, really!) 1053:The Rape of Nanking (book) 1045:The Rape of Nanking (book) 479:This message delivered by 789:You got a Christmas card! 1607:), article discussions ( 2316:User:Lar/Accountability 2042:requested unprotection 821: 812: 803: 670:Could you also rv the 1128:Christianity in China 876:Thanks for uploading 820: 811: 802: 438:Request for Mediation 42:of past discussions. 2036:Unprotection request 705:(is that the word?) 2256:3RR report himself 2237:Your recent unblock 1182:to you and not me. 892:You may add it back 489:Mediation Committee 397:Thank you very much 319:Your block of user 2351:the change records 2206:- 04.01.2008 09:39 1963: 1958: 1260:Thank you, Nat. -- 822: 813: 804: 709:given up. Thanks. 707:don't seem to have 2358: 2357: 2296:category member! 2207: 1961: 1956: 1648: 1579:Re: Menu thing... 1550: 1082:Blockedsockpuppet 1072: 884:claim of fair use 842: 841: 790: 603: 581: 558: 499: 476: 475: 347:assume good faith 299:Michael Redd Lock 198:don't like them. 165:Elections infobox 54: 53: 48:current talk page 2379: 2341:Larry Pieniazek 2289: 2274: 2203: 2195: 2190: 2173: 2171: 2165: 2161: 2147: 2145: 2139: 2135: 2122: 2120: 2114: 2110: 2093: 2091: 2085: 2081: 2026: 2021: 2016: 1939: 1921: 1752:It's not listed 1647: 1644: 1641: 1540: 1530:User:Binksternet 1475: 1472: 1469: 1466: 1463: 1460: 1434: 1417: 1414: 1411: 1408: 1405: 1402: 1357: 1337: 1242:"electric fence" 1194: 1190: 1186: 1166: 1162: 1158: 1143: 1085: 1062: 959: 903:my contributions 875: 838: 795: 794: 788: 783: 757: 703:les marionnettes 680:User:Aranherunar 631: 604: 601: 597: 595: 582: 579: 575: 573: 559: 556: 552: 550: 477: 463: 433: 426: 387: 363: 337: 67:British monarchy 33: 32: 26: 2387: 2386: 2382: 2381: 2380: 2378: 2377: 2376: 2287: 2272: 2239: 2213: 2201: 2193: 2187: 2167: 2163: 2157: 2155: 2141: 2137: 2131: 2129: 2116: 2112: 2106: 2104: 2103:- nuff said ;) 2087: 2083: 2077: 2075: 2067: 2038: 2024: 2019: 2014: 2008: 1912: 1896: 1893: 1872: 1854: 1660: 1645: 1637: 1601: 1581: 1562: 1534:User:Appletrees 1526:article history 1522: 1493: 1473: 1470: 1467: 1464: 1461: 1458: 1432: 1415: 1412: 1409: 1406: 1403: 1400: 1367:Second Intifada 1355: 1351: 1335: 1205: 1192: 1188: 1184: 1180:personal attack 1164: 1160: 1156: 1152: 1142: 1131: 1120: 1103: 1088: 1079: 1049: 988: 969: 957: 949: 930: 869: 850: 849: 848: 847: 846: 845: 844: 843: 825: 792: 784: 772: 755: 749: 730: 641: 629: 616: 599: 591: 589: 577: 569: 567: 554: 546: 544: 541: 532: 514:User:ElJay Arem 507: 498: 461: 424: 399: 378: 354: 328: 324: 301: 167: 140: 62: 60:Britsh monarchy 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 2385: 2383: 2356: 2355: 2343: 2298: 2297: 2286: 2280: 2238: 2235: 2212: 2209: 2186: 2183: 2182: 2181: 2180: 2179: 2178: 2177: 2066: 2061: 2037: 2034: 2007: 2004: 1984: 1983: 1892: 1887: 1871: 1868: 1863: 1861: 1859: 1857: 1853: 1850: 1849: 1848: 1847: 1846: 1845: 1844: 1843: 1842: 1841: 1840: 1750: 1749: 1748: 1747: 1746: 1745: 1744: 1743: 1659: 1654: 1600: 1597: 1580: 1577: 1561: 1560:A City Warning 1558: 1556: 1521: 1516: 1492: 1487: 1486: 1485: 1484: 1483: 1482: 1481: 1442: 1441: 1440: 1439: 1424: 1423: 1350: 1347: 1345: 1343: 1342: 1329: 1328: 1321: 1320: 1314: 1313: 1307: 1306: 1300: 1299: 1293: 1292: 1286: 1285: 1278: 1277: 1258: 1257: 1230: 1229: 1204: 1201: 1200: 1199: 1151: 1148: 1135: 1119: 1116: 1102: 1099: 1087: 1077: 1048: 1041: 1040: 1039: 1025: 996:user:Bonaparte 987: 984: 976:SchmuckyTheCat 968: 965: 948: 945: 929: 928:Happy Holidays 926: 915:BetacommandBot 868: 865: 840: 839: 823: 814: 805: 793: 787: 786: 785: 778: 777: 776: 775: 774: 773: 771: 770:Happy Holidays 768: 748: 745: 729: 726: 725: 724: 672:names of China 668: 667: 662: 661: 654: 653: 640: 637: 615: 612: 611: 610: 609: 608: 540: 537: 520: 506: 500: 492: 478: 474: 473: 472: 471: 470: 469: 451: 445: 434: 423: 420: 418: 398: 395: 394: 393: 392: 391: 368: 367: 350: 323: 317: 311:198.150.94.139 300: 297: 296: 295: 294: 293: 258: 238: 181:of an infobox 166: 163: 139: 136: 135: 134: 133: 132: 131: 130: 61: 58: 56: 52: 51: 34: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 2384: 2375: 2374: 2371: 2367: 2363: 2354: 2352: 2348: 2342: 2339: 2335: 2331: 2329: 2324: 2320: 2317: 2312: 2308: 2305: 2300: 2299: 2295: 2292:Hello fellow 2291: 2290: 2285: 2281: 2279: 2278: 2275: 2267: 2265: 2260: 2258: 2254: 2250: 2246: 2242: 2236: 2234: 2233: 2229: 2225: 2220: 2216: 2210: 2208: 2205: 2204: 2197: 2196: 2184: 2176: 2172: 2170: 2162: 2160: 2152: 2151: 2150: 2146: 2144: 2136: 2134: 2127: 2126: 2125: 2121: 2119: 2111: 2109: 2102: 2101:User:07kinjac 2099: 2098: 2097: 2096: 2092: 2090: 2082: 2080: 2073: 2065: 2062: 2060: 2059: 2055: 2051: 2047: 2043: 2035: 2033: 2032: 2029: 2028: 2027: 2022: 2017: 2005: 2003: 2002: 1998: 1994: 1989: 1982: 1978: 1974: 1970: 1969: 1968: 1967: 1964: 1959: 1952: 1951: 1947: 1943: 1937: 1933: 1929: 1925: 1920: 1916: 1911: 1907: 1903: 1899: 1891: 1888: 1886: 1885: 1881: 1877: 1869: 1867: 1864: 1851: 1839: 1835: 1831: 1826: 1825: 1824: 1820: 1816: 1812: 1811: 1810: 1806: 1802: 1798: 1797: 1796: 1792: 1788: 1784: 1783: 1782: 1778: 1774: 1770: 1769: 1768: 1767: 1763: 1759: 1755: 1742: 1738: 1734: 1730: 1726: 1725: 1724: 1720: 1716: 1712: 1708: 1707: 1706: 1702: 1698: 1694: 1693: 1692: 1688: 1684: 1680: 1679: 1678: 1677: 1673: 1669: 1665: 1658: 1655: 1653: 1652: 1649: 1642: 1640: 1634: 1630: 1626: 1622: 1618: 1614: 1610: 1606: 1598: 1596: 1595: 1591: 1587: 1578: 1576: 1575: 1571: 1567: 1559: 1557: 1554: 1553: 1548: 1544: 1539: 1535: 1531: 1527: 1520: 1517: 1515: 1514: 1510: 1506: 1500: 1496: 1491: 1488: 1480: 1477: 1476: 1453: 1448: 1447: 1446: 1445: 1444: 1443: 1438: 1435: 1428: 1427: 1426: 1425: 1422: 1419: 1418: 1396: 1393: 1390: 1386: 1382: 1379: 1376: 1372: 1368: 1364: 1363: 1362: 1361: 1358: 1348: 1346: 1341: 1338: 1331: 1330: 1326: 1323: 1322: 1319: 1316: 1315: 1312: 1309: 1308: 1305: 1302: 1301: 1298: 1295: 1294: 1291: 1288: 1287: 1283: 1280: 1279: 1274: 1273: 1272: 1271: 1267: 1263: 1256: 1252: 1248: 1244: 1243: 1237: 1232: 1231: 1228: 1225: 1224: 1220: 1219: 1214: 1210: 1209: 1208: 1202: 1198: 1195: 1187: 1181: 1177: 1173: 1172: 1171: 1170: 1167: 1159: 1149: 1147: 1146: 1141: 1138: 1134: 1129: 1125: 1117: 1115: 1114: 1111: 1107: 1100: 1098: 1097: 1094: 1084:|Peter zhou}} 1083: 1078: 1076: 1075: 1070: 1066: 1061: 1057: 1054: 1046: 1042: 1038: 1034: 1030: 1026: 1024: 1020: 1016: 1012: 1011: 1010: 1009: 1005: 1001: 997: 993: 985: 983: 981: 977: 973: 966: 964: 963: 960: 954: 946: 944: 943: 939: 935: 927: 925: 924: 920: 916: 913:. Thank you. 912: 908: 904: 899: 897: 893: 889: 885: 881: 880: 874: 864: 863: 859: 855: 837: 833: 829: 824: 819: 815: 810: 806: 801: 797: 796: 782: 769: 767: 766: 763: 762: 759: 758: 744: 743: 739: 735: 734:Landcamera900 727: 723: 720: 716: 712: 708: 704: 700: 696: 695: 694: 693: 689: 685: 681: 677: 673: 664: 663: 659: 658: 657: 651: 650: 649: 646: 638: 636: 635: 632: 627: 626: 621: 613: 607: 602: 596: 594: 587: 586: 585: 580: 574: 572: 565: 564: 563: 562: 557: 551: 549: 538: 536: 535: 530: 527: 524: 519: 515: 511: 504: 501: 496: 490: 486: 482: 468: 465: 464: 458: 455: 454: 453: 452: 449: 443: 439: 435: 432: 428: 427: 421: 419: 416: 415: 412: 407: 403: 396: 390: 386: 383: 382: 375: 372: 371: 370: 369: 366: 362: 359: 358: 351: 348: 343: 342: 341: 340: 336: 333: 332: 322: 318: 316: 315: 312: 308: 305: 298: 292: 289: 285: 280: 279: 278: 275: 271: 267: 263: 259: 256: 251: 247: 243: 239: 236: 232: 228: 224: 220: 216: 212: 211: 210: 209: 205: 201: 197: 193: 188: 184: 180: 176: 172: 164: 162: 161: 157: 153: 149: 145: 137: 129: 125: 121: 117: 116: 115: 111: 107: 104:Indeed I am. 103: 102: 101: 97: 93: 88: 84: 83: 82: 81: 77: 73: 68: 59: 57: 49: 45: 41: 40: 35: 28: 27: 19: 18:User talk:Nat 2359: 2344: 2340: 2336: 2332: 2325: 2321: 2313: 2309: 2301: 2268: 2261: 2249:Pedro Gonnet 2243: 2240: 2222:Thank you, 2221: 2217: 2214: 2199: 2194:pedro gonnet 2191: 2188: 2168: 2158: 2142: 2132: 2117: 2107: 2088: 2078: 2068: 2039: 2015:bibliomaniac 2012: 2011: 2009: 1985: 1953: 1894: 1873: 1865: 1855: 1751: 1728: 1661: 1638: 1602: 1599:Jeffpw issue 1582: 1566:City warming 1563: 1555: 1538:Hong Qi Gong 1523: 1501: 1497: 1494: 1457: 1399: 1391: 1377: 1352: 1344: 1259: 1241: 1222: 1217: 1212: 1206: 1153: 1121: 1104: 1089: 1060:Hong Qi Gong 1050: 989: 970: 950: 931: 906: 900: 877: 870: 851: 761: 754: 750: 731: 702: 676:User:Fueglao 669: 655: 642: 639:Edit Request 623: 617: 592: 570: 547: 542: 508: 481:MediationBot 459: 456: 417: 408: 404: 400: 380: 356: 330: 325: 309: 306: 302: 283: 272:issue here? 265: 261: 254: 249: 245: 241: 230: 226: 222: 218: 214: 195: 191: 182: 178: 174: 170: 168: 147: 143: 141: 63: 55: 43: 37: 2072:new account 1988:Juanholanda 1505:Vintagekits 1333:this case. 1282:User:Tiamut 1262:Timeshifter 1247:Timeshifter 756:OhanaUnited 307:Thank you. 217:to use the 138:Re: GoodDay 36:This is an 2328:this table 2048:. Thanks! 1711:peacockery 1043:Help with 992:User:EU_01 953:Taipei 101 947:Taipei 101 684:TheLeopard 2304:Brenneman 2247:block of 1870:Main Page 1503:regards-- 1213:no action 1101:Userboxes 614:Re: Block 503:IMC-OnAir 270:ownership 2338:wishes. 2284:CAT:AOTR 2273:IronDuke 2064:05kinjac 2050:Vassyana 1547:Contribs 1433:IronDuke 1395:contribs 1381:contribs 1356:IronDuke 1349:Confused 1336:IronDuke 1176:Peonuxio 1122:I got a 1110:lucasbfr 1093:lucasbfr 1069:Contribs 1029:AdrianTM 1015:AdrianTM 1000:AdrianTM 967:Mr. Sock 907:articles 888:orphaned 854:AdrianTM 529:friendly 526:contribs 485:operated 442:accepted 255:slackers 223:actually 219:standard 192:personal 171:required 1993:C.Logan 1915:protect 1910:history 1639:Arcayne 1223:toronto 1189:fireboy 1161:fireboy 1124:message 699:replied 487:by the 288:Bearcat 284:special 274:Bearcat 266:created 262:nothing 200:Bearcat 187:WP:CWNB 152:GoodDay 144:British 39:archive 2224:Anmiol 2185:Thanks 2159:Tiddly 2133:Tiddly 2108:Tiddly 2079:Tiddly 1957:Avruch 1919:delete 1876:Nikkul 1586:Readin 1383:) and 1371:Tewfik 1150:My RfA 1133:Chris! 1108::) -- 958:Jerrch 934:Tionqo 828:Jeffpw 625:Graham 462:Daniel 411:Jeffpw 385:scribe 361:scribe 335:scribe 321:Jeffpw 246:unique 148:equals 2241:Nat: 2046:Jesus 2006:China 1936:views 1928:watch 1924:links 1898:Jesus 1890:Jesus 1385:Armon 1245:". -- 1218:nat.u 791:→ → → 728:Image 645:China 600:(Ni!) 578:(Ni!) 555:(Ni!) 518:Ioeth 250:can't 227:can't 179:point 120:TSO1D 106:TSO1D 92:TSO1D 72:TSO1D 16:< 2228:talk 2215:Hi, 2202:talk 2054:talk 2044:for 1997:talk 1977:talk 1962:talk 1946:talk 1932:logs 1906:talk 1902:edit 1880:talk 1834:talk 1819:talk 1805:talk 1791:talk 1777:talk 1762:talk 1754:here 1737:talk 1719:talk 1701:talk 1687:talk 1672:talk 1590:talk 1570:talk 1543:Talk 1532:and 1509:talk 1389:talk 1375:talk 1276:him? 1266:talk 1251:talk 1193:Talk 1165:Talk 1065:Talk 1033:talk 1019:talk 1004:talk 980:talk 938:talk 919:talk 858:talk 832:talk 738:talk 715:heru 711:Aran 688:talk 593:Kwsn 571:Kwsn 548:Kwsn 523:talk 231:look 215:have 204:talk 156:talk 124:talk 110:talk 96:talk 76:talk 2362:Lar 2266:. 2169:Tom 2143:Tom 2118:Tom 2089:Tom 1729:are 898:). 719:nar 539:Hey 381:WjB 357:WjB 331:WjB 242:all 196:you 175:all 173:on 87:3RR 2364:: 2230:) 2198:- 2056:) 1999:) 1979:) 1948:) 1934:| 1930:| 1926:| 1922:| 1917:| 1913:| 1908:| 1904:| 1882:) 1836:) 1830:GJ 1821:) 1815:GJ 1807:) 1801:GJ 1793:) 1787:GJ 1779:) 1773:GJ 1764:) 1758:GJ 1756:. 1739:) 1733:GJ 1721:) 1715:GJ 1703:) 1697:GJ 1689:) 1683:GJ 1674:) 1668:GJ 1646:() 1631:, 1627:, 1623:, 1615:, 1592:) 1572:) 1545:- 1511:) 1268:) 1253:) 1215:. 1185:Jh 1157:Jh 1118:Hi 1080:{{ 1067:- 1035:) 1021:) 1006:) 982:) 940:) 921:) 860:) 834:) 740:) 697:I 690:) 630:87 436:A 206:) 183:is 158:) 126:) 112:) 98:) 78:) 2370:c 2368:/ 2366:t 2253:B 2226:( 2164:- 2138:- 2113:- 2084:- 2052:( 2025:5 2020:1 1995:( 1975:( 1973:B 1944:( 1942:B 1938:) 1900:( 1878:( 1832:( 1817:( 1803:( 1789:( 1775:( 1760:( 1735:( 1717:( 1699:( 1685:( 1670:( 1633:8 1629:7 1625:6 1621:5 1617:4 1613:3 1609:2 1605:1 1588:( 1568:( 1549:) 1541:( 1507:( 1474:t 1471:u 1468:m 1465:a 1462:i 1459:T 1416:t 1413:u 1410:m 1407:a 1404:i 1401:T 1392:· 1387:( 1378:· 1373:( 1264:( 1249:( 1140:t 1137:c 1071:) 1063:( 1047:? 1031:( 1017:( 1002:( 978:( 936:( 917:( 856:( 830:( 736:( 717:| 713:| 686:( 531:) 521:( 497:. 450:. 444:. 202:( 154:( 122:( 108:( 94:( 74:( 50:.

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

Index