611:
In my RL briefwriting or my scholarly writing, I try to root out unwanted complexity and other indicia of bad writing by writing a brief or an article sometime before it's due, and then returning to it a few days later. I can then not only fix the typos and copyedit but also hone and simplify the prose. In addressing a
Knowledge dispute, that generally can't be done—one needs to comment timely to influence the dispute, and only a limited amount of time can be spent—and so the first draft is the only draft. That, more than anything else, explains some sentences that leave even me, when I look back, asking "why the heck was I so long-winded about this?" And at times the writing style had the side-effect of leading knowledgeable critics, in their more Eva Destructive moments, to infer that I was substituting pomposity for analysis, which was never the case (or at least not consciously!).
959:
625:" That's not a sentence that makes me cringe in retrospect; it says exactly what I meant it to say, including precisely the intended amount of ambiguity. But there's no doubt that it's complicated. Someone on the workshop page fed my sentence into the Flesch reading level meter, and it yielded a readability score of something like six hundred forty, meaning that the sentence can be understood only by advanced German-literature graduate students under controlled conditions, or something. So I suppose it will be simplified. And after all, it
1476:
people sincerely attempted to get through to him before it reached this point, but I suspect a long-term loss which could have been avoided here. The drama escalation which followed this mess was probably avoidable (if not simply unnecessary) too, but seems to be an increasingly common feature at en.wiki. In that sense and in such situations, I do sometimes wonder whether the project is actually gaining, or whether it is losing more. I am sure you would have thought at some point (or still think) about that too. Regards,
31:
605:.) I never set out to achieve a different style in my wiki writing. Anyone reading through a few weeks of what I've written on WP:RFAR or sometimes at ANI or wherever could probably guess that I'm a lawyer (to the best of my knowledge, D--- B--- was the only person ever to doubt it), and that sometimes I think complicated thoughts. But it was never a conscious stylistic choice to write in complex and tangled sentences for its own sake.
952:
1238:
and editing interests. As you intended it, your userpage is very descriptive and very introspective. I thought it gave me some insight into why you might be editing the way you were and what advice might be most helpful to you. Every editor is a unique individual and should be treated as such, but after nine years on
Knowledge I have come to recognize certain types of frequently committed "rookie mistakes."
1177:
know each other. I understand that you're an administrator, but there were already several on the case already. Moreover, your requests weren't exactly heeded--I am still under the trammel of an indefinite topic ban upon any and all subjects related to gamergate. Nothing really became of your efforts.
843:
I had little interest in sock investigations—my attitude was always "unless they're being disruptive or working around a sanction, it's better to leave them in situ so you know what their current account is". The comment was more for the benefit of others reading your talkpage—you have Font Of Wisdom
616:
As a sidenote, in the past few weeks I've tried not to spend too much time peeking at the arbitration pages. But I did look at the workshop in one of the cases after I left the
Committee, and I found that my style was writing style. One of the arbitrators borrowed (with minor tweaks) a principle that
610:
I've actually been criticized for "complicated, awkward sentences" ever since high-school and college freshman
English, and I suppose I've improved only marginally. My writing method is often to think the substance of an analysis through, but then to type quickly and get my thoughts down on the page.
256:
Thanks. I'll probably drop him a note too. For what it's worth, I still think the question I posed to Kww should have been asked of Coffee before the talkpage was undeleted. I suppose I won't actually do it, but part of me thinks I should redelete the talkpage now until I hear back from him—partly on
1237:
In that context, I saw the enforcement request against you and, as I always do when I am thinking of commenting or taking admin action involving an editor with whom I'm unfamiliar, I took a look at your userpage and talkpage to see what the editor has chosen to share concerning his or her background
1465:
I must confess I thought you would. I think it's partially subject to interpretation of the FA criterion on stability; it could be argued that content is not significantly being changed each day (as it is about hidden text) so protection is really not a good way of sorting it out, but it could also
1362:
Perhaps I need to clarify. I have always held you to be one of the finest, but this shows me you are either biased or didn't take the time to understand what you did. I told you that I only supported unprotection if the edit warriors trying to add the disputed hidden text would be blocked if they
1176:
You see, I'm somewhat....curious, I suppose. As you may recall, in an action which still, to this day, baffles me, you opted to opine regarding the severity of the punishment I was receiving due to my.....policy contraventions, we'll put it. As aforementioned, I am confused by this. We don't even
555:
How pleased are you that the term "Bradspeak" is not only still in circulation, but has entered the lexicon to the extent it can be used in a headline without explanation? Someone somewhere should probably be paying me royalties for the use of it. (Along with "civility police", "facebook for ugly
1475:
In the end, it is a pity that a contributor was clearly in burnout (especially in recent weeks), and as he didn't take up a voluntary break for a relatively long short term, spiraled even more. The consequent outcome was inevitable. I'm not sure what efforts were made to counsel him or how many
695:
When one always has the knowledge at the back of one's mind that anything you say can be taken as a public pronouncement and waved at one of the drama boards in support of some wiki-crusade or other, it forces one to be very measured and pedantic with the wording of anything said for public
600:
On the other hand, if "Bradspeak" is construed as "longwinded, legalistic, complicated, hard-to-understand prose in wikispace," I'm less honored. Believe it or not, in my real-world legal career, I'm a strong champion of writing legal documents that are readable and interesting, with as few
1243:
Of course, I didn't realize as I was typing my advice to you that another administrator was in the process of topic-banning you, thus rendering moot the advice I was giving. But I hope it was useful to you anyway. And I hope this reply is responsive to the question you asked me. Regards,
1383:
I didn't, and don't, care much about the hidden text. I just didn't, and don't, like the idea of an FA being full-protected for a week based on a dispute about hidden text. Hopefully a consensus can be reached about the existence and content of the hidden text, or any other open issue.
623:"An editor must not engage in a pattern of editing that focuses on a specific racial, religious, or ethnic group and can reasonably be perceived as gratuitously endorsing or promoting stereotypes, or as evincing invidious bias and prejudice against the members of the group.
592:
Am I pleased that the term is still remembered? To give a more serious reply than you might have expected, I suppose that depends on what it's being remembered for? If it's "thoughtful and deliberate written analysis of problems on
Knowledge, in a style commanding
125:
638:
I suppose this is
Bradspeak at its worst again—answering a throwaway comment about longwindedness with an overly long reply. But I'll continue as I began and just leave it here rather than try to edit or truncate it. Make of it what you will. Regards,
241:
I've already dropped him an e-mail, although not on this specific matter. If he indicates anything in a response, I will forward it to you. My sincere hope is that he returns shortly and makes it clear here what he thinks should best be done.
382:
If something starts as a hoax, like Jar'edo Wens (or however it is spelt), but then is adopted by popular culture or the mythos of something, what happens? Would the article eventually be restored if it gained enough use and coverage?
1405:
OK, so you're saying you were expecting
Newyorkbrad to block an editor who re-adds the text. But were you expecting him to leave an editor who re-removed the text unblocked or were you expecting Newyorkbrad to block that editor too?
744:
BTW, regarding your comments two threads up, policy is very explicit that unlike the other drama boards, there's no requirement to notify the parties in a sockpuppet investigation. If you think that should be changed,
1366:
Yet you unprotected and let them edit war to re-add the disputed text. Ergo, you wanted the hidden text, else you would have acted on it when they edit warred to re-add it. So you win, the hidden text is back.
271:
No, you shouldn't; it's highly unlikely that was anything other than a lashing out in frustration. I'm pretty sure the drama has peaked based on some heuristics I've developed from reading too many ANI threads.
1231:
case since it opened in 2014.) This gave me a great deal of background on the GamerGate-related editing disputes, and therefore I've commented on some (though by no means all) GamerGate-related enforcement
143:
Celebrate Women's
History Month by building, editing, and expanding articles about women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics fields during DC Public Library's first full-day edit-a-thon.
912:
Then GG and MB are yours then, I'm removing them from my watchlist. And my apologies, I lost my temper and should not have been editing while that was occurring. Thanks for all your help and advice.
122:
In honor of Women’s
History Month, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) is organizing and hosting an edit-a-thon to improve coverage of women in science in Knowledge. Free coffee and lunch served!
1153:
I will take a look at this when I have more time (see below). I will share my thoughts then if I have any useful thoughts to share that wouldn't be repetitive of what others have said. Regards,
549:
333:
1134:
The case against me is vexatious indeed - I shall not contend against those who taste blood. The main complaint even includes my essays - so I wrote one which I hope you will appreciate
1207:
Personally, I like the parodic writing style in your section header. You may not be aware of it, but inadvertently or otherwise, you were aping a writing style I've been accused of (cf.
297:'s page, I understand there are wiki politics but discussing a possible sock investigation which is a serious thing without informing the editor involved is just wrong in my opinion. -
1173:
Rather than make do with the patented 'On _____'--or simply '_____', as it were, I've elected to use this title, instead. I feel it suits me. Polysyllables aside, let's talk business:
784:
I enjoy witty titles, so I thought it was worth a shot :-) For the record, I have always found
Bradspeak to mean the first possibility you mentioned -- careful, deliberate analysis.
706:
of Bradspeak as the inevitable product of someone trying to bring clarity to a multicultural project. I've made many criticisms of you, but the use of language wasn't one of them. –
762:
I'll have to admit that the SSI pages haven't been one of my wiki hangouts (the last time I really enjoyed a colloquy on WP:RFCU, which was the predecessor of SSI, was when
629:
be more-or-less paraphrased to "Don't be a bigoted asshole if you want to edit here." That would have worked as a principle (I'm not saying as a finding of fact) in the
1262:
Ah, I see. Well, yes, you have satisfied my curiosity. Also, yes, the parody *was* inadvertent--it was more of a self-parody, really. Anyway, thank you for responding.
1101:
I've been busy for the past few days between work and some other commitments. I'll still be mostly offline for the next few days, but should be back around after that.
898:
I haven't investigated your history in the area, so I'm not saying that (or the opposite). I do think you've said enough on MarkBernstein's talkpage, though. Regards,
1436:
Actually, while I understand your thinking, I might have left a picture of another large fish here...but I can't seem to find the last one I had left here. Regards,
257:
the chance there should be revisions-deletions, and partly to see if it would even be possible to turn this weekend's drama-level up from 11 to 12 or 13. Regards,
1221:
770:(as he then was) were bantering about the templates. That must have been around 1995 or so. So, I have no opinion on how that page should work. Regards again,
663:, for easy reference. Arbcom does not make policy, but only enforces existing policy, so presumably the quoted proposition has the weight of policy, or...?
1216:
As for why I addressed the arbitration enforcement thread concerning you, there were two main reasons. The first is that I was one of the members of the
82:
746:
1026:
996:
992:
971:
943:
933:
1466:
be argued that the article is subject to ongoing edit wars and is therefore not stable, so a short term protection may not be such a bad thing.
1451:
Thank you for input. For what it's worth, I still think I did the right thing, for the reasons I have stated here and on the arbitration page.
975:, a Knowledge celebration and mini-conference for the project's 14th birthday. In addition to the party, the event will be a participatory
167:
828:
1135:
798:
350:
414:. Hopefully no hoax on Knowledge ever rises to that level. For a short essay I once wrote on a related abuse of Knowledge, please see
79:
Women in the Arts and ArtAndFeminism Knowledge Edit-a-thon at the National Museum of Women in the Arts. Free coffee and lunch served!
1030:
to our roster, and otherwise join in the "open space" experience! Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --
1050:
415:
332:
Hi Brad, Just to let you know, we plan to run your interview this week. If you would like to review your comments, you may do so
1588:
1217:
699:
411:
218:
516:
that, just because the artist is notable, does not mean the album is automatically notable. I would think you would know that
188:
164:
Smithsonian Institution Archives Groundbreaking Women in Science Knowledge Edit-a-thon. Free lunch courtesy of Wikimedia DC!
1169:
A superfluously sesquipedalian title which shall immediately betray the author's deluded pretensions to effectual elocution
958:
103:
1000:
659:
453:
1180:
I write this, then, in the hopes that you may answer my questions, and, in so doing, dispel my befuddlement. Good day.
1068:
1604:
1208:
671:
584:
38:
1524:
ps: I didn't see the above when I wrote this. Had added a black and white image to my talk before, having written
1049:(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from
302:
146:
1202:
First off, apologies for the short delay in my response. I've been mostly offline for a few days (see above).
791:
343:
986:
movement and from educational and cultural institutions interested in developing free knowledge projects.
1570:
1537:
1515:
1267:
1185:
1063:
517:
294:
200:
Hope you can make it to an event! If you have any questions or require any special accommodations, please
1552:
1481:
1456:
1441:
1421:
1411:
1389:
1353:
1313:
1297:
1249:
1158:
1106:
1086:
983:
903:
860:
775:
729:
693:
In some defense, if you read the original quote (I know you did, as you commented in the thread) it was
668:
644:
465:
423:
367:
317:
262:
247:
47:
17:
700:
in the context of a discussion about the need for functionaries to speak politely but without ambiguity
229:
Coffee has email enabled, so you could email him if there are specific revisions he'd like rev-del'd.
403:
398:
Certainly there are historical hoaxes that become encyclopedic in their own right. For examples, see
855:
I largely agree with you (about sock-chasing, that is, not about "Font Of Wisdom status"). Regards,
1372:
1336:
917:
886:
813:
482:
298:
1189:
601:
unnecessary complexities and legalisms as possible. (That's one of the main reasons I participate
441:
shows wisdom and common sense -- have you ever considering running for the arbitration committee?
786:
679:
580:
407:
388:
338:
1614:
1593:
arbitration case request, which you were listed as a party to. For the Arbitration Committee, --
1574:
1556:
1541:
1519:
1485:
1460:
1445:
1425:
1393:
1378:
1357:
1342:
1317:
1302:
1271:
1253:
1162:
1147:
1129:
1110:
1090:
1075:
1039:
923:
907:
892:
864:
850:
836:
816:
804:
779:
755:
733:
712:
684:
648:
562:
543:
489:
469:
447:
427:
392:
371:
356:
321:
306:
278:
266:
251:
235:
1608:
1566:
1533:
1511:
1263:
1197:
1181:
1143:
1125:
533:
509:
505:
724:
Thanks very much ... I suppose I'll have to be self-critical without you this time. Regards,
597:
and attention" than sure, I'll be glad to be remembered that way, and I'll try to keep at it.
1548:
1477:
1452:
1437:
1417:
1407:
1385:
1349:
1309:
1289:
1245:
1154:
1102:
1082:
1035:
899:
856:
832:
771:
767:
725:
640:
602:
536:? It didn't chart, so that's out. It hasn't been reviewed by anyone of note, so that's out.
461:
457:
443:
419:
363:
313:
274:
258:
243:
231:
454:"I arrested a man once and he turned out to be guilty; that's why I was made an inspector."
1525:
1285:
1014:
966:
845:
750:
719:
707:
570:
557:
201:
749:
would be the place to go, but there are a number of good reasons why this is the case. –
1062:
Despite disagreement with some analysis of yours from time to time, you're a good egg.--
951:
823:
If you strive to write legal documents that are readable, I wonder if you've ever cited
1600:
1400:
1368:
1332:
913:
882:
810:
763:
477:
192:
171:
150:
129:
107:
86:
844:
status in some circles, and don't want to be indirectly endorsing incorrect advice. –
676:
664:
384:
68:
I am very excited to announce this month’s events, focused on Women’s History Month:
1529:
1139:
1121:
976:
399:
881:
If you think I should step away from GamerGate related articles, I shall so do.
1031:
46:
If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the
633:
case too. Bestspeak, presumably, has a formality level somewhere in the middle.
336:. We plan to publish in the neighborhood of 5 PM EST, I would imagine. Thanks!
1528:(around the time of his memorial service, as I later found out) and nominated
211:
1595:
1227:. (I was an arbitrator from 2008 to 2014, and continued into January on the
824:
63:
979:, with plenary panels, lightning talks, and of course open space sessions.
621:
case (and which passed unanimously, including your (Iridescent's) vote):
1416:
I've just realised he's blocked himself so I won't expect a reply yet.
100:
An evening gathering with free-flowing conversation and free pizza.
1498:
Did you know that Laurence Olivier had an undisputed infobox from
1138:. It would be fun to see how others react, indeed. Warm regards,
25:
696:
consumption; Bradspeak is a virtually inevitable consequence.
957:
950:
1587:
Hi Newyorkbrad, the Arbitration Committee has declined the
982:
We also hope for the participation of our friends from the
217:
To unsubscribe from this newsletter, remove your name from
1168:
1120:
See ArbCom even though you assiduously avoid it. Cheers.
1506:
1500:
1364:
1328:
576:
439:
504:
Tell me how "absolutely no sourcing found" and "fails
1547:
I would rather not discuss anything about infoboxes.
1308:
I've read the case request and posted my statement.
293:I have notified Rationalobserver about the talk on
934:Knowledge Day NYC Celebration and Mini-Conference
520:is a thing. If you think it's notable, how about
550:Knowledge Signpost/2015-03-04/Arbitration report
185:Dinner and drinks with your fellow Wikipedians!
1565:A simple yes or no would have been shorter. --
8:
1024:We especially encourage folks to add your
587:" reference in the title of the interview.
556:people" and "undefined, not infinite".) –
508:" are "pointless, worthless nomination".
747:Knowledge talk:Sockpuppet investigations
476:If you choose to run, count on my vote.
694:
44:Do not edit the contents of this page.
312:Your point is well-taken. Thank you.
159:She Blinded Me with Science, Part III
117:NIH Women's History Month Edit-a-Thon
7:
60:Editing for Women's History in March
1280:Arbitration request concerning you
74:Women in the Arts 2015 Edit-a-thon
24:
1583:Arbitration case request declined
827:, as another lawyer recently did
138:Women in STEM Edit-a-Thon at DCPL
59:
29:
412:Protocols of the Elders of Zion
1017:, 3009 Broadway, by W 118th St
965:You are invited to join us at
1:
1414:) 18:30, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
1136:WP:Knowledge and shipwrights
221:. 02:25, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
1081:Thank you. Goo goo g'joob.
1630:
1615:06:26, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
1575:20:23, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
1557:23:21, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
1542:21:17, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
1520:20:44, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
1486:18:41, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
1461:19:30, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
1446:18:38, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
1426:18:38, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
1394:18:22, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
1379:16:48, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
1358:23:21, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
1343:20:42, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
1318:23:22, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
1303:21:47, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
1272:16:54, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
1254:15:10, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
1209:User:Newyorkbrad/Bradspeak
1190:09:58, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
1163:22:11, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
1148:04:20, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
1130:12:10, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
1111:22:09, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
1091:22:09, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
1076:03:49, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
1299:Penny for your thoughts?
1040:21:58, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
941:
924:21:52, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
908:01:35, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
893:01:27, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
865:21:30, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
851:21:18, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
837:21:09, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
817:20:42, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
805:20:41, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
780:20:37, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
756:07:48, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
734:21:30, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
713:21:18, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
685:20:17, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
649:20:37, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
563:07:48, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
544:22:01, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
490:08:17, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
470:03:26, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
448:03:14, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
428:01:06, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
393:00:59, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
372:16:08, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
357:15:52, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
322:02:54, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
307:02:45, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
279:02:37, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
267:01:10, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
252:00:45, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
236:00:34, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
1027:5-minute lightning talks
1001:at bit.ly/wikidaybarnard
809:Was it only 1995? Gawd.
657:The quotation is now at
1348:I didn't win anything.
1220:who was active in the
993:Knowledge Day NYC 2015
972:Knowledge Day NYC 2015
962:
955:
944:Knowledge Day NYC 2015
385:Tharthandorf Aquanashi
295:User talk:Anthonyhcole
1218:Arbitration Committee
1058:All things considered
1013:10:00pm - 9:00 pm at
961:
954:
660:WP:Bias and prejudice
378:Question about hoaxes
93:Wednesday, March 11:
42:of past discussions.
18:User talk:Newyorkbrad
1225:arbitration decision
702:, it was actually a
404:Vortigern and Rowena
178:Saturday, March 28:
136:Saturday, March 21:
180:March Dinner Meetup
963:
956:
583:to thank for the "
500:Peter and the Wolf
408:Cottingley Fairies
328:Signpost interview
157:Friday, March 27:
115:Friday, March 13:
110:(or just show up!)
1611:
1428:
1377:
1341:
1064:Two kinds of pork
1054:
1046:
1045:
942:Sunday March 22:
932:Sunday March 22:
922:
891:
835:
758:
617:I drafted in the
446:
277:
234:
72:Sunday, March 8:
54:
53:
48:current talk page
1621:
1609:
1509:
1503:
1415:
1404:
1375:
1371:
1339:
1335:
1300:
1294:
1201:
1074:
1071:
1048:
990:Sunday March 22
939:
938:
920:
916:
889:
885:
848:
831:
801:
796:
789:
753:
743:
723:
710:
574:
560:
541:
539:Ten Pound Hammer
487:
485:Let's discuss it
458:Inspector Cramer
442:
353:
348:
341:
273:
230:
189:More information
168:More information
161:– 10 AM to 4 PM
147:More information
126:More information
104:More information
83:More information
76:– 10 AM to 4 PM
33:
32:
26:
1629:
1628:
1624:
1623:
1622:
1620:
1619:
1618:
1585:
1526:Martin Petzoldt
1507:14 January 2015
1505:
1499:
1496:
1398:
1373:
1337:
1326:
1298:
1290:
1282:
1195:
1171:
1118:
1099:
1073:
1069:
1066:
1060:
1029:
1015:Barnard College
967:Barnard College
937:
918:
887:
879:
846:
799:
792:
787:
751:
717:
708:
568:
558:
553:
537:
518:WP:NOTINHERITED
502:
483:
436:
380:
351:
344:
339:
330:
291:
289:Just a heads up
227:
215:
119:– 9 AM to 4 PM
97:– 7 PM to 9 PM
95:March WikiSalon
62:
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
1627:
1625:
1584:
1581:
1580:
1579:
1578:
1577:
1560:
1559:
1495:
1492:
1491:
1490:
1489:
1488:
1470:
1469:
1468:
1467:
1434:
1433:
1432:
1431:
1430:
1429:
1396:
1325:
1322:
1321:
1320:
1281:
1278:
1277:
1276:
1275:
1274:
1257:
1256:
1240:
1239:
1234:
1233:
1213:
1212:
1204:
1203:
1170:
1167:
1166:
1165:
1117:
1114:
1098:
1095:
1094:
1093:
1067:
1059:
1056:
1044:
1043:
1025:
1022:
1021:
1020:
1019:
1007:
1006:
947:
946:
936:
930:
929:
928:
927:
926:
878:
875:
874:
873:
872:
871:
870:
869:
868:
867:
821:
820:
819:
807:
741:
740:
739:
738:
737:
736:
691:
690:
689:
688:
687:
635:
634:
613:
612:
607:
606:
598:
589:
588:
552:
547:
501:
498:
497:
496:
495:
494:
493:
492:
435:
432:
431:
430:
379:
376:
375:
374:
329:
326:
325:
324:
299:Knowledgekid87
290:
287:
286:
285:
284:
283:
282:
281:
226:
223:
207:
198:
197:
196:
195:
193:RSVP on Meetup
186:
176:
175:
174:
172:RSVP on Meetup
165:
155:
154:
153:
151:RSVP on Meetup
144:
134:
133:
132:
130:RSVP on Meetup
123:
113:
112:
111:
108:RSVP on Meetup
101:
91:
90:
89:
87:RSVP on Meetup
80:
61:
58:
56:
52:
51:
34:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1626:
1617:
1616:
1612:
1610:ping in reply
1606:
1602:
1598:
1597:
1592:
1591:
1582:
1576:
1572:
1568:
1564:
1563:
1562:
1561:
1558:
1554:
1550:
1546:
1545:
1544:
1543:
1539:
1535:
1531:
1527:
1522:
1521:
1517:
1513:
1508:
1502:
1493:
1487:
1483:
1479:
1474:
1473:
1472:
1471:
1464:
1463:
1462:
1458:
1454:
1450:
1449:
1448:
1447:
1443:
1439:
1427:
1423:
1419:
1413:
1409:
1402:
1397:
1395:
1391:
1387:
1382:
1381:
1380:
1376:
1370:
1365:
1361:
1360:
1359:
1355:
1351:
1347:
1346:
1345:
1344:
1340:
1334:
1330:
1323:
1319:
1315:
1311:
1307:
1306:
1305:
1304:
1301:
1295:
1293:
1287:
1279:
1273:
1269:
1265:
1261:
1260:
1259:
1258:
1255:
1251:
1247:
1242:
1241:
1236:
1235:
1230:
1226:
1224:
1219:
1215:
1214:
1210:
1206:
1205:
1199:
1194:
1193:
1192:
1191:
1187:
1183:
1178:
1174:
1164:
1160:
1156:
1152:
1151:
1150:
1149:
1145:
1141:
1137:
1132:
1131:
1127:
1123:
1116:tasting blood
1115:
1113:
1112:
1108:
1104:
1096:
1092:
1088:
1084:
1080:
1079:
1078:
1077:
1072:
1065:
1057:
1055:
1052:
1042:
1041:
1037:
1033:
1028:
1018:
1016:
1011:
1010:
1009:
1008:
1004:
1002:
998:
994:
989:
988:
987:
985:
980:
978:
974:
973:
968:
960:
953:
949:
948:
945:
940:
935:
931:
925:
921:
915:
911:
910:
909:
905:
901:
897:
896:
895:
894:
890:
884:
877:My activities
876:
866:
862:
858:
854:
853:
852:
849:
842:
841:
840:
839:
838:
834:
829:
826:
822:
818:
815:
812:
808:
806:
803:
802:
797:
795:
790:
783:
782:
781:
777:
773:
769:
765:
761:
760:
759:
757:
754:
748:
735:
731:
727:
721:
716:
715:
714:
711:
705:
701:
697:
692:
686:
682:
681:
678:
673:
670:
666:
662:
661:
656:
655:
654:
653:
652:
651:
650:
646:
642:
637:
636:
632:
628:
624:
620:
615:
614:
609:
608:
604:
599:
596:
591:
590:
586:
582:
581:Go Phightins!
578:
572:
567:
566:
565:
564:
561:
551:
548:
546:
545:
540:
535:
532:
528:
527:
523:
519:
515:
511:
507:
499:
491:
488:
486:
481:
480:
475:
474:
473:
472:
471:
467:
463:
459:
455:
452:
451:
450:
449:
445:
440:
438:This unblock
433:
429:
425:
421:
417:
413:
409:
405:
401:
397:
396:
395:
394:
390:
386:
377:
373:
369:
365:
361:
360:
359:
358:
355:
354:
349:
347:
342:
335:
327:
323:
319:
315:
311:
310:
309:
308:
304:
300:
296:
288:
280:
276:
270:
269:
268:
264:
260:
255:
254:
253:
249:
245:
240:
239:
238:
237:
233:
224:
222:
220:
214:
213:
209:
205:
203:
194:
190:
187:
184:
183:
181:
177:
173:
169:
166:
163:
162:
160:
156:
152:
148:
145:
142:
141:
139:
135:
131:
127:
124:
121:
120:
118:
114:
109:
105:
102:
99:
98:
96:
92:
88:
84:
81:
78:
77:
75:
71:
70:
69:
66:
57:
49:
45:
41:
40:
35:
28:
27:
19:
1594:
1590:Infoboxes II
1589:
1586:
1567:Gerda Arendt
1534:Gerda Arendt
1530:Maria Radner
1523:
1512:Gerda Arendt
1497:
1435:
1327:
1291:
1283:
1264:Ghost Lourde
1228:
1222:
1198:Ghost Lourde
1182:Ghost Lourde
1179:
1175:
1172:
1133:
1119:
1100:
1061:
1047:
1023:
1012:
997:RSVP on-wiki
991:
984:Free Culture
981:
977:unconference
970:
964:
880:
793:
785:
742:
703:
675:
658:
630:
626:
622:
618:
594:
554:
538:
530:
525:
524:
521:
513:
503:
484:
478:
437:
400:Piltdown Man
381:
345:
337:
331:
292:
228:
216:
210:
206:
199:
179:
158:
137:
116:
94:
73:
67:
64:
55:
43:
37:
1549:Newyorkbrad
1501:25 May 2006
1494:History DYK
1478:Ncmvocalist
1453:Newyorkbrad
1438:Ncmvocalist
1418:Ncmvocalist
1408:Ncmvocalist
1386:Newyorkbrad
1350:Newyorkbrad
1310:Newyorkbrad
1292:HJ Mitchell
1284:Please see
1246:Newyorkbrad
1155:Newyorkbrad
1103:Newyorkbrad
1083:Newyorkbrad
900:Newyorkbrad
857:Newyorkbrad
772:Newyorkbrad
768:Thatcher131
726:Newyorkbrad
641:Newyorkbrad
462:Newyorkbrad
460:. Regards,
420:Newyorkbrad
418:. Regards,
364:Newyorkbrad
362:Thank you.
314:Newyorkbrad
259:Newyorkbrad
244:John Carter
202:let me know
36:This is an
1363:continued.
847:iridescent
752:iridescent
720:Iridescent
709:iridescent
669:Dear ODear
577:looks like
571:Iridescent
559:iridescent
534:WP:NALBUMS
529:me how it
510:WP:NALBUMS
506:WP:NALBUMS
212:James Hare
1401:Dreadstar
1369:Dreadstar
1333:Dreadstar
1232:requests.
1229:GamerGate
1223:GamerGate
1051:this list
914:Dreadstar
883:Dreadstar
825:Dr. Seuss
811:Mackensen
794:Phightins
764:Mackensen
631:Noleander
619:Noleander
585:Bradspeak
346:Phightins
219:this list
1532:. RIP --
1286:WP:A/R/C
595:gravitas
579:we have
208:Thanks,
140:– 12 PM
1329:You win
1140:Collect
1122:Collect
704:defense
434:Unblock
182:– 6 PM
65:Hello,
39:archive
1504:until
1032:Pharos
833:NE Ent
814:(talk)
531:passes
479:Cullen
444:NE Ent
275:NE Ent
232:NE Ent
225:Coffee
1070:Bacon
672:ODear
627:could
512:even
16:<
1596:L235
1571:talk
1553:talk
1538:talk
1516:talk
1510:? --
1482:talk
1457:talk
1442:talk
1422:talk
1412:talk
1390:talk
1354:talk
1324:Fine
1314:talk
1268:talk
1250:talk
1186:talk
1159:talk
1144:talk
1126:talk
1107:talk
1097:Note
1087:talk
1036:talk
969:for
904:talk
861:talk
776:talk
766:and
730:talk
698:and
665:LLAP
645:talk
603:here
526:show
514:says
466:talk
424:talk
416:here
389:talk
368:talk
334:here
318:talk
303:talk
263:talk
248:talk
999:or
677:is
667:,
575:It
542:•
522:you
410:or
406:or
402:or
1613:)
1607:/
1603:/
1573:)
1555:)
1540:)
1518:)
1484:)
1459:)
1444:)
1424:)
1392:)
1356:)
1331:.
1316:)
1296:|
1288:.
1270:)
1252:)
1211:).
1188:)
1161:)
1146:)
1128:)
1109:)
1089:)
1053:.)
1038:)
906:)
863:)
830:?
788:Go
778:)
732:)
683:)
647:)
468:)
456:—
426:)
391:)
370:)
340:Go
320:)
305:)
265:)
250:)
204:.
191:•
170:•
149:•
128:•
106:•
85:•
1605:c
1601:t
1599:(
1569:(
1551:(
1536:(
1514:(
1480:(
1455:(
1440:(
1420:(
1410:(
1403::
1399:@
1388:(
1374:☥
1352:(
1338:☥
1312:(
1266:(
1248:(
1200::
1196:@
1184:(
1157:(
1142:(
1124:(
1105:(
1085:(
1034:(
1005:.
1003:)
995:(
919:☥
902:(
888:☥
859:(
800:!
774:(
728:(
722::
718:@
680:a
674:(
643:(
573::
569:@
464:(
422:(
387:(
366:(
352:!
316:(
301:(
261:(
246:(
50:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.