User talk:Pedro/Archive 15 - Knowledge (XXG)

2070:. Throughout 2006 I spent dozens of hours working on that article. My references to the DoD assertions that it was an organization with ties to al Qaida were the very first references that article had. Those references, that material, was routinely removed, either without any explanation, or with the explanation that the DoD assertions were false, weak, based on denunciations coerced through torture. Most of those dozens of hours I spent were consumed in trying to explain to the admirers of the Tabligh movement that the core policy of 2499:

letter of policies. This is my view, and not a Knowledge (XXG) view of course. Admins must exercise judgment and I perhaps need to soften mine and be more lenient. I guess repeated CSD actions (I have some 1,000 deletions) tend to make one a bit jaded. This is clearly a bad thing. I hope that the editor will recreate the article back to the main space, and I will endeavour to learn from your well reasoned comments and propositions.

444: 1049: 1454: 2529:, which was currently standing at 11 supports, 22 opposes and 6 neutrals. This count could have been so much better if I had understood policy, although I believe that 17 questions is a lot to ask of a user's first RfA. I will take on all comments given at the RfA and will endeavour to meet the high expectations of the RfA voters. 952:

mean? The fact that I've used the Rollback (good faith)? Is that a problem, and something that is frowned upon? If so, please let me know so I can stop doing so. I just use the assume good faith option to rollback stuff I'm not certain is intentional vandalism, but is clearly inappropriate (in my opinion) content anyway.

294:

need, to meaningfully modify it in response to that discussion. If you read the explanation below and still feel that the article should be modified before being recreated, please let me know what changes you feel should be made. I would be glad to try to make those changes or at least give them every consideration.

2560: 1389: 888: 2827:

pertinent in casting their vote. I still feel as though I'd be an asset (rather than a hindrance) to the team, but I wouldn't ever believe your comments were made in bad faith. I'm not sure if you went beyond my talk page for your analysis, but perhaps if you did, you wouldn't feel so ambivalent. Regards!

2708:

Thank you for clearing that up. Although, candidates are allowed to have holes in their experience, especially if they don't intend to work in that area. For example, you have little article writing or XfD experience, but that didn't harm your RfA. I know the Twibe RfA is an issue, but I believe that

2498:

policies. To this end I will be looking at performing less CSD actions in the future and focusing my time elsewhere. With regards to the specific article, I guess this is where our views differ. IMHO articles should at least merit a stub status prior to inclusion - i.e. they fulfil the spirit not the

1867:

I understand that you are just a volunteer, working on the wikipedia in your spare time. I understand that leaving a substantive note for Dusoft may have consumed more time than you were willing to budget for this article. Personally, I would strongly prefer quality-control volunteers only act on a

510:

I would be very honored if you could adopt me or if you could give me a few pointers about Knowledge (XXG). I will be sure to ask Jayron32 the same thing. If you speak Spanish, I think you'll understand that "a conocerte fue un placer, y espero que podamos hablarnos en el fúturo". But I don't know if

293:

for the reason that it was recreated, without substantial changes, after being deleted through discussion. Here is why I recreated the article without substantial changes: It was deleted as original research, but as I explain below, it doesn't contain original research. So I don't see any way, or any

2331:

liscenses on images they didn't own to get around the policy change. Well, obviously they shouldn't be doing that. They should have done what I did, and looked for free replacement images. But he wasn't fully complying with policy either. He acknowledged this. But he claimed that if he took the

180:

A little late... but I saw your name go by this morning and thought, "Gee, haven't wished him the best of the season!". I thought you might be interested to know that I've taken the only "oppose" comment at my AfD to heart and have been working on articles rather than/as well as wielding the mop --

2870:

Hi Pedro, I'm very new to this world of Wiki and need assistance with a disambiguation situation. There is a rock group (Treepeople) that has the same name as a nonprofit that I created an entry for (TreePeople). How to I indicate on the rock group's page that the nonprofit also exists? I read your

2842:

Let me put it this way - you're an asset without the admin bit and I strongly believe in the future you will be an asset with the admin bit. I'd just like to see 10/12 weeks of ironing out some minor issues. I agree 99% of what you do is great, but sadly RfA's allways fail on the 1% (or less!) that

2309:

This policy change came as an unpleasant surprise. I had uploaded a dozen or more images of Canadian Coast Guard vessels. But, it is important to comply with policy, so I spent a day looking for images of Canadian vessels that had been taken by employees of the US Federal government, because they

1889:

Yes, userifying the article is better than just blowing Dusoft off, or telling him to take it to deletion review. But, IMO, it would have been better to not delete the article in the first place. My understanding of what you have written, so far, is that you are not disputing whether the topic of

482:

I withdrew my request for adminship. Now is not the time for that. Although I love editing Knowledge (XXG), I don't know exactly what I would do with the tools, and what I would do. I think I'll keep editing Knowledge (XXG), and maybe six months or a year from now, I can go at it again. I apologize

419:

Thank you for your interest in my edits. Unfortunately the material you've reinserted reads more like an editorial than an encyclopedia entry. I have been working on a more neutral version that I've previously not inserted as citations aren't compelete. However, I now intend to insert it in its

2826:

Hi Pedro. I want you to know that I'm not holding a grudge or thinking ill of you at all regarding your oppose position, and, possibly, the flurry of opposition and neutral stances it may have "caused". The truth of the matter is that you brought certain things to light that other users felt were

2493:

Hi Geo Swan, and than your for your time in your expansive response. I think the issue here is perhaps getting out of proportion. I appreciate you are a more than seasoned Knowledge (XXG) editor, and your keen knowledge of policy is a testament to this. On balance perhaps I need to refresh myself

2375:

That patroller who was breaching policy in his attempts to get the non-complying images deleted was setting a bad example. Those image uploaders who were relative newbies aren't going to be taught to comply with the wikipedia's policies if those enforcing the policies weren't complying with them

2095:

By late December of 2006 my patience with the admirers of the Tablighi movement, who were removing referenced material, that was written from a neutral point of view, based on their personal interpretation that it wasn't true was exhausted. I had suggested starting an article just to discuss the

951:

I saw you left this comment for me: "I am slightly nervous that this user has used Twinkle fairly regularly for (admitedly minor) content reversion, rather than directly editing the page." If that is a reason not to give me rollback, then cool, no problems whatsoever. but can you explain what you

577: 2393:

No, I am not saying you uttered a variation of this justification. But I am concerned that what you have written comes close to this justification. It is my opinion the nominator's efforts fell short. And, sorry, I don't mean to be rude, but you seem to be arguing that you did everything that

1740:

due to a total lack of assertion of notability. I userfied the article pending assertion of that notability. The editor had time enough to add citation. However he did not add notability - and 20 minutes is more than sufficent IMHO to add notability rather than references. Userfying was the best

2798:

Hiya. A good idea. My only reservation is that banners using the "usermessage" class of div as it confuses people into thinking they do have a message! An interesting one for you - I protected a page the other day and just couldn't get it to work right - I kept on getting the end date wrong and

1629:

Sorry about the rather vague edit summary. I was trying to fix the support section for the RFA report, but it didn't seem to work, but it doesn't matter anyway because I've gone neutral. I was sure that I had opted out of automatic edit signing.... - Apologies for any inconvenience. Regards,

297:

The reason given for the original deletion — which resulted from discussion of a different article — was original research. However, the entire article was taken from the sources cited. I reviewed it again just now and can't find any "unpublished facts, arguments, speculation, and ideas";

1516:

would have been so effective? 32 emails in one week! (Even if it does classify some as junk :P) I'm glad that I've been appointed after a nail biting and some might call, decision changing RFA, but if you ever need anything, just get in touch. The very best of luck for 2008 and beyond,

2723:

I think that this is more the issue - you nominate based on one thing and then the candidate announces they want to work elsewhere with no experience at all!! Frustrating! As you say, I had very little article writing experience at my RfA so If I'd gone in with "I want to work at

1999:

So, I am sorry, but I continue to hold the opinion you are mistaken to think you should be deciding whether articles should be deleted based on their contents at the time of their nomination. I continue to hold the opinion that your decision should have been based on whether

1964:

used to be much clearer on this. It used to have a table that very clearly spelled out how to react to problems in articles for which deletion should not be considered an option. It used to spell out, more clearly, that everyone -- nominators, those voicing an opinion in the

1890:

this band was notable. Dusoft thought he had satisfied the notability requirement, by supplying more references. I am completely confident he made that comment in good faith. I strongly believe he deserved to have someone politely explain that the article did not yet comply.

2226:

So, why didn't I just initiate a deletion review. Well, I did that. It should have been clear cut. But it was a very aggravating drain on my time. It was a very unpleasant surprise to learn that after the deletion review I had to face the very unpleasant time drain of an

2771:, and it looks like the new message bar, but it includes the current date and time. How do you like it? And, if you'd like to reword it to make it more British (I'm not familiar with the British "language", so to speak, because I'm American), then feel free to. — 2078:. Frankly, I too was skeptical as to the credibility of the DoD allegations. But they were highly verifiable, and, IMO, they were highly noteworthy, because a significant fraction of the Guantanamo captives were being held due to an association with this group. 2357:

This is a justification I have heard variations of dozens of times since then. It is a justification I had differed with, in all its variations. IMO it is absolutely essential that everyone who is trying to enforce policy fully comply with policy in their

537:

Haha! Americans are probably the worst when it comes to foreign languages, not the Britons! I don't mind a communication delay for the most part. You're very kind. Thank you. I'm currently making a special Barnstar for you in Power Point, so stay tuned! —

355:

Thank you for being so helpful and agreeable. Knowledge (XXG) needs more level-headed administrators like you. Yes, I've reviewed the sources carefully to be sure that they actually support the article. Best wishes to you too and have a great day!

2320:

and other valid-looking liscenses. He wasn't explaining why he was changing the liscenses, on the talk page. And he wasn't informing the uploaders. I asked him to explain what he was doing. He said he was sure the uploaders were putting bogus

2291:

liscense were allowed. In the winter of 2005 there was a policy change announcing that uploading new images with a noncommercial liscense would no longer be allowed, and that volunteers would start pruning the existing images with noncommercial

2411:

Personally, I would far rather have quality control patrollers who fully complied with policy themselves, at the cost of cruft sticking around a bit longer, than have "efficient" patrollers who set a bad example by skipping full compliance with

754:

that is unfavorable to Maddox, the result does not read as an article, but a set of bullet points which do not even form grammatical sentences. Further, it is hard not to suspect that this "bullet point" style has been chosen specifically to

1096:

You beat me to removing that symbol you added, which I was going to do because of the transclusion on a couple others' pages. I thought about adding that "talk" symbol but than it looked kind of weird with the "no" symbol on top of that...

2709:

either he meant he would work at AfD only once he was ready, or that he only made the comment to make himself seem more rounded. I nominated him as a potential vandal-fighting admin; I didn't expect him to say he would get involved in AfD.

1328:

Keith, I've commented on the talk page. I'm really busy today and just quickly popped on to do a couple of things, so I'm really sorry I can't help further at the moment. I'll check back on it though. Sorry again not to be more helpfull.

336:

I did find some unsourced statements in the article, so I sourced them before returning the article to Knowledge (XXG). I think every idea in the article is now referenced. Just let me know if you still think that changes should be made.

2055:

back in late 2005 or early 2006. I had never heard about it, and had no idea why counter-terrorism analysts asserted an alleged association between an individual and the Tabligh movement was grounds for detention in Guantanamo. The

2871:

entry at the Help Desk as well as the disambiguation page but I'm starting to slip down the rabbit hole and sense this simple action is going to take me a long time to figure out. THANKS SO MUCH for any assistance you can offer!

1112:....But if you could make that a bit smaller without making it hard to read, I can replace the image I have. I just tried using it at about 60px and the writing was too small to read, but I didn't want the image too huge.... - 2004:

merited coverage. I continue to hold the opinion that all your decisions on deletion, whether as a nominator, discussion participant, or closing admin, should be based on the topic of the article, not the current state of the

1290:

and myself. As this does not appear to be the correct way of handling the different entities involved. The discussion took place before Christmas and then all of a sudden yesterday the page was unilaterally moved. Since which

984:

Hi. I see that my Rollback permission request was deleted, following a note from you of "Malformed Request." It said "reason below", but I couldn't find it. I'm not sure what the situation is. Could you explain? Thanks.

2433:

Now, maybe I am wrong, but I am concerned over your interpretation of policy -- that we are supposed to base our conclusions on whether articles merit deletion on the articles' current state, not on the importance of the

762:

Maddox used for arguing his cases and his causes; since that is undeniably part of a complete picture of the man, I do not think that this is a very good change. Would you please take a look and see what you think? --

456:, which closed successfully with 47 supports, 3 opposes, and 0 neutrals. I am glad that the community thinks it can trust me with these tools; I will try and use my new mop and bucket (or vacuum cleaner!) carefully. 1410:. Thank you for your comments! Whether it was a support, oppose, or neutral, I likely got some good feedback from you. I will probably do another RfA in the future, but not until I work out the issues brought up. 123:

Our edits have probably crossed each other, but I just wanted to remind you that normally we can't G12 articles when there's an assertion of copyright :) We need to blank and wait the mandatory 7 days. Cheers! --

2526: 310:

Smith says that Jones committed plagiarism by copying references from another book. Jones denies this, and says it's acceptable scholarly practice to use other people's books to find new references.

188:

You know, I kind of depend on you to tell me when I'm ready for things -- am I ready to "pay it forward" and adopt a wannabe-administrator? I'm starting to think it's time I made you proud.

1504:

who all offered to do co-nominations, but I unfortunately had to decline. I had all these funny ideas that it would fail again, and I was prepared for the worst, but at least it showed that

2799:

didn't know why - then I remembered to type it in American fashion and it worked! He! So you're totally right that we need to remember the difference between Brit and US day/month format!

1259:

Hi, dropping by for that help that you said was available. I have to declare an interest so stepping aside a bit I wondered if you would take a look at a move that took place yesterday.

971:

user to me doesnt meet the requirement of need, looking through the contribs I see lots of AWB edits adding and removing space I dont see any vandalism reverts and was about to decline.

1190:, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Knowledge (XXG). 746:

today, apparently because there is something "outdated" about the template used to protect it, not because the issues which called for the protection of the article had been resolved.

782:

of the article without need to reprotect it. If you feel the changes done are detrimental feel free to ammend them again, but please can consensus be achieved via talk first. Thanks.

1809:

No. I deleted because the article failed to assert notability. Please remember that whilst discussion is great, an admin, at the end of the day, makes the decision based on the text

2209:

tag. I know 38 minutes is not long enough. So I know 20 minutes is not sufficient. And as I pointed out before, you really only allowed a dozen minutes from Dusoft's last note.

158:

I hope you don't mind, but I reduce this guy's block to two days. A few people at AN/I (well, you started the thread) apparently wanted that; he requested unblock because he was "

915:. Thank you for your support and all the kind words that were expressed. I will try to live up to the trust placed in me by the community. I now have my homework to do and then 321:

There is also some background, but this is taken from the sources as well. Again, just let me know if you still feel that changes are needed. Thank you for your consideration.

1911:. IIUC that the sources are in Slovakian, not English, makes them less favored than sources in English, but does not disqualify them for being regarded as reliable sources. 371: 2566: 1721:

Your deletion was less than twenty minutes after the newbie showed they needed help -- help which the nominator didn't seem to think they had any obligation to supply.

1538: 1791:

he had supplied information to demonstrate the band's notability. You concluded the deletion because the details he supplied missed explicitly stating that key word

627:...for the heads up on the BRC MfD. It's surprising that no one bothered to post a note on my talk page before you. I appreciate it. Thanks also for the support. 894: 72:

Majorly and I don't always see eye to eye, but I like him a lot and occasionally you've got to have a bit of fun round here! As for the <insert word here: -->

298:"unpublished analysis or synthesis of published material that serves to advance a position"; or "opinions, experiences, or arguments" not found in the sources ( 27: 2264:

could have been avoided if the nominator and concluding administrator had each spent a fraction of a minute thinking about complying more fully with policy.

1461: 1395: 1064: 453: 2761:

Hi again, Pedro! I remembered that you're British, and I was wondering if you would like a template I made that you can put in your userspace. It's called

405:

asserting there was permission from the copyright holder. I'd just removed the speedy tag after seeing this in the deletion log when I went to delete it. —

814: 258:

I'll try my very hardest... I'm only a timid person in real life though, you might frighten me! :D Seriously though, it would be nice to meet eventually.

1623: 778:

The protection ended as I had preset it to expire on the 6th, and the bot just removed the template. I am hoping that this can be sorted out on the

2199:

tag before an overly hasty administrator deleted the article. This overly hasty administrator's deletion was 38 minutes after my placement of the

208:

Hi there, I noticed you expressed interest in the Birmingham meetup last October. Just letting you know, another UK meetup is in planning stages,

374:; if you have any further comments, that may be the best place to make them. Thanks for your efforts in this situation, they are appreciated. 1194: 290: 2310:

would be under PD liscenses. I noticed the efforts of these volunteers doing the pruning. I found one guy who was changing liscenses, from

2281:

There is a phenomenon I first became aware of two years ago. Prior to the winter of 2005 images that were from a site that had some kind of

2097: 2048: 1183: 676:

So when are you joining? :P SonOfPedro is a valued member, of course, but we can always use more admins taking pictures in bathrobes! Haha.

747: 421: 764: 592: 1817:

I'm sorry you feel that way and hope that by restoring the article to user space pending improvement I have not lost a "newbie". Best.

2872: 2621: 1431: 3006: 2976: 2787: 832:

Cheers buddy. I saw the old ANI discussion about my original block, and I know some felt that it was a bit faithless. But sometimes

554: 527: 499: 1179: 2189:

You suggested 20 minutes was plenty of time for a contributor to assert notability? I hadn't finished my justification of my

1672:

you were just plain wrong deleting it as I have cited few local newspapers that should satisfy any request for reliability. --

2540: 1078: 2100:. I knew it would take me hours. I expected it to take about ten minutes per reference, and I had three dozen references. 2455:, but on the article's current state, I would appreciate you citing the clauses of policy on which you base this opinion. 2451:

If you remain convinced that policy supports your interpretation, that conclusions about deletion should not be based on

1505: 2531: 2125:, which warns nominators not to tag articles within minutes of creation because the author might still be working on it. 1636: 1523: 1003:

Ah. Thanks very much. Can you tell me what was malformed about my request so I don't repeat the error? Thanks again.

103: 61: 2096:

allegations. They had objected. But the material kept being deleted, so I assembled my notes, and started working on

837: 2990:: Sorry, I accidentally put this message on your user page. It's not vandalism, but I reverted it, so I apologize. — 1541:

was successful at 64/1/2! Many thanks for your participation and I will endeavor to meet your expectations. Cheers,

760: 314:

Knowledge (XXG)'s original research policy presents the passage above specifically as an example of "good editing" (

2765: 380: 194: 1908: 1202: 779: 2586: 2022:

This particularly concerns me because I think we are agreed that the effort necessary to satisfy the clause of

1497: 1187: 1175: 425: 2352:"My efforts to enforce the wikipedia's policy would be less effective if I fully complied with policy myself." 1975:, and closing admins, were supposed to form their opinion on whether the article should be deleted on whether 1485: 768: 635: 2998: 2968: 2779: 2023: 546: 519: 491: 2876: 2626: 2285: 1741:

option to keep the editor happy and potentialy get the arrticle into the mainspace without future issues.

595:

was exactly how RfAs similar to that should be handled: with civility, encouragement, and respect for the

2119:

only to have it tagged for speedy deletion by an over-hasty new page patroller one minute after creation.

691:

Ha! With my new Knowledge (XXG) mug and T-shirt as well - just need Wife Of Pedro to take the snap shot!

209: 1696: 375: 189: 2910: 2888: 2725: 2060:

article was then very weak. It was totally unreferenced, and subject to revision wars and contentious

483:

for whatever I may have done in the past, but I strongly believe that I am a useful contributor now. —

2991: 2961: 2843:

isn't. I really admire the way you've approached this though, and how calm and accepting you've been.

2772: 539: 512: 484: 98: 56: 33:

Thankyou for doing that for me. I figure it's better to be safe than sorry for such things! Cheers,

1198: 1008: 990: 933: 899: 743: 731: 717: 681: 1477: 1178:. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Knowledge (XXG) uses a set of 576: 2828: 2582: 1942:"If the page can be improved, this should be solved through regular editing, rather than deletion." 975: 406: 162:", but I didn't unblock him completely because of the things he did. Again, hope you don't mind. 149: 38: 2681: 2660: 2954: 2832: 2604: 2477: 1813:. I suggest you re-read the deleted version and notability guidelines. As for your accusation of 1800: 1726: 1631: 1543: 1518: 1427: 1267: 1072: 641: 464: 459:

I would like to personally thank you (again) for nominating me, I hope I meet your expectations.

302:). Instead, the article presents ideas taken from different sources as in the example found at ( 2909:

This page is about the not for profit group. For information on the band of the same name, see

2903:{{about|the not for profit group|information on the band of the same name|Treepeople (band)}} 2714: 2698: 2616: 1715: 1611: 1493: 1492:

all inspired me to run for a second candidacy. I would also like to make a special mention to

1367: 1318: 1221: 1155: 1117: 1102: 662: 361: 342: 326: 268: 222: 212:. We need input on where and when we will meet so comments would be much appreciated. Thanks. 2693:

I'm sorry you feel this way, but all I can do is assure you that this is a misunderstanding.

1814: 2064: 1771: 1692: 1677: 1501: 1030: 810: 2413: 2122: 2071: 1961: 1936: 1869: 1737: 1355: 1307: 945: 833: 596: 315: 303: 299: 64: 3025: 2941: 2852: 2808: 2741: 2646: 2508: 2203: 2193: 2166: 2146: 2057: 2052: 1826: 1750: 1654: 1598: 1338: 1283: 1239: 1148:

I uploaded a smaller version over yours. Looks good. Feel free to revert if you want to.

1135: 1004: 986: 954: 929: 866: 849: 822: 791: 739: 713: 700: 677: 246: 117: 85: 17: 1359: 1303: 1299: 1182:

to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from

2162:, left a note on the nominator's talk page, and started drafting my explanation for the 2728:" I'd have been in trouble and rightly so. I did however have substantial and accurate 972: 968: 613: 600: 34: 2892: 1358:

just before going to bed then had second thoughts this morning. Looks like take it to

712:

Don't forget the thumbs up! :P So I'll be expecting that on my desk shortly, shall I?

2668: 2473: 2314: 1796: 1722: 1418: 1271: 1263: 1193:

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on

1068: 629: 460: 137: 125: 2710: 2694: 2612: 2332:

time to fully comply it would make his vandal fighting efforts much less effective.

2325: 2258: 2231: 1969: 1562: 1363: 1314: 1217: 1151: 1113: 1098: 658: 443: 357: 338: 322: 260: 214: 182: 49: 1126:

I'll give it a go over the weekend if I have five mins. No worries. Cheers buddy.

1718:

and the person who nominated it for deletion, would you still have deleted it?

3032: 3011: 2981: 2948: 2880: 2859: 2836: 2815: 2792: 2748: 2718: 2702: 2683: 2653: 2631: 2608: 2590: 2545: 2515: 2481: 2156: 1868:

quality control concern when they have time to do so while fully complying with

1833: 1804: 1757: 1730: 1700: 1681: 1673: 1661: 1639: 1614: 1605: 1583: 1551: 1526: 1481: 1442: 1438: 1371: 1345: 1322: 1246: 1225: 1206: 1159: 1142: 1121: 1106: 1083: 1048: 1034: 1026: 1012: 994: 978: 958: 937: 870: 856: 826: 798: 772: 721: 707: 685: 666: 647: 616: 603: 559: 532: 504: 468: 429: 409: 384: 365: 346: 330: 273: 253: 227: 198: 170: 142: 130: 106: 92: 42: 2932:

Obviously the links will go blue when you create the article. Hope that helps.

420:

present form since my deletions keep getting reverted. Your input is welcome.

3019: 2935: 2926: 2896: 2846: 2802: 2735: 2640: 2502: 1820: 1774:. No offense, but I think you have forgotten what it was like to be a newbie. 1744: 1648: 1592: 1489: 1332: 1292: 1279: 1233: 1129: 862: 843: 818: 785: 750:

has rewritten the article entirely in his own style; while he has not removed

694: 402: 240: 185:

to at least GA status (okay, I'm shooting for FA, but one thing at a time).

164: 79: 926:

I'm particularly grateful for your full analysis of my contributions. Cheers.

2925:

This page is about a band. For information on the not for profit group, see

1287: 2254:

All the waste of time and aggravation arising from the deletion review and

1982:-- not on how well written the article was at the time of its nomination. 1787:, ten or eleven minutes prior to your deletion. It seems to me as if he 1509: 1298:

Do you think that this should be reversed and the user ask to take it to

395: 2121:

IMO, this nomination lapsed from compliance with the recommendations of

370:

This situation has now escalated to the point where I've reported it at

1453: 2559: 1388: 887: 2919:{{about|a band|information on the not for profit group|Treepeople}} 2732:

work, and that was my main area of interest and I said so in my Q1.

2729: 2581:. Thanks for the support and I'll look forward working with you. -- 2495: 1736:

I checked all relevant conversations and found the article failed

1513: 1275: 2394:

could be expected of you, and I think you should have done more.

2030:, a reference to a national tour, top ten hit, positive reviews. 1930:"...at the end of the day, makes the decision based on the text 1589:

Thanks! Wife Of Pedro and I think so too, but we are biased!!!

55::) Like your additions. Very <insert suitable word here: --> 2525:

Hey there, I'm writing to inform you that I have withdrawn my

2899:

article insert the following code (you can cut and paste it):

2026:

clause sounds relatively trivial. Insertion of a the phrase

1452: 1434: 442: 1067:. Take this cookie as a small token of my appreciation.-- 2960:

It's not the colors of the usermessage boxes anymore! —

291:

Interlingua and the characteristica universalis compared

73:

hmmmmmm.... surreal? .....bizarre...? drug induced....?

2118: 1928:

With regard to your understanding that administrators:

1784: 1767: 1711: 1213: 612:

You're welcome: you definitely deserved that award. :)

2098:

Allegations that Tablighi Jamaat has ties to terrorism

2049:

Allegations that Tablighi Jamaat has ties to terrorism

813:, your instincts would seem to be very accurate. See 372:

Knowledge (XXG):Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents

136:

Thanks! That kind of things happened to me too :) --

861:

No problem, a bit of vindication is always nice. :)

599:

candidate, along with good advice. Thank you Pedro.

282:

Redeletion of characteristica-Interlingua comparison

2866:

New to Knowledge (XXG)...could you please assist...

1063:Thank you SO MUCH for your support in my unanimous 593:

Knowledge (XXG):Requests for adminship/Cuyler91093‎

2887:No problems. First you need to create the article 1850:WRT rudeness. It was not my intention to be rude. 1460:Dear Pedro, my sincere thanks for your support in 1909:Knowledge (XXG):Verifiability#Non English sources 233:Promise not to beat me up when we meet? Promise? 511:that's correct, 'cause I'm only in Spanish 3. — 452:Hello, Pedro, thank you for participating in my 28:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/PublicFUSE 2350: 1940: 759:description of the highly controversial tactics 3016:That's a lot nicer. And I'm using it! Thanks! 2916:On the existing article just reverse it e.g. 2895:enough for inclusion). Then at the top of the 815:Category:Knowledge (XXG) sockpuppets of Dan689 1939:says, in the first sentence of this section: 1624:Knowledge (XXG):Requests for adminship/Triwbe 1354:Thanks for the response, I wrote the note on 1170:License tagging for Image:Rollbackimgedit.jpg 8: 1937:Knowledge (XXG):DEL#Alternatives_to_deletion 1302:or should the interested parties just go to 2074:stated that the standard for inclusion was 1306:to get it reversed? I did suggest going to 2554: 1691:A belated thank you for your RFA support! 1476:neutral. I would especially like to thank 1383: 882: 1195:Knowledge (XXG):Media copyright questions 1046: 574: 401:It was not reposted, it was undeleted by 2047:Let me tell you about the deletion of 2891:. (I'm going to assume that they are 2349:IMO this is a false justification -- 1197:. Thank you for your cooperation. -- 7: 1286:on a rename that was objected to by 585:The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar 2569:, which closed unsuccessfully with 2530: 2051:. I came across references to the 181:my New Year's resolution is to get 97:You're better than a thesaurus. :) 2152:on the article when I noticed the 237:Thanks for letting me know matey. 24: 2558: 2117:So, I saved an interim version, 1387: 1047: 886: 809:Regarding your initial block of 657:i won't do it again promise :)-- 575: 1577: 1574: 1571: 1568: 1565: 1462:my second request for adminship 1459: 1150:That one looks better big... - 438: 289:You have redeleted the article 1714:between the person working on 1564: 1542: 840:. Thanks for letting me know. 1: 2535:WEBURIEDOURSECRETSINTHEGARDEN 1512:don't. Who would have though 165: 3033:07:56, 25 January 2008 (UTC) 3012:03:09, 25 January 2008 (UTC) 2982:03:07, 25 January 2008 (UTC) 2949:21:51, 24 January 2008 (UTC) 2881:21:32, 24 January 2008 (UTC) 2860:08:05, 23 January 2008 (UTC) 2837:00:25, 23 January 2008 (UTC) 2816:08:35, 22 January 2008 (UTC) 2793:06:51, 22 January 2008 (UTC) 2749:11:12, 22 January 2008 (UTC) 2719:11:08, 22 January 2008 (UTC) 2703:00:04, 22 January 2008 (UTC) 2684:22:39, 21 January 2008 (UTC) 2654:22:23, 21 January 2008 (UTC) 2632:22:16, 21 January 2008 (UTC) 2591:06:33, 21 January 2008 (UTC) 2564: 2546:21:06, 20 January 2008 (UTC) 2541: 2532: 2516:13:41, 20 January 2008 (UTC) 2482:03:25, 19 January 2008 (UTC) 1834:21:23, 18 January 2008 (UTC) 1805:19:26, 18 January 2008 (UTC) 1758:22:15, 17 January 2008 (UTC) 1731:21:44, 17 January 2008 (UTC) 1701:21:21, 17 January 2008 (UTC) 1682:21:58, 16 January 2008 (UTC) 1662:20:19, 16 January 2008 (UTC) 1640:17:14, 16 January 2008 (UTC) 1615:13:25, 16 January 2008 (UTC) 1606:10:56, 16 January 2008 (UTC) 1584:10:56, 16 January 2008 (UTC) 1552:09:08, 16 January 2008 (UTC) 1544: 1527:16:10, 15 January 2008 (UTC) 1478:my admin coach and nominator 1443:17:10, 12 January 2008 (UTC) 1393: 1372:15:26, 12 January 2008 (UTC) 1346:14:43, 12 January 2008 (UTC) 1323:13:41, 12 January 2008 (UTC) 1247:21:43, 11 January 2008 (UTC) 1226:18:15, 11 January 2008 (UTC) 1207:18:12, 11 January 2008 (UTC) 1160:16:53, 11 January 2008 (UTC) 1143:16:49, 11 January 2008 (UTC) 1122:16:48, 11 January 2008 (UTC) 1107:16:45, 11 January 2008 (UTC) 1084:05:54, 11 January 2008 (UTC) 1035:14:17, 10 January 2008 (UTC) 1013:16:31, 10 January 2008 (UTC) 995:16:26, 10 January 2008 (UTC) 979:13:50, 10 January 2008 (UTC) 959:10:24, 10 January 2008 (UTC) 892: 2172:on the article's talk page. 1508:really does have something 938:15:57, 9 January 2008 (UTC) 871:15:45, 9 January 2008 (UTC) 857:15:26, 9 January 2008 (UTC) 827:14:54, 9 January 2008 (UTC) 799:08:21, 8 January 2008 (UTC) 773:00:11, 8 January 2008 (UTC) 722:00:42, 8 January 2008 (UTC) 708:08:47, 7 January 2008 (UTC) 686:06:17, 7 January 2008 (UTC) 667:04:55, 7 January 2008 (UTC) 648:18:22, 6 January 2008 (UTC) 617:01:01, 6 January 2008 (UTC) 604:00:57, 6 January 2008 (UTC) 560:00:33, 6 January 2008 (UTC) 533:00:26, 6 January 2008 (UTC) 505:00:22, 6 January 2008 (UTC) 469:17:55, 4 January 2008 (UTC) 430:16:10, 4 January 2008 (UTC) 410:15:43, 4 January 2008 (UTC) 385:18:13, 5 January 2008 (UTC) 366:13:44, 5 January 2008 (UTC) 347:04:06, 4 January 2008 (UTC) 331:02:57, 4 January 2008 (UTC) 274:17:15, 3 January 2008 (UTC) 254:16:50, 3 January 2008 (UTC) 228:16:49, 3 January 2008 (UTC) 199:16:12, 3 January 2008 (UTC) 171:00:52, 3 January 2008 (UTC) 143:23:07, 2 January 2008 (UTC) 131:22:09, 2 January 2008 (UTC) 107:16:41, 2 January 2008 (UTC) 93:16:34, 2 January 2008 (UTC) 65:16:31, 2 January 2008 (UTC) 43:13:15, 2 January 2008 (UTC) 3051: 2924: 2908: 2557: 2076:"verifiability, not truth" 1386: 885: 742:removed all protection on 730:Premature unprotection of 1710:If you had been aware of 1310:but probably a bit OTT. 1295:has also voiced concern. 1176:Image:Rollbackimgedit.jpg 1053: 581: 2565:Thank you for voting in 1398:, which I withdrew with 1394:Thank you for voting in 893:Thank you for voting in 48: 2667:We're recruiting. :) · 2611:left but came back and 1645:No probs at all buddy. 1282:which was initiated by 1278:. The discussion is at 1057:Thanks for your support 2955:The Right now template 2354: 1944: 1561:Your baby is so cute! 1457: 836:has to come second to 447: 2527:request for adminship 1783:Note, in particular, 1610::-D have a good one! 1539:request for adminship 1456: 1174:Thanks for uploading 897:, which which passed 817:for a reason why. ;) 454:request for adminship 446: 2599:RE: Who did we lose? 2028:"is notable because" 1180:image copyright tags 744:Alton H. Maddox, Jr. 732:Alton H. Maddox, Jr. 2906:which will produce 1498:Dihyrdogen Monoxide 1488:who in addition to 1464:, which ended with 1216:the tag for you. - 838:WP:BLATANT BAD NEWS 1486:Ryan Postlethwaite 1458: 1268:Leeds city council 917:pass the Marigolds 448: 50:Majorly's userpage 3031: 2947: 2911:Treepeople (band) 2889:TreePeople (Band) 2858: 2814: 2766:Right now English 2747: 2652: 2596: 2595: 2514: 1832: 1756: 1660: 1604: 1423: 1414: 1413: 1344: 1245: 1141: 1089: 1088: 1081: 1075: 923: 922: 855: 797: 706: 609: 608: 591:Your behavior in 475: 474: 467: 383: 252: 197: 91: 3042: 3030: 3028: 3017: 3009: 3003: 2996: 2979: 2973: 2966: 2946: 2944: 2933: 2857: 2855: 2844: 2813: 2811: 2800: 2790: 2784: 2777: 2770: 2764: 2746: 2744: 2733: 2679: 2651: 2649: 2638: 2629: 2624: 2619: 2562: 2555: 2544: 2542: 2538: 2513: 2511: 2500: 2330: 2324: 2319: 2313: 2290: 2284: 2263: 2257: 2236: 2230: 2208: 2202: 2198: 2192: 2171: 2165: 2161: 2155: 2151: 2145: 2069: 2063: 1980:merited coverage 1974: 1968: 1831: 1829: 1818: 1772:User talk:Dusoft 1755: 1753: 1742: 1659: 1657: 1646: 1634: 1603: 1601: 1590: 1580: 1579: 1576: 1573: 1570: 1567: 1550: 1548: 1529: 1521: 1441: 1437: 1424: 1421: 1391: 1384: 1343: 1341: 1330: 1244: 1242: 1231: 1140: 1138: 1127: 1079: 1073: 1051: 1044: 1043: 957: 890: 883: 854: 852: 841: 796: 794: 783: 705: 703: 692: 644: 638: 632: 579: 572: 571: 557: 551: 544: 530: 524: 517: 502: 496: 489: 463: 461:Camaron1 | Chris 439: 379: 376:Accounting4Taste 263: 251: 249: 238: 217: 193: 190:Accounting4Taste 167: 140: 128: 101: 90: 88: 77: 59: 3050: 3049: 3045: 3044: 3043: 3041: 3040: 3039: 3026: 3018: 3007: 2999: 2992: 2977: 2969: 2962: 2958: 2942: 2934: 2930: 2914: 2868: 2853: 2845: 2824: 2809: 2801: 2788: 2780: 2773: 2768: 2762: 2759: 2742: 2734: 2691: 2669: 2665: 2647: 2639: 2627: 2622: 2617: 2601: 2553: 2537: 2523: 2509: 2501: 2328: 2322: 2317: 2311: 2288: 2282: 2261: 2255: 2234: 2228: 2206: 2200: 2196: 2190: 2169: 2163: 2159: 2153: 2149: 2143: 2067: 2061: 2058:Tablighi Jamaat 2053:Jamaat Tablighi 1972: 1966: 1907:I just checked 1827: 1819: 1751: 1743: 1708: 1689: 1670: 1655: 1647: 1632: 1627: 1599: 1591: 1559: 1535: 1530: 1519: 1450: 1430: 1419: 1417: 1382: 1339: 1331: 1257: 1240: 1232: 1199:ImageTaggingBot 1172: 1136: 1128: 1094: 1042: 1025:Much obliged - 1023: 966: 953: 949: 881: 850: 842: 807: 792: 784: 740:User:Maelgwnbot 736: 701: 693: 674: 655: 642: 636: 630: 625: 570: 555: 547: 540: 528: 520: 513: 500: 492: 485: 480: 437: 435:RFA thanks card 417: 399: 284: 261: 247: 239: 215: 206: 178: 176:Happy new year! 153: 138: 126: 121: 118:Livadia (yacht) 99: 86: 78: 57: 53: 31: 22: 21: 20: 18:User talk:Pedro 12: 11: 5: 3048: 3046: 3038: 3037: 3036: 3035: 2957: 2952: 2922:which becomes 2901: 2900: 2867: 2864: 2863: 2862: 2823: 2820: 2819: 2818: 2758: 2755: 2754: 2753: 2752: 2751: 2690: 2687: 2664: 2658: 2657: 2656: 2600: 2597: 2594: 2593: 2583:BritandBeyonce 2563: 2552: 2549: 2533: 2522: 2519: 2491: 2490: 2489: 2488: 2487: 2486: 2485: 2484: 2463: 2462: 2461: 2460: 2459: 2458: 2457: 2456: 2442: 2441: 2440: 2439: 2438: 2437: 2436: 2435: 2424: 2423: 2422: 2421: 2420: 2419: 2418: 2417: 2402: 2401: 2400: 2399: 2398: 2397: 2396: 2395: 2384: 2383: 2382: 2381: 2380: 2379: 2378: 2377: 2366: 2365: 2364: 2363: 2362: 2361: 2360: 2359: 2355: 2340: 2339: 2338: 2337: 2336: 2335: 2334: 2333: 2300: 2299: 2298: 2297: 2296: 2295: 2294: 2293: 2272: 2271: 2270: 2269: 2268: 2267: 2266: 2265: 2245: 2244: 2243: 2242: 2241: 2240: 2239: 2238: 2217: 2216: 2215: 2214: 2213: 2212: 2211: 2210: 2180: 2179: 2178: 2177: 2176: 2175: 2174: 2173: 2133: 2132: 2131: 2130: 2129: 2128: 2127: 2126: 2108: 2107: 2106: 2105: 2104: 2103: 2102: 2101: 2086: 2085: 2084: 2083: 2082: 2081: 2080: 2079: 2038: 2037: 2036: 2035: 2034: 2033: 2032: 2031: 2013: 2012: 2011: 2010: 2009: 2008: 2007: 2006: 1990: 1989: 1988: 1987: 1986: 1985: 1984: 1983: 1952: 1951: 1950: 1949: 1948: 1947: 1946: 1945: 1932:in the article 1919: 1918: 1917: 1916: 1915: 1914: 1913: 1912: 1898: 1897: 1896: 1895: 1894: 1893: 1892: 1891: 1880: 1879: 1878: 1877: 1876: 1875: 1874: 1873: 1858: 1857: 1856: 1855: 1854: 1853: 1852: 1851: 1841: 1840: 1839: 1838: 1837: 1836: 1811:in the article 1778: 1777: 1776: 1775: 1761: 1760: 1707: 1704: 1688: 1685: 1669: 1666: 1665: 1664: 1626: 1621: 1620: 1619: 1618: 1617: 1558: 1555: 1534: 1531: 1451: 1449: 1446: 1416: 1412: 1411: 1392: 1381: 1378: 1377: 1376: 1375: 1374: 1349: 1348: 1274:redirected to 1256: 1253: 1252: 1251: 1250: 1249: 1230:Cheers buddy. 1171: 1168: 1167: 1166: 1165: 1164: 1163: 1162: 1093: 1090: 1087: 1086: 1060: 1059: 1054: 1052: 1041: 1038: 1022: 1019: 1018: 1017: 1016: 1015: 998: 997: 965: 962: 948: 942: 941: 940: 927: 921: 920: 891: 880: 877: 876: 875: 874: 873: 806: 805:Good instincts 803: 802: 801: 748:130.156.31.148 735: 728: 727: 726: 725: 724: 673: 670: 654: 651: 624: 621: 620: 619: 607: 606: 588: 587: 582: 580: 569: 566: 565: 564: 563: 562: 479: 476: 473: 472: 449: 436: 433: 422:130.156.29.112 416: 415:Alton H Maddox 413: 398: 393: 392: 391: 390: 389: 388: 387: 350: 349: 312: 311: 283: 280: 279: 278: 277: 276: 205: 202: 177: 174: 152: 147: 146: 145: 120: 115: 114: 113: 112: 111: 110: 109: 52: 47: 30: 25: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 3047: 3034: 3029: 3023: 3022: 3015: 3014: 3013: 3010: 3008:Соитяівцтіоиѕ 3004: 3002: 2997: 2995: 2989: 2986: 2985: 2984: 2983: 2980: 2978:Соитяівцтіоиѕ 2974: 2972: 2967: 2965: 2956: 2953: 2951: 2950: 2945: 2939: 2938: 2928: 2923: 2920: 2917: 2912: 2907: 2904: 2898: 2894: 2890: 2886: 2885: 2884: 2882: 2878: 2874: 2865: 2861: 2856: 2850: 2849: 2841: 2840: 2839: 2838: 2834: 2830: 2821: 2817: 2812: 2806: 2805: 2797: 2796: 2795: 2794: 2791: 2789:Contributions 2785: 2783: 2778: 2776: 2767: 2756: 2750: 2745: 2739: 2738: 2731: 2727: 2722: 2721: 2720: 2716: 2712: 2707: 2706: 2705: 2704: 2700: 2696: 2688: 2686: 2685: 2682: 2680: 2678: 2675: 2672: 2662: 2659: 2655: 2650: 2644: 2643: 2636: 2635: 2634: 2633: 2630: 2625: 2620: 2614: 2610: 2606: 2598: 2592: 2588: 2584: 2580: 2576: 2572: 2568: 2561: 2556: 2550: 2548: 2547: 2543: 2539: 2536: 2528: 2520: 2518: 2517: 2512: 2506: 2505: 2497: 2483: 2479: 2475: 2471: 2470: 2469: 2468: 2467: 2466: 2465: 2464: 2454: 2450: 2449: 2448: 2447: 2446: 2445: 2444: 2443: 2432: 2431: 2430: 2429: 2428: 2427: 2426: 2425: 2415: 2410: 2409: 2408: 2407: 2406: 2405: 2404: 2403: 2392: 2391: 2390: 2389: 2388: 2387: 2386: 2385: 2374: 2373: 2372: 2371: 2370: 2369: 2368: 2367: 2356: 2353: 2348: 2347: 2346: 2345: 2344: 2343: 2342: 2341: 2327: 2316: 2308: 2307: 2306: 2305: 2304: 2303: 2302: 2301: 2287: 2286:noncommercial 2280: 2279: 2278: 2277: 2276: 2275: 2274: 2273: 2260: 2253: 2252: 2251: 2250: 2249: 2248: 2247: 2246: 2233: 2225: 2224: 2223: 2222: 2221: 2220: 2219: 2218: 2205: 2195: 2188: 2187: 2186: 2185: 2184: 2183: 2182: 2181: 2168: 2158: 2148: 2141: 2140: 2139: 2138: 2137: 2136: 2135: 2134: 2124: 2120: 2116: 2115: 2114: 2113: 2112: 2111: 2110: 2109: 2099: 2094: 2093: 2092: 2091: 2090: 2089: 2088: 2087: 2077: 2073: 2066: 2059: 2054: 2050: 2046: 2045: 2044: 2043: 2042: 2041: 2040: 2039: 2029: 2025: 2024:WP:notability 2021: 2020: 2019: 2018: 2017: 2016: 2015: 2014: 2003: 1998: 1997: 1996: 1995: 1994: 1993: 1992: 1991: 1981: 1979: 1971: 1963: 1960: 1959: 1958: 1957: 1956: 1955: 1954: 1953: 1943: 1938: 1935: 1933: 1927: 1926: 1925: 1924: 1923: 1922: 1921: 1920: 1910: 1906: 1905: 1904: 1903: 1902: 1901: 1900: 1899: 1888: 1887: 1886: 1885: 1884: 1883: 1882: 1881: 1871: 1866: 1865: 1864: 1863: 1862: 1861: 1860: 1859: 1849: 1848: 1847: 1846: 1845: 1844: 1843: 1842: 1835: 1830: 1824: 1823: 1816: 1812: 1808: 1807: 1806: 1802: 1798: 1794: 1790: 1786: 1782: 1781: 1780: 1779: 1773: 1769: 1765: 1764: 1763: 1762: 1759: 1754: 1748: 1747: 1739: 1735: 1734: 1733: 1732: 1728: 1724: 1719: 1717: 1713: 1712:this exchange 1705: 1703: 1702: 1698: 1694: 1686: 1684: 1683: 1679: 1675: 1668:vymucany page 1667: 1663: 1658: 1652: 1651: 1644: 1643: 1642: 1641: 1638: 1635: 1625: 1622: 1616: 1613: 1609: 1608: 1607: 1602: 1596: 1595: 1588: 1587: 1586: 1585: 1582: 1581: 1556: 1554: 1553: 1549: 1547: 1546:Sephiroth BCR 1540: 1532: 1528: 1525: 1522: 1515: 1511: 1507: 1506:the community 1503: 1499: 1495: 1491: 1487: 1483: 1479: 1475: 1472:opposes, and 1471: 1467: 1463: 1455: 1447: 1445: 1444: 1440: 1436: 1433: 1429: 1425: 1409: 1405: 1401: 1397: 1390: 1385: 1379: 1373: 1369: 1365: 1361: 1357: 1353: 1352: 1351: 1350: 1347: 1342: 1336: 1335: 1327: 1326: 1325: 1324: 1320: 1316: 1311: 1309: 1305: 1301: 1296: 1294: 1289: 1285: 1281: 1277: 1273: 1272:City of Leeds 1269: 1266:was moved to 1265: 1264:City of Leeds 1260: 1254: 1248: 1243: 1237: 1236: 1229: 1228: 1227: 1223: 1219: 1215: 1211: 1210: 1209: 1208: 1204: 1200: 1196: 1191: 1189: 1185: 1181: 1177: 1169: 1161: 1157: 1153: 1149: 1146: 1145: 1144: 1139: 1133: 1132: 1125: 1124: 1123: 1119: 1115: 1111: 1110: 1109: 1108: 1104: 1100: 1091: 1085: 1082: 1076: 1070: 1066: 1062: 1061: 1058: 1055: 1050: 1045: 1039: 1037: 1036: 1032: 1028: 1020: 1014: 1010: 1006: 1002: 1001: 1000: 999: 996: 992: 988: 983: 982: 981: 980: 977: 974: 970: 963: 961: 960: 956: 947: 943: 939: 935: 931: 928: 925: 924: 918: 914: 910: 906: 902: 901: 896: 889: 884: 878: 872: 868: 864: 860: 859: 858: 853: 847: 846: 839: 835: 831: 830: 829: 828: 824: 820: 816: 812: 804: 800: 795: 789: 788: 781: 777: 776: 775: 774: 770: 766: 765:209.6.177.176 761: 758: 753: 749: 745: 741: 733: 729: 723: 720: 719: 715: 711: 710: 709: 704: 698: 697: 690: 689: 688: 687: 684: 683: 679: 671: 669: 668: 664: 660: 652: 650: 649: 646: 645: 639: 634: 633: 622: 618: 615: 611: 610: 605: 602: 598: 594: 590: 589: 586: 583: 578: 573: 567: 561: 558: 556:Contributions 552: 550: 545: 543: 536: 535: 534: 531: 529:Contributions 525: 523: 518: 516: 509: 508: 507: 506: 503: 501:Contributions 497: 495: 490: 488: 477: 471: 470: 466: 462: 457: 455: 450: 445: 441: 440: 434: 432: 431: 427: 423: 414: 412: 411: 408: 404: 397: 394: 386: 382: 377: 373: 369: 368: 367: 363: 359: 354: 353: 352: 351: 348: 344: 340: 335: 334: 333: 332: 328: 324: 319: 317: 309: 308: 307: 305: 301: 295: 292: 287: 286:Hello Pedro, 281: 275: 271: 270: 265: 264: 257: 256: 255: 250: 244: 243: 236: 232: 231: 230: 229: 225: 224: 219: 218: 211: 203: 201: 200: 196: 191: 186: 184: 175: 173: 172: 169: 168: 161: 156: 151: 150:User:FortKent 148: 144: 141: 135: 134: 133: 132: 129: 119: 116: 108: 105: 102: 96: 95: 94: 89: 83: 82: 76: 71: 70: 69: 68: 67: 66: 63: 60: 51: 46: 44: 40: 36: 29: 26: 19: 3020: 3000: 2993: 2987: 2970: 2963: 2959: 2936: 2931: 2921: 2918: 2915: 2905: 2902: 2873:67.107.22.68 2869: 2847: 2825: 2803: 2781: 2774: 2760: 2757:Hello there! 2736: 2692: 2676: 2673: 2670: 2666: 2641: 2613:User:Shadow1 2602: 2578: 2574: 2570: 2534: 2524: 2503: 2492: 2452: 2351: 2075: 2027: 2001: 1977: 1976: 1941: 1931: 1929: 1821: 1810: 1795:, correct? 1792: 1788: 1785:this comment 1745: 1720: 1709: 1690: 1671: 1649: 1628: 1593: 1563: 1560: 1545: 1536: 1510:other places 1494:Phoenix-wiki 1473: 1469: 1465: 1422:Ninety Three 1415: 1407: 1403: 1399: 1333: 1312: 1297: 1262:The article 1261: 1258: 1255:Help on move 1234: 1192: 1173: 1147: 1130: 1095: 1056: 1024: 967: 950: 916: 912: 908: 904: 898: 844: 808: 786: 756: 751: 738:I note that 737: 716: 695: 680: 675: 656: 640: 628: 626: 597:good-faithed 584: 548: 541: 521: 514: 493: 486: 481: 458: 451: 418: 400: 320: 313: 296: 288: 285: 267: 259: 241: 234: 221: 213: 207: 187: 183:Ellery Queen 179: 163: 159: 157: 154: 122: 80: 74: 54: 32: 2609:User:Rlevse 2605:User:Rudget 2376:themselves. 1768:left a note 1706:question... 1693:Archtransit 1502:OhanaUnited 1186:, click on 2927:Treepeople 2897:Treepeople 2822:Re: My RFA 2607:has left, 2571:25 support 2472:Candidly, 1468:supports, 1380:RfA thanks 1284:Chrisieboy 1280:Talk:Leeds 1005:Monkeyzpop 987:Monkeyzpop 955:Lilac Soul 930:Kbthompson 905:45 support 879:RfA thanks 811:ALA2222222 752:everything 403:User:ESkog 160:being bold 2661:WP:TSQUAD 2579:6 neutral 2575:18 oppose 2453:the topic 2292:liscense. 2002:the topic 1978:the topic 1793:"notable" 1738:WP:CSD#A7 1557:Cute baby 1408:9 neutral 1404:14 oppose 1400:5 support 1188:this link 1184:this list 913:0 neutral 900:nem. con. 780:talk page 623:Thanks... 614:Acalamari 601:Acalamari 478:Adminship 407:Random832 35:Lankiveil 2829:Wisdom89 2689:RfA noms 2637:Bugger. 2474:Geo Swan 2358:efforts. 2142:I put a 2005:article. 1797:Geo Swan 1723:Geo Swan 1716:Vymucany 1080:contribs 1069:Jayron32 964:rollback 909:0 oppose 568:Barnstar 396:Sue Page 139:lucasbfr 127:lucasbfr 2893:notable 2883:Laurie 2711:Epbr123 2695:Epbr123 2618:Phoenix 2615:left.-- 2065:copyvio 1815:WP:BITE 1789:thought 1612:Miranda 1448:Rudget! 1364:Keith D 1315:Keith D 1313:Thanks 1218:Rjd0060 1152:Rjd0060 1114:Rjd0060 1099:Rjd0060 1092:Userbox 1040:Thanks! 659:Dlo2012 358:Lumturo 339:Lumturo 323:Lumturo 316:WP: SYN 304:WP: SYN 300:WP: NOR 262:Majorly 216:Majorly 2994:Cuyler 2964:Cuyler 2775:Cuyler 2726:WT:DYK 2674:ndonic 2603:Well, 2577:, and 2567:my RfA 2551:My RfA 2521:My RfA 2434:topic. 2414:WP:CIV 2204:hangon 2194:hangon 2167:hangon 2147:hangon 2123:WP:CSD 2072:WP:VER 1962:WP:DEL 1870:WP:CIV 1687:Thanks 1674:dusoft 1633:Rudget 1533:My RfA 1520:Rudget 1482:Rlevse 1420:Soxπed 1406:, and 1396:my RfA 1356:WP:ANI 1308:WP:ANI 1027:Nigosh 946:WP:RFR 911:, and 895:my RfA 834:WP:AGF 542:Cuyler 515:Cuyler 487:Cuyler 465:(talk) 204:Meetup 3027:Chat 3021:Pedro 3001:91093 2971:91093 2943:Chat 2937:Pedro 2854:Chat 2848:Pedro 2810:Chat 2804:Pedro 2782:91093 2743:Chat 2737:Pedro 2730:C:CSD 2648:Chat 2642:Pedro 2510:Chat 2504:Pedro 2496:C:CSD 2494:with 1828:Chat 1822:Pedro 1752:Chat 1746:Pedro 1656:Chat 1650:Pedro 1600:Chat 1594:Pedro 1514:Gmail 1490:Ioeth 1360:WP:RM 1340:Chat 1334:Pedro 1304:WP:RM 1300:WP:RM 1293:Jza84 1276:Leeds 1270:then 1241:Chat 1235:Pedro 1214:added 1137:Chat 1131:Pedro 976:garra 903:with 863:Woody 851:Chat 845:Pedro 819:Woody 793:Chat 787:Pedro 757:avoid 718:Cobra 714:Glass 702:Chat 696:Pedro 682:Cobra 678:Glass 653:sorry 549:91093 522:91093 494:91093 248:Chat 242:Pedro 166:jj137 155:Hey, 87:Chat 81:Pedro 16:< 2988:Edit 2877:talk 2833:talk 2715:talk 2699:talk 2628:wiki 2587:talk 2478:talk 2315:self 1801:talk 1727:talk 1697:talk 1678:talk 1500:and 1484:and 1368:talk 1319:talk 1288:PamD 1222:talk 1203:talk 1156:talk 1118:talk 1103:talk 1074:talk 1031:talk 1009:talk 991:talk 973:Gnan 969:This 934:talk 867:talk 823:talk 769:talk 663:talk 643:Love 631:Lara 426:talk 381:talk 362:talk 343:talk 327:talk 318:). 269:talk 223:talk 210:here 195:talk 39:talk 2326:sfd 2259:afd 2232:afd 1970:afd 1770:on 1537:My 1466:113 1065:RFA 1021:RFR 944:My 672:BRC 306:): 3024:: 3005:- 2975:- 2940:: 2879:) 2851:: 2835:) 2807:: 2786:- 2769:}} 2763:{{ 2740:: 2717:) 2701:) 2645:: 2589:) 2573:, 2507:: 2480:) 2329:}} 2323:{{ 2318:}} 2312:{{ 2289:}} 2283:{{ 2262:}} 2256:{{ 2235:}} 2229:{{ 2207:}} 2201:{{ 2197:}} 2191:{{ 2170:}} 2164:{{ 2160:}} 2157:db 2154:{{ 2150:}} 2144:{{ 2068:}} 2062:{{ 1973:}} 1967:{{ 1934:." 1825:: 1803:) 1766:I 1749:: 1729:) 1699:) 1680:) 1653:: 1597:: 1575:nd 1569:ir 1496:, 1480:, 1470:11 1426:| 1402:, 1370:) 1362:. 1337:: 1321:) 1238:: 1224:) 1212:I 1205:) 1158:) 1134:: 1120:) 1105:) 1033:) 1011:) 993:) 936:) 919:. 907:, 869:) 848:: 825:) 790:: 771:) 699:: 665:) 553:- 526:- 498:- 428:) 364:) 345:) 329:) 272:) 245:: 235::) 226:) 100:Rt 84:: 75::) 58:Rt 45:. 41:) 2929:. 2913:. 2875:( 2831:( 2713:( 2697:( 2677:O 2671:A 2663:. 2623:- 2585:( 2476:( 2416:. 2237:. 1872:. 1799:( 1725:( 1695:( 1676:( 1637:. 1578:a 1572:a 1566:m 1524:. 1474:4 1439:b 1435:d 1432:c 1428:t 1366:( 1317:( 1220:( 1201:( 1154:( 1116:( 1101:( 1077:| 1071:| 1029:( 1007:( 989:( 932:( 865:( 821:( 767:( 734:? 661:( 637:❤ 424:( 378:: 360:( 341:( 325:( 266:( 220:( 192:: 104:. 62:. 37:(

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

Index