1158:. All editors of this article are limited to one content revert per day (obvious vandalism excepted). Editors who revert more than once may be blocked for up to 24 hours per offense. Hopefully you will be able to discuss your changes and come to an agreement on these issues, or at least agree that as long as "the other side's" version is not much different from the way you would want it, you can let it go for a while to work on some of the more serious problem areas.
1132:
reverting once every couple of days to a favorite or preferred version is a bad practice and will keep the article stuck in a bad state. You have also engaged in inappropriate personal comments. Simply searching for the phrase "You are..." on this page finds it used more often by SS108 than all other editors combined. It does not matter whether a editor runs an anti-Sai web site somewhere else, as long as their behavior
115:"Fresh off Republican wins in November, O'Reilly and company have ratcheted up the rhetoric. Mixing a kernel of truth with a grab bag of unconfirmed anecdotes, as well as some outright falsehoods, and then repeating the dire warnings, they've helped manufacture the impression that a tidal wave of anti-Christian activity, fueled by Democrats, is threatening to drive Christmas underground in America."
328:
611:"The 'number' of abuse testimonies on critical sites does not at all reflect the true nature of the situation. Sathya Sai Baba is believed to have engaged in sexual relations since the 1940s, and at least one report of child maltreatment dates from that period. The 'true number' of people in any way mistreated by SSB is impossible to count."
1060:
1148:
doesn't deteriorate into an attack article. I also think the disagreements here are rather small, and can be worked out if the editors involved can set aside personal issues. Therefore, I will issue a 48 hour block of SSS108 (24 hours for edit warring and 24 hours for personal comments) which will be
1269:
You should give your advice to the Admin who spoke in this matter and to ArbCom instead of arguing with someone you perceive as being inexperienced. As an experienced editor (as you claim to be), one would think you would have acted with more civility and grace than what you have shown with thus far.
981:
acting like an Admin. Too funny. And if you are so committed to no personal attacks, explain why you created a public blog specifically attacking me and my involvement on
Knowledge (XXG)? Explain why you have made numerous derogatory comments against me on Yahoo Groups and forums about my involvement
824:
You will revert what? And by the way, I am not aware of any ArbCom ruling on the George W. Bush or
Michael Moore wiki-pages that prevents linking to critical and negative sites, as outlined by the ArbCom ruling on the Sathya Sai Baba article. You can't use other pages to make your arguments. There is
1136:
is appropriate and follows the rules. Accusing someone of being "the most vocal critic and defamer of SSB on the internet" over and over again is not how you move forward on editing an article. It is also not appropriate to link to google searches or external web sites on the talk page in order to
1015:
Re your above complaints, "Attack" seems to be your favourite word of late. If you use
Knowledge (XXG) as a vehicle to push your bias in favour of Sathya Sai Baba, you can expect your edits to be reviewed by other editors just as you do to them. The blog you keep referring to was created prior to my
275:
And you did it again on the noticeboard page. Look, if the guy wanted to keep his name a secret, then he has the right to. What you are doing is considered stalking and that is not a good thing. I ask you to stop now. If the person wanted to reveal their name, then they would (like I have). But, the
1147:
I am in a tough spot here. The edit warring and continued personal comments require some response. However, it seems that the only regular editors here have either a strong pro-SSB or strong anti-SSB agenda, and if I block or ban SSS108, I will have to personally watch the article to make sure it
990:
while you are so busy acting like an Admin and citing
Knowledge (XXG) policies. You viciously attack me off Knowledge (XXG) about my invovlement on Knowledge (XXG) and then you have the audacity to tell me not to attack you when I rightly point out your Anti-Sai Bais and vicious defamations against
188:
Sorry. I read somewhere that salon.com was not a reputable source. That's why I removed it. I also read somewhere that all criticism of SSB coming from people with little geographical or cultural connection with SSB should be removed. That's why I removed the statement of Sacha Kester (Sacha Kester
1383:
Perhaps you don't know what "duplicitous" means. I suggest that you look it up, understand what it implies about the person whose edits you're calling duplicitous, and not use it again. This isn't a playground game of name-calling; you will be blocked from editing if you make personal attacks on
305:
regarding problems with the article then that isn't a debate addressed specifically to you, but for all editors. You are not the owner of that article. And yes, according to
Knowledge (XXG) policies your actions can be interpreted as stalking. After all, you had to dig into my edit history to find
1131:
spans 8 days and 48 reversions and yet the content of the article is almost identical, except for rearranging a couple of paragraphs. Reverting is not an appropriate editing method. Reverting 3 times on 19 Dec is arguably a blockable offense even though it is one less than a 3RR violation. Even
846:
Ekantik/Gaurasundara, Andries and ProEdits (Robert Priddy) are all collaborators and belong to the very same Anti-Sai Group that systematically attacks Sathya Sai Baba on the internet. I do not have to explain myself to you, of all people, Ekantik/Gaurasundara. Admin has already spoken about this
208:
SSS, please at least take responsibility for your own edits. It's relatively frustrating when you revert with no justification for your actual edit and instead claim that it is someone else who should be blamed because they added the original text ("lease seek agreement with
Andries first: his
310:
I have shown that almost all your accusations have reasonable explanations. Your sockpuppetry allegation has effectively collapsed, yet you continue to discuss disruptive information that bears no relation to the original sockpuppetry complaint. All of your actions are in violation of several
290:
What about his stalking of me on the internet and creating a blog specifically attacking me on
Knowledge (XXG)? I said I would respect his wish as long as he doesn't attempt to portray himself as a netural editor who does not have a POV to push and that he is somehow not connected to the Sai
1028:
about off-wiki attacks that you continue to engage in. Knowledge (XXG) does not directly penalise editors for such attacks but such actions may be considered aggravating factors during dispute resolution and other procedural matters. I would very much love to stop using your talk page as a
693:
include the link because it will cause another uproar by
Andries & Co. As you already know, when it comes to highly defamatory content by Robert Priddy, Andries will argue the exact opposite of what he is arguing now. Andries is a POV pusher due his former webmaster status and current
189:
comes from
Germany and has no geographical or cultural connection with SSB). As for the information about "Sai Krishna" I removed it from the Miracles section because I thought it didn't belong in that section. By the way, why did you write you didn't understand the reasons for my edits?
135:"Jan. 1 marked the 2,000th anniversary of Jesus' bloody brith mileh, the Jewish ritual that snips off an infant boy's foreskin approximately one week after birth. The cock-cutting of Christ is presently sanctified in numerous Christian sects as the "Feast of the Circumcision."
31:
That's a tough question. Print magazines are generally preferred over
Internet ones, but as Internet magazines go Salon is one of the best. Getting printed isn't the only indicator of reliability; Salon is certainly more reliable than supermarket tabloids. I hope that helps.
223:
The second wording should always be inferior, no matter what the variables stand for. Instead of reverting for purely procedural reasons ("This very issue was already discussed before and has not reached any consensus.") why not work with me and try to find a better wording.
353:
Such posting can cause offense or embarrassment to the victim of the posting, not least because it means that their name, and any personal criticism or allegations made against them can then appear on web searches. If you have posted such information, please remove it
100:"The biggest danger to the Bush campaign is not that the candidate is an idiot, it's the perception that he is an idiot. And every time his spinsters try to "clarify his remarks," they just reinforce the perception that Bush would be lost without them."
1258:
I've put up a clarification process. But as you yourself did state, that you don't consider yourself an Knowledge (XXG) editor, you should better trust the word of someone who has a better overview and has seen more than three or four articles.
1137:
demonstrate that an editor is opposed to SSB. (It is also not appropriate for opponents of SSB to try and denigrate SSS108 because he is a believer. Just deal with a person's edits on wikipedia and leave the rest of the web to itself.)
1247:
That is your opinion. Cite the relevant sections and have ArbCom verify your opinions to me. Instead of pushing forward with whatever agenda you are pushing, I suggest you follow a civil path and not the one you are currently treading.
342:. Knowledge (XXG) policy on that issue is strictly enforced. Posting private information about a user with the intent to annoy, threaten or harass, specifically their (alleged) name and/or personal details, is strictly prohibited as
880:
Thank you, but I am not asking what Admin think of it in connection with the ArbCom ruling. I am asking what rationale you are employing in determining Priddy's site as an "Anti Sai site" and not a homepage. Thanks in advance.
209:
edit."). Anyone should be able to improve poorly worded text. In this specific example, you keep bloating the text with meaningless clauses, which has the effect of dilluting the section to the point of making it unreadable.
1221:
and is not bound by th 3 revert rule. Until ArbCom and Admin changes its position, I am not violating the 3RR and I am not changing your postings. I am simply deactivating the links in accordance with the opinion of Admin.
835:
Yes you can use other pages to make arguments. Precedents are quoted all over Knowledge (XXG) in discussions. What is your rationale for arguing that Priddy's site is an "Anti-Sai site" and not a homepage?
449:
Ekantik/Gaurasundara, please stop using my talk page as a forum to push your venom and whine (just as you do on your blog specifically attacking me and my involvement on Knowledge (XXG)). You have shown
814:
Thanks for your upteenth explanation that I still consider completely unconvincing. I will only revert, because discussion seems to be endless between us without any side coming a millimeter closer.
1020:
numerous derogatory comments on Yahoo groups and other venues (which far exceed mine when you consider the number of websites and blogs you author that specifically slander me). You were recently
793:. As I said before, you will argue hard and long to push your Anti-Sai Agenda because you are a POV pusher, self-admitted critic and ex-devotee of Sathya Sai Baba and former webmaster and current
603:). As long as you edit on the Sathya Sai Baba article, you will be held accountable for your extra-Knowledge (XXG) status as a critic, defamer and ex-devotee of Sathya Sai Baba. Get used to it.
671:
We should not, because it is defamatory of the critics of SSB. Much of the websites contains interpretations and viewpoints that contradict reputable sources. And as such it is worse than
311:
Knowledge (XXG) poolicies and guidelines and you can be blocked for them. Please desist from being disruptive and stop revealing people's identities in violation of their requests.
760:
is notable then it is because of his writings critical of SSB. Of course his article should link to his writings that make him notable on his own homepage. It is very similar with
1213:
1108:
957:
359:
1045:
I am not going to stop. File a complaint. And I would like to see my off-Wiki posts attacking you and your involvement on Knowledge (XXG)? And your diff from Jossi
253:
by revealing the real name of user:Ekantik. As per arbcom decision in this respect, I will however keep on using your name because you yourself keep revealing it.
219:"X wrote an aritcle. This article was wholly critical of Y, in which X expressed the opinion, without mentioning any sources, that Y is a good example of Z"
307:
870:
You see the link in my previous post. Place your cursor over it and left-click on it. Please direct your questions to the Admin who made that comment.
631:
If you want this discussion to stop, I suggest that you stop using my real name and behave in accordance with Knowledge (XXG) policies and guidelines.
995:
have the last word (as you do outside Knowledge (XXG)) and I will tell you once again to stop using my talk page as a forum for your venom and whine.
1200:
This behaviour may result in temporary blocking your write access to Knowledge (XXG). Of course, as an involved party, I won't block you myself.
466:
of defamatory, vulgar, sexually-explicit and grotesque posts against Sathya Sai Baba stand in testament to this fact (as I have stated before
1307:
and discussing the quality of edits. May be you can start doing it. It does not mean extensive discussion about editing procedures. Thanks.
1235:
Andries is bound by the ArbCom ruling, as well you yourself. If other editors in good standing are inserting links, it's another issue. --
506:
1418:
Hi, I have added a discussion to Sathya Sai Baba talk page regarding Sathya Sai Baba sex changing claim, please give your feedback.
291:
Controversy. He is. He chose to engage in debates with me first, which led to my discovery of his sockpuppet. That isn't stalking.
659:
SSS108, so should we or should we not include your website into the Sathya Sai Baba article? By the way, you are the webmaster of
1152:—I will not actually carry out the block if you stop edit warring and making personal remarks. I am also placing the article on
945:
952:, not on contributors; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to
1354:
If you make personal attacks on other editors, such as calling their edits duplicitous, you will be blocked from editing. --
672:
1127:. You have engaged in edit warring and have reverted the article a number of times wiping out substantial contributions.
901:
No I am not kidding. I am asking you to provide a rationale for one of your fundamental arguments. Thank you for violating
492:
140:
In other words, anyone can justify their bias (particularly if you are a liberal) on Knowledge (XXG) by citing Salon.com
1078:
1009:
953:
606:
Even on Knowledge (XXG), Ekantik/Gaurasundara said about Sathya Sai Baba (so much for the neutrality and NPOV claim):
525:
me all over the internet (and creating a blog specifically attacking me and my involvement on Knowledge (XXG)), you
366:
repost it on that page). An admin or developer can then remove the information from the archives of Knowledge (XXG).
1109:
Knowledge (XXG):Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#re: Knowledge (XXG):Requests for arbitration/Sathya Sai Baba
1004:
This is your second warning. Please stop. If you continue to make personal attacks on other people as you did at
130:
905:
and not pointing me to a Knowledge (XXG) policy or guideline that supports your theory. I'll also thank you to
772:. If you had your own article then of course that article could link to your homepage defaming me and Priddy.
396:
In accordance with the instructions on this template, please remove your offences at the following locations:
95:
1286:
One was a mistake, caused by too much haste; the article doesn't need the "fact" template" twice, though. --
476:
343:
1115:
555:
that you are a Sai Critic/Ex-devotee. You continually and unremittingly accuse Sathya Sai Baba of being a
500:
81:
1159:
104:
110:
59:
143:. Happy day. Just the type of information one would expect to find an encyclopedia (sarcasm implied).
1389:
1359:
1291:
1112:
1070:
302:
541:
association with the Sai Controversy. When Jossi asked you if you considered yourself a POV editor (
458:
others that you are a neutral editor who does not have a POV to push (despite the fact that you are
338:
Knowledge (XXG) operates on the principle that every contributor has a right if they wish to remain
250:
424:
has already attempted to refactor one of your privacy violations before you proceeded to continue (
417:
378:
REMEMBER: Knowledge (XXG)'s privacy policy is there to protect the privacy of every user, including
48:
55:
Examples Of Salon.com Articles That Could Be Cited IF Deemed To Be A Reliable Stand-Alone Source:
1186:
769:
124:
902:
141:
802:
703:
974:
718:
597:
496:
486:
443:
1173:
I think your proposition is a good idea because it will greatly limit Anti-Sai POV pushing.
983:
17:
1407:
1395:
1377:
1365:
1311:
1297:
1274:
1263:
1252:
1239:
1226:
1206:
1162:
1154:
1118:
1101:
1095:
1085:
1052:
1037:
999:
987:
964:
930:
926:
about including links to websites critical of Sathya Sai Baba on Robert Priddy's wikipage.
913:
895:
885:
874:
864:
854:
840:
829:
818:
808:
776:
747:
738:
725:
679:
649:
635:
625:
432:
390:
315:
295:
282:
270:
257:
238:
228:
167:
147:
36:
1385:
1355:
1287:
1005:
941:
787:
663:, aren't you? Please tell me if by writing this I am stalking. 15:05 (UTC+1) 10 Dec. 2006
530:
513:
of your edits are accessible to anyone at any time. Contrary to your assertions that I am
158:
120:
790:. And I am not alone in my opinion. You were warned against including that link by admin
372:
860:
I might have missed it somewhere. Please edify me about the rationale which you employ.
782:
For the umpteenth time, the link you want to include on Robert Priddy's page is not his
1329:
1322:
1174:
765:
664:
277:
197:
190:
178:
1193:) postings and you are using misleading edit summaries. You are near 3RR violation at
1419:
1280:
1194:
761:
757:
768:
and of coures his homepage should be linked to even it is defamatory reg. Bush. See
369:
If you do not ensure that personal information you posted is removed from this site
276:
editor chose not to do so and we should respect his right to not use his real name.
1308:
1260:
1236:
1203:
1082:
1034:
1012:
for disruption. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Thank you.
970:
961:
910:
882:
861:
837:
815:
773:
714:
710:
676:
632:
482:
439:
429:
387:
312:
267:
254:
235:
225:
164:
1091:
Keep playing Admin. I am not scared and will not be bullied by you of all people.
521:
times on other forums), it is clear that you are stalking me. After attacking and
1404:
1374:
1341:
1271:
1249:
1223:
1092:
1049:
996:
927:
892:
871:
851:
826:
805:
744:
735:
722:
646:
622:
362:
page and inform people there that the information was posted (but crucially, do
292:
144:
1025:
421:
33:
891:
You've got to be kidding? Right? Keep babbling. You are going to be ignored.
1048:
was not directed to anyone in particular. Stop distorting other's words.
462:
most vocal critic and opponent of Sathya Sai Baba on the internet). Your
621:
If you want this discussion to stop, I suggest you bring it to an end.
161:
in which you are involved. You have been named a party in the dispute.
1111:
has been started in response to the posts on my talk page. Thank you,
1059:
327:
1033:
just as soon as you cut it with the personal attacks. Please comply.
76:"the volume on his vitriol so high that it's hard to hear anything"
196:
Thank you for clarifying the problem and the misunderstanding.
68:"a poster boy for intolerance, vitriol and questionable ethics"
732:
686:
660:
575:
lodged against him first-hand by any alleged victim in India.
1016:
joining Knowledge (XXG). In addition I may draw attention to
922:
Admin has spoken again regarding this matter. Please see the
1058:
1303:
Cooperation in Knowledge (XXG) means discussing the article
1069:. If you continue to make personal attacks, as you did at
509:) and anyone can view it. By posting on Knowledge (XXG),
1214:
Knowledge (XXG):Requests for arbitration/Sathya Sai Baba
1197:
itself and using misleading edit summaries there, too.
1142:
However, I believe some of your concerns are legitimate.
157:
I filed a request for arbitration regarding the article
1402:
1372:
1348:
1219:
1217:
1128:
1125:
1046:
1021:
923:
906:
848:
791:
644:
642:
614:
601:
549:
542:
533:
article, engaged me in debate incognito and made edits
469:
467:
425:
413:
409:
405:
401:
397:
264:
162:
825:
now an ArbCom ruling that must be taken into account.
984:
which has already been discussed earlier on this page
571:been charged with any crime and has never had even
960:and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you.
702:website opposing Sathya Sai Baba on the internet
786:. It is an Anti-Sai Site exclusively attacking
764:who became notable because of his criticism of
416:. You were asked to stop violating privacy by
308:Knowledge (XXG):Suspected_sock_puppets/Ekantik
696:"Main Representative, Supervisor And Contact"
689:, I already expressed my view that we should
263:I filed a complaint about your behavior. See
8:
795:"Main Reresentative, Supervisor And Contact"
705:. Best to drop the issue. Now there are two
107:: This one does it in for the Hare Krishnas.
47:Salon.com article by Michelle Goldberg and
578:And my sockpuppetry claim against you has
249:SSS108, please do not continue to violate
216:"X wrote an article which critized Y as Z"
306:something wrong with it and according to
1212:I am removing the links in violation of
184:Controversial material (Sathya Sai Baba)
72:"masterpieces of contemptuous nastiness"
770:Talk:Michael_Moore#Violation_of_WP:BLP
478:) will bring up the relevant results.
131:Penis of Jesus trimmed 2,000 years ago
177:Maybe you're right. 20.11.2006 17:55
7:
1189:you are changing other user's (i.e.
82:The arrogance of the Catholic Church
1216:. This has been voiced by 2 Admin:
481:Your edit history is public domain
346:, and users who do that are often
24:
1031:"vehicle to whine and spew venom"
991:Sathya Sai Baba. I know you must
940:With regards to your comments on
801:Anti-Sai website on the internet
709:Anti-Sai Activists to deal with:
673:Knowledge (XXG):original research
567:been convicted of any crime, has
358:. Please then follow the link to
301:Debates? If I add my comments to
234:Let's continue this on the talk.
743:No, you are not stalking me :-)
517:you (a mantra you have parroted
326:
60:Antonin Scalia, self-made martyr
1414:Exceptional Controversial Claim
944:: Please see Knowledge (XXG)'s
850:and that is all I need to say.
333:A serious message - PLEASE READ
245:Please do not reveal real names
924:final warning given to Andries
756:That is a different issue. If
473:"sathya sai baba+gaurasundara"
111:The Grinch who saved Christmas
1:
1312:19:39, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
1298:22:53, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
1275:23:17, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
1264:23:03, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
1253:22:59, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
1240:22:52, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
1227:22:50, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
1207:22:44, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
1163:05:18, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
1119:07:22, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
1096:05:47, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
1086:05:45, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
1053:05:05, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
1038:04:56, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
1000:04:43, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
965:04:32, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
931:17:45, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
914:06:28, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
896:06:15, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
886:06:09, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
875:05:59, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
865:04:39, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
855:04:21, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
841:03:49, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
830:18:30, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
819:18:26, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
809:18:24, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
777:18:16, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
748:18:12, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
739:18:12, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
726:18:06, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
680:14:14, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
650:04:07, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
636:03:46, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
626:12:39, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
563:despite the fact that he has
433:04:37, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
391:04:07, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
350:from editing Knowledge (XXG).
316:04:06, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
148:00:29, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
1408:18:37, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
1396:09:56, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
1378:00:21, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
1366:22:31, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
731:Yes, I am the webmaster for
296:18:56, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
283:18:49, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
271:17:15, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
258:06:53, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
239:20:28, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
229:20:09, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
168:22:41, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
37:16:07, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
685:Regarding the inclusion of
661:http://www.saisathyasai.com
1436:
1332:09:24 (UTC+1) 29 Dec 2006
1325:19:29 (UTC+1) 26 Dec 2006
1177:22:04 (UTC+1) 20 Dec 2006
96:Does W. have a death wish?
988:Off Wiki Personal Attacks
655:Inclusion Of Website Link
471:). Any Google search for
200:18:24 (UTC+1) 02.12.2006
193:15:03 (UTC+1) 02.12.2006
1346:Because of this comment:
1317:People influenced by SSB
641:I suggest you catch up:
376:from editing this site.
956:for disruption. Please
585:. To the contrary, you
557:"homosexual paedophile"
551:) even though you know
454:except your attempt to
418:Administrator Zscout370
251:Knowledge (XXG):privacy
212:Compare the following:
153:Request for Arbitration
1063:
986:)? I suggest you read
173:Sathya Sai Baba (link)
1062:
42:Current Controversies
1071:Talk:Sathya Sai Baba
982:on Knowledge (XXG) (
573:one single complaint
340:completely anonymous
303:Talk:Sathya Sai Baba
127:: Title says it all.
948:policy. Comment on
946:no personal attacks
936:No Personal Attacks
422:Administrator Jossi
348:immediately blocked
1422:9th February 2007
1187:Talk:Robert Priddy
1064:
1384:other editors. --
1328:Thank you again.
1081:for disruption.
322:Breach Of Privacy
281:
1427:
1392:
1362:
1294:
1124:See my comments
733:saisathyasai.com
687:saisathyasai.com
667:Modified: 15:09
330:
280:
18:User talk:SSS108
1435:
1434:
1430:
1429:
1428:
1426:
1425:
1424:
1416:
1390:
1360:
1338:
1319:
1305:
1292:
1284:
1183:
1171:
1169:Your propositon
1155:1 revert parole
1105:
1006:Sathya Sai Baba
977:, there you go
942:Sathya Sai Baba
938:
788:Sathya Sai Baba
657:
531:Sathya Sai Baba
447:
385:
324:
247:
206:
186:
175:
159:Sathya Sai Baba
155:
119:Was Jesus Gay?
74:and turning up
44:
29:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
1433:
1431:
1415:
1412:
1411:
1410:
1401:My Response →
1381:
1380:
1371:My response →
1352:
1351:
1337:
1334:
1318:
1315:
1304:
1301:
1283:
1278:
1267:
1266:
1245:
1244:
1243:
1242:
1230:
1229:
1182:
1179:
1170:
1167:
1166:
1165:
1144:
1143:
1139:
1138:
1104:
1099:
1089:
1088:
1043:
1042:
1041:
1040:
1013:
1008:, you will be
937:
934:
917:
916:
907:carry this out
889:
888:
868:
867:
844:
843:
822:
821:
780:
779:
766:George W. Bush
753:
752:
751:
750:
683:
682:
656:
653:
639:
638:
619:
618:
529:appear on the
446:
436:
395:
336:
325:
323:
320:
319:
318:
288:
287:
286:
285:
278:User:Zscout370
246:
243:
242:
241:
221:
220:
217:
205:
202:
185:
182:
174:
171:
154:
151:
138:
137:
128:
117:
108:
102:
93:
79:
53:
52:
43:
40:
28:
27:Salon magazine
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1432:
1423:
1421:
1413:
1409:
1406:
1403:
1400:
1399:
1398:
1397:
1393:
1387:
1379:
1376:
1373:
1370:
1369:
1368:
1367:
1363:
1357:
1349:
1347:
1343:
1340:
1339:
1335:
1333:
1331:
1326:
1324:
1316:
1314:
1313:
1310:
1302:
1300:
1299:
1295:
1289:
1282:
1281:Robert Priddy
1279:
1277:
1276:
1273:
1265:
1262:
1257:
1256:
1255:
1254:
1251:
1241:
1238:
1234:
1233:
1232:
1231:
1228:
1225:
1220:
1218:
1215:
1211:
1210:
1209:
1208:
1205:
1201:
1198:
1196:
1195:Robert Priddy
1192:
1188:
1180:
1178:
1176:
1168:
1164:
1161:
1157:
1156:
1151:
1146:
1145:
1141:
1140:
1135:
1130:
1126:
1123:
1122:
1121:
1120:
1117:
1114:
1110:
1107:A section at
1103:
1100:
1098:
1097:
1094:
1087:
1084:
1080:
1076:
1072:
1068:
1065:This is your
1061:
1057:
1056:
1055:
1054:
1051:
1047:
1039:
1036:
1032:
1027:
1023:
1019:
1014:
1011:
1007:
1003:
1002:
1001:
998:
994:
989:
985:
980:
976:
972:
969:
968:
967:
966:
963:
959:
955:
951:
947:
943:
935:
933:
932:
929:
925:
921:
915:
912:
908:
904:
900:
899:
898:
897:
894:
887:
884:
879:
878:
877:
876:
873:
866:
863:
859:
858:
857:
856:
853:
849:
842:
839:
834:
833:
832:
831:
828:
820:
817:
813:
812:
811:
810:
807:
803:
800:
796:
792:
789:
785:
778:
775:
771:
767:
763:
762:Michael Moore
759:
758:Robert Priddy
755:
754:
749:
746:
742:
741:
740:
737:
734:
730:
729:
728:
727:
724:
720:
716:
712:
708:
704:
701:
697:
692:
688:
681:
678:
674:
670:
669:
668:
666:
662:
654:
652:
651:
648:
645:
643:
637:
634:
630:
629:
628:
627:
624:
616:
612:
609:
608:
607:
604:
602:
599:
596:
592:
588:
584:
581:
576:
574:
570:
566:
562:
558:
554:
550:
547:
543:
540:
536:
532:
528:
524:
520:
516:
512:
508:
505:
502:
498:
494:
491:
488:
484:
479:
477:
474:
470:
468:
465:
461:
457:
453:
445:
441:
437:
435:
434:
431:
427:
423:
419:
415:
411:
407:
403:
399:
393:
392:
389:
384:
382:
379:
375:
374:
367:
365:
361:
357:
351:
349:
345:
341:
335:
334:
329:
321:
317:
314:
309:
304:
300:
299:
298:
297:
294:
284:
279:
274:
273:
272:
269:
265:
262:
261:
260:
259:
256:
252:
244:
240:
237:
233:
232:
231:
230:
227:
218:
215:
214:
213:
210:
203:
201:
199:
194:
192:
183:
181:
180:
172:
170:
169:
166:
163:
160:
152:
150:
149:
146:
142:
136:
132:
129:
126:
122:
118:
116:
112:
109:
106:
103:
101:
97:
94:
91:
87:
83:
80:
77:
73:
69:
65:
61:
58:
57:
56:
50:
46:
45:
41:
39:
38:
35:
26:
19:
1417:
1382:
1353:
1345:
1327:
1320:
1306:
1285:
1268:
1246:
1202:
1199:
1190:
1184:
1172:
1153:
1149:
1133:
1106:
1090:
1074:
1067:last warning
1066:
1044:
1030:
1017:
992:
978:
975:Gaurasundara
949:
939:
919:
918:
890:
869:
845:
823:
798:
794:
783:
781:
719:Gaurasundara
706:
699:
695:
690:
684:
658:
640:
620:
610:
605:
598:Gaurasundara
594:
590:
586:
582:
579:
577:
572:
568:
564:
560:
556:
552:
545:
538:
534:
527:"innocently"
526:
522:
518:
514:
510:
503:
497:Gaurasundara
489:
480:
472:
463:
459:
455:
451:
448:
444:Gaurasundara
438:Response To
394:
386:
380:
377:
370:
368:
363:
355:
352:
347:
339:
337:
332:
331:
289:
248:
222:
211:
207:
195:
187:
176:
156:
139:
134:
114:
99:
89:
85:
75:
71:
67:
63:
54:
30:
1321:Thank you.
1160:Thatcher131
1026:Admin Jossi
583:"collapsed"
544:) you said
371:you may be
356:immediately
90:"evil ways"
86:"arrogance"
49:hidden bias
1391:Μελ Ετητης
1386:Mel Etitis
1361:Μελ Ετητης
1356:Mel Etitis
1293:Μελ Ετητης
1288:Mel Etitis
784:"homepage"
707:well known
515:"stalking"
344:harassment
105:Holy Abuse
70:, writing
1330:Kkrystian
1323:Kkrystian
1175:Kkrystian
1150:suspended
1129:This diff
958:stay cool
665:Kkrystian
593:that you
591:admitting
587:confirmed
553:full well
539:exclusive
464:thousands
198:Kkrystian
191:Kkrystian
179:Kkrystian
92:and more.
1420:Wikisunn
1022:reminded
903:WP:CIVIL
797:for the
698:for the
561:"faggot"
523:defaming
519:numerous
507:contribs
493:contribs
426:evidence
66:, being
64:"martyr"
1336:Warning
1309:Andries
1261:Pjacobi
1237:Pjacobi
1204:Pjacobi
1181:Warning
1083:Ekantik
1079:blocked
1035:Ekantik
1010:blocked
971:Ekantik
962:Ekantik
950:content
920:Update:
911:ekantiK
883:ekantiK
862:ekantiK
838:ekantiK
816:Andries
799:largest
774:Andries
715:Ekantik
711:Andries
700:largest
677:Andries
633:ekantiK
483:Ekantik
456:deceive
452:nothing
440:Ekantik
430:ekantiK
388:ekantiK
373:blocked
313:ekantiK
268:Andries
255:Andries
236:savidan
226:savidan
165:Andries
1405:SSS108
1375:SSS108
1342:SSS108
1272:SSS108
1270:Pity.
1250:SSS108
1224:SSS108
1113:Banyan
1102:WP:ANI
1093:SSS108
1073:, you
1050:SSS108
997:SSS108
993:always
954:blocks
928:SSS108
893:SSS108
872:SSS108
852:SSS108
847:issue
827:SSS108
806:SSS108
745:SSS108
736:SSS108
723:SSS108
647:SSS108
623:SSS108
589:it by
412:, and
293:SSS108
145:SSS108
34:Jayjg
979:again
569:never
565:never
414:diff5
410:diff4
406:diff3
402:diff2
398:diff1
16:<
1134:here
1116:Tree
1075:will
1018:your
973:aka
713:and
615:Diff
559:and
546:"no"
501:talk
495:) /
487:talk
442:aka
420:and
360:this
1350:...
1185:On
1077:be
1024:by
691:not
595:are
580:not
537:in
535:all
511:all
460:the
428:).
381:you
364:not
204:SSB
1394:)
1364:)
1344::
1296:)
1259:--
1191:my
909:.
804:.
721:.
717:/
675:.
617:).
408:,
404:,
400:,
266:.
133::
125:02
123:-
121:01
113::
98::
88:,
84::
62::
1388:(
1358:(
1290:(
613:(
600:(
548:(
504:·
499:(
490:·
485:(
475:(
383:.
78:.
51:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.