1769:, both of which (particularly the latter) drastically change the very nature of both articles. When asked why, the user insisted that her (?) way was "superior" and that she would allow for no discussion on this point from anyone. As another editor of the page, I'm turning to you and a few others to ask assistance in trying to reign in actions that frankly border on vandalism. While some of her changes are more than welcome (additions of photos of Union officers, for example), the wholesale elimination of notations that were being worked on and the changes is format, to say nothing of refusing to discuss it with anyone else - either before or after - are, in my opinion, invasive. May I ask for you to take a look and give your opinion on the matter?
1696:
process. I do not believe that sweeping it under the rug of a new username account is the answer, since looking back on one's early mistakes helps build one's character and in the future, may provide someone with perspective on both where they've been, and on newbies that you yourself may encounter as a future veteran. Moreover, we don't stop making mistakes once we're veterans. I myself have made one or two recently, and rather than blanking evidence of this from my talk page, I keep it (though I do archive past pages when they become too big, and I will revert things like vandalism or harassment from my tp), in order to maintain a sense of openness and transparency about both my successes and my failures. But that's just me.
1163:
918:
693:
297:
1849:
983:
1218:
21:
373:
1617:. The fact that you personally created that article means nothing - if something needs a citation, and you cannot find one, you must not simply remove the "citation needed" tag. You should leave it in the hope that someone else will be able to find one, and if that does not happen after a reasonable time, the unsourced content itself, not the tag, should be removed.
617:
569:
468:
892:), all without any references or citations. I have reverted many of the edits between the dates of 17 December 2011 – 20 December 2011, but there are quite a few more edits made previous my revision corrections, for which I imagine are also unreferenced &/or uncited. Upon further review of the edit history of
1594:
is not sufficient as a source for stating his rank in the article itself - that's just a list of people who, at some time in their career, attained that rank. Soldiers typically rise through many ranks, and you can't just pick one at random that he happened to hold at one time - I'm not sure what the
1528:
Hi. Thanks for the explanations. I have a busy afternoon now, but will be happy to come back later and look over those articles again (and, of course, anyone else is welcome to). But before I head off, I just want to make it clear that our aim here is not to "inactivate this account", but to help you
1879:
until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of
1303:
I did not make any major editing errors this time. All the info I added to the articles comes from their external links, or from other articles I linked to. I do apologize for forgetting edits summaries, and I will never be a perfect contributor (unless somebody teaches me), but I stand by my point.
1605:
article, but as you appear to now appreciate, that is not sufficient as a source for other linked articles - the approach that "Another article that it links to has an external link that provides the information" is not sufficient. In fact, just adding it as an external link is not good enough even
1566:
I should clarify i'm mildly autistic, but that it's no excuse. This was never a problem before, but I accept the responsibility, and would like to deactive this account, so I could make a fresh start once I'm more experienced in editing. But please don't undo my latest edits, I just wanted to help
1549:
Whatever the details relating to particular edits, your previous unblock was lifted after you said "I should have known to reference the edits properly. If you would allow me to return to editing ... I will immediately put in all the proper references to my sources." How do you reconcile that with
1420:
it's similar - I can't see those years of service mentioned in either of the sources used by the article. You also changed his rank to "Brigadier
General", but the two sources used state "Major" and "Major General" - Major at the time of his Medal of Honour action, and Major General as the highest
1358:
Hi. It's way past my bedtime now and I'm really too tired, but I'll re-examine your latest edits in the morning and will expand on what I thought was wrong with them, and try to help towards an unblock (that is, if nobody else reviews your unblock request before then). But in short, the problem is
1574:
Hi. Firstly, please be assured that nobody is accusing you of vandalism or of any bad faith - I'm quite sure your intentions are entirely honorable. (And I can sympathize with your mild autism - I have experience of it with some friends too). I'll come back to the fresh start later, but first I'd
783:
That's certainly odd. The block went through at 18:57, October 16, 2011, and it is now past 21:40 a week later, so it should have been lifted. However, my email provider informs me that you sent your email three hours ago, which might've been a short while before the block expired. Have you tried
1063:
I'm apologising for my recent editing behavior, because I should have known to reference the edits properly. If you would allow me to return to editing (or shorten my sentence), I will immediately put in all the proper references to my sources. If not, I shall accept the punishment given to me.
1695:
As for starting fresh, well, that's your call, but I would personally recommend---and this is just my personal opinion, not one directly relating to any policy or guideline---that part of learning the ropes is accepting your mistakes, and incorporating your early mistakes as a newbie into the
1610:
article itself - you need to include it as an inline citation, so that it appears in the
References section, and not expect the reader to have to search the external links to see if the source is in there. To reiterate, in this case you needed to add the source, as an inline citation, to both
1359:
that you were adding new material with no indication where it came from - it's not enough to just take information from sources being used for the article and expect people to guess that it came from one of the sources and guess which one, you need to add citations (<ref: -->
1659:
says you can. As for this account, you can just walk away from it. Alternatively, after you've had a break you might feel you are able to carry on from this one again - if so, just ask here for an unblock (and feel free to ping me on my Talk page) and we can see how things are
1643:
Concerning your recent edits, what I'll try to do over the next dew days is have a look over them and see if I can find where the source for each is - if I can find it, I'll fix it up, but if I can't then I'll have no alternative but to revert it. I'll also fix up the
1585:
article, and from there I guess readers could look up the cemetery site and search for themselves, but that does not satisfy
Knowledge's policies - if you use a specific source, it must be cited in that actual article, as an inline citation as explained at
1315:
Procedural decline, as the editor has requested the closing of this account (see below). But in case of any change of mind, future requests after a break can certainly be made and should be considered in the light of the editor's obvious good faith --
1685:
1591:
1502:
1525:, this info came from a book, wich I didn't know how to link properly. If you do not consider my explanantions to be enough, you can inactivate this account, on the condition I'm notified beforehand. Anyway, Happy Holidays from Searcher_1990.
772:, I urge you to reconsider your activities on Knowledge. If you wish to be a part of the editing community here, you'll have to learn to follow the rules, and communicate with others when matters like this arise. Thank you.
1595:
guidelines are, but I'd expect a biography article to use the highest rank he attained. And again, it needs an inline source - a wikilinked article is not sufficient (because
Knowledge is itself not a reliable source).
1413:, you added "Years of service 1943 - 1945". Where did you get that? I've checked the only two sources given, and while they both put his death at 1945, neither appears to mention 1943 as the year he entered service.
1478:
Well, as I just said above, I'd rather wait and see what answers we get first, and if they are not satisfactory, I think we'll need to consider a blanket reversion of the changes - but let's give them a chance --
1804:. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose
1677:
Thanks. I'm gonna have to read up on the editing guidelines. I could also provide you or others with info instead of making edits myself, if that is considered a better option. Until after New Year everyone.
933:
for persistent addition of unsourced content, and ignoring over a year and a half of repeated warnings for this and other types of disruptive editing, the most recent violations being the following edits to
1876:
519:
I am a
Wikipedian, who is studying the phenomenon on Knowledge. I need your help to conduct my research on about understanding "Motivation of Knowledge contributors." I would like to invite you to
1581:. You may have obtained the information from the Arlington National Cemetery site, but unless you actually include it as a citation, it can't be used as a source. The article has a link to the
1623:. Yes, you're right, the years of service are indeed included in the article, so you can have that one :-) But please note there are no inline references in that article, and it needs some.
527:. I chose you as a English Knowledge user who made edits recently through the RecentChange page. Refer to the first page in the online survey form for more information on the study and me.
1463:
page), by way of apologies and denial of knowledge (that which has been provided on their talk page). Can we discuss reverting the edits by this user that led to them being blocked?
1917:
1912:
1075:
The editor apologized for his behavior, and indicated that he would rectify the problem, which I understand to mean that he will no longer add unsourced material to articles.
1442:
It's entirely possible I've missed where the sources support the information you have added, so can you please explain where you got these snippets of information from? --
60:
46:
1766:
807:
you've recently created. A link to a disambiguation page is almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles.
1459:
It's still apparent to me that this user is blatantly and deliberately making edits without regard to the guidance and advice provided to this user (through their
1391:
We may need to, yes,and I have reverted a few already - but I'd like to get answers to my questions, below, before we consider going for large scale reversion --
737:
326:, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at
664:
in the New
Articles list-- However, I noticed there are some holes that may need filling: the article does not contain in-line citations, and so doesn't follow
1350:
template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired.
1883:
To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit
1762:
1718:
It appears you are making edits in the same fashion that caused you to be blocked from editing, only now you are not logging in (editing under IP address
1258:
1018:
830:
240:
Please sign your messages on talk pages with four tildes (~~~~). This will automatically insert your "signature" (your username and a date stamp). The
1865:
814:
826:
426:
593:
77:
625:
1663:
Anyway, I hope this hasn't been too discouraging an experience for you, and I hope you can be back some time in the not-too-distant future --
720:, et al.), as well as a disruptive refusal to include edit summaries in edits, the most recent violations of the former being the creation of
584:. Please help by adding more sources to the article you created, and/or by clarifying how the sources already given support the material (see
810:
1178:
for coming off a block and carrying on with exactly the same problems that got you blocked. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to
1861:
1829:
546:
Please add an edit summary to any non-trivial change you make in articles. Lack of an edit summary negates the usefulness of a watchlist.
1727:
1335:
1253:
1199:
1013:
967:
889:
765:
200:
35:. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else.
1757:, without once discussing it with anyone else, looking at the article histories, or bothering to read the talk pages (not to mention
1620:
1518:
243:
1825:
1501:, I took that from the Arlington National Cemetery site (it's possible that one isn't linked yet), and I also linked it to the
589:
115:
1856:
1840:
1668:
1534:
1484:
1447:
1396:
1366:
1321:
1207:
896:, it appears they continue to conduct a patter of behavior that is be disruptive & not in accordance with Knowledge's
27:
76:
If you have any questions, feel free to ask me at my talk page — I'm happy to help. Or, you can ask your question at the
520:
171:
1816:
describes the
Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to
1884:
1821:
1582:
1272:
1183:
1032:
951:
749:
342:
1517:, I personally created that article, but could not find any other sources that mention Rappahannock. In the case of
1230:
Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the
482:
212:
946:, and dozens of other reverted edits visible in your edit history. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to
1869:
1231:
1170:
925:
700:
401:
346:
312:
1575:
like to go through those articles again - not to criticize, but to try to help you understand and move forward.
1664:
1587:
1530:
1480:
1443:
1392:
1362:
1317:
1225:
1203:
990:
804:
636:
492:
768:
first. Given your long history of ignoring warnings regarding WP:V, and your attempts to conceal this fact by
1774:
1739:
1723:
1468:
1382:
907:
621:
553:
487:
440:
319:
1555:
1179:
947:
745:
497:
327:
163:
70:
1688:
article, I would add that one article cannot be a source for another, since this is circular. Please see
1719:
1704:
1656:
1626:
1522:
1236:
1147:
1080:
996:
975:
893:
881:
789:
777:
409:
66:
1116:
Second, it appears that you are again adding unsourced material to articles, with edits such as these:
311:
on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a
1614:
1514:
357:
151:
48:
Please excuse this intrusion as you have been around a bit already but if no one has said it before:
352:
If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.
1894:
1817:
1758:
603:
532:
323:
308:
143:
1730:). Please resolve all issues that caused you to be blocked from editing before continuing to make
1529:
improve your editing so we can unblock you (at least, that's what I'd most like to see happen) --
1521:, the serviceyears are already in the article, so I did not feel it was necessary. In the case of
1770:
1735:
1689:
1633:
1464:
1378:
903:
677:
549:
505:
104:
1091:
Searcher, I have two matters I need to talk to you about. First, regarding the following edits:
900:(even after a history of punishment). Please assist with preventing such edits from continuing.
1793:
1784:
1551:
854:
846:
822:
729:
632:
452:
256:
1813:
1797:
1754:
1700:
1649:
1607:
1602:
1567:
complete those articles, not vandalize them. I hope all of you can understand. Searcher_1990
1510:
1429:
1344:
1189:
1143:
1076:
971:
957:
873:
869:
785:
773:
755:
669:
431:
419:
405:
1812:, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
644:
573:
353:
588:
for how to do inline referencing). Many thanks! PS If you need any help, you can look at
1889:
1809:
1801:
1578:
1498:
1110:
661:
654:
597:
585:
528:
334:
281:
435:. The community has decided that all new biographies of living persons must contain a
1906:
1805:
897:
717:
713:
673:
665:
501:
444:
439:
that supports at least one statement made about the person in the article as per our
381:
338:
1686:
List of brigadier generals in the United States
Regular Army before February 2, 1901
1592:
List of brigadier generals in the United States
Regular Army before February 2, 1901
1503:
List of brigadier generals in the United States
Regular Army before February 2, 1901
1778:
1731:
1109:, you should know that punctuation goes before a citation, not after, according to
850:
581:
448:
436:
389:
380:
you will receive for your disruptive edits. The next time you violate Knowledge's
296:
1629:. if you got the information from a book, you can cite a book using the template
471:
Welcome to Knowledge. Everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, but
1377:
Can we discuss reverting the edits by this user that led to them being blocked?
709:
577:
385:
372:
341:, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see
1645:
1598:
1506:
640:
476:
246:
button, on the tool bar above Knowledge's text editing window, also does this.
20:
322:
to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only
1898:
1833:
1743:
1708:
1672:
1559:
1538:
1488:
1472:
1451:
1400:
1386:
1370:
1325:
1211:
1151:
1084:
911:
858:
837:
793:
681:
648:
610:
557:
536:
509:
456:
413:
361:
285:
277:
85:
84:
Here are some more resources to help you as you explore and contribute to
1761:) has suddenly shown up and made a massive 22,000 character addition to
639:
and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you.--
1139:
a disambiguation tag needed, without any explanation or edit summary.
242:
576:. However, one of Knowledge's core policies is that material must be
1513:' page (wich I did not make clear enough, I agree). In the case of
1432:" - but again, I can't see any mention of that in the sources used.
668:. It would be great if you could also improve the related article
392:
policies by adding unsourced material to articles, as you did with
708:
for persistent violation of various policies related to sourcing (
500:
to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.
1800:
is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Knowledge
333:
When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious
486:
for the content of your edit. This helps maintain our policy of
1655:
If you feel you need a break then a clean start, that's fine -
253:
If you would like to play around with your new Wiki skills the
15:
1877:
Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Top Ten (American TV program)
1216:
1161:
981:
916:
691:
295:
234:
193:
136:
97:
523:. Please give me your valuable time, which estimates about
345:). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found
1550:
the fact that you have continued to make unsourced edits?
1332:
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please
1352:
Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
660:
I just thought I'd let you know that I saw your article
1854:
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article
1652:
articles so you can see how they should have been done.
1509:, I put a link to the Handbook of Texas Online site at
1436:
1425:
1417:
1410:
1286:
1282:
1276:
1267:
1263:
1249:
1245:
1241:
1132:
1126:
1123:
1120:
1117:
1107:
1104:
1101:
1098:
1095:
1092:
1046:
1042:
1036:
1027:
1023:
1009:
1005:
1001:
943:
939:
935:
849:
for improving this automated tool are welcome. Thanks,
770:
removing warnings for this behavior from your talk page
769:
741:
733:
725:
721:
393:
1864:, is suitable for inclusion in Knowledge according to
1113:. It's a minor point, but I thought I'd let you know.
318:
Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not
1224:
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an
989:
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an
740:, and the most recent examples of the latter being
1497:I'll explain were I got this info; in the case of
425:Hi! It seems you recently created an unreferenced
1792:You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
1767:List of American Civil War Generals (Confederate)
1428:you added "In 1877, Paine was shot and killed by
744:. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to
175:— a summary of Knowledge's most important rules.
742:innumerable examples on your contributions page
155:— quick reference on Knowledge's mark-up codes.
738:List of foreign-born Medal of Honor recipients
65:I hope you enjoy the encyclopedia and want to
1182:. If you would like to be unblocked, you may
950:. If you would like to be unblocked, you may
748:. If you would like to be unblocked, you may
8:
1918:Wikipedians who opt out of template messages
620:Please do not add or change content without
69:. As a first step, you may wish to read the
1913:Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery
1763:List of American Civil War Generals (Union)
1699:Happy Holidays to all concerned here. :-)
803:Hi, this message is to let you know about
303:Hello. Your account has been granted the "
1135:, you removed both a citation needed tag
31:. Searcher 1990 has not edited Knowledge
1601:. OK, you added an external link to the
167:— an overview of Knowledge's foundations
1611:articles that took information from it.
1505:, on wich he is listed. In the case of
1765:and a 307,000 character deletion from
1361:) so we know where it comes from. --
594:Knowledge:New contributors' help page
7:
880:Many recent edits have been made by
572:Thanks for contributing new article
147:— a guide on where to ask questions.
1866:Knowledge's policies and guidelines
868:The following section was added to
86:the world's largest encyclopedia...
1875:The discussion will take place at
635:. Please review the guidelines at
515:Invitation to take part in a study
14:
1818:review the candidates' statements
978:) 05:58, December 20, 2011 (UTC)
596:, or just ask me. Best regards,
580:, by being clearly attributed to
496:for how to cite sources, and the
315:scheduled to end 15 August 2010.
28:This user may have left Knowledge
1847:
1749:Problem with the Generals' lists
1621:John Wainwright (Medal of Honor)
1519:John Wainwright (Medal of Honor)
799:Disambiguation link notification
784:editing since then? Try it now.
615:
567:
466:
371:
241:
19:
590:Help:Contents/Editing Knowledge
447:as soon as possible. Thanks! --
1824:. For the Election committee,
1794:Arbitration Committee election
1785:ArbCom elections are now open!
809:For more information, see the
558:16:18, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
473:when you add or change content
216:— Knowledge's hub of activity.
204:— a guide on how you can help.
1:
1857:Top Ten (American TV program)
1841:Top Ten (American TV program)
1834:13:39, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
1744:05:12, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
1709:00:17, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
1673:19:34, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
1560:13:58, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
1539:13:22, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
1489:10:39, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
1473:05:50, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
1452:10:24, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
1401:10:24, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
1387:05:50, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
1371:03:28, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
1326:19:38, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
1212:00:28, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
1174:from editing for a period of
1152:00:09, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
1085:17:25, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
929:from editing for a period of
912:09:00, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
859:13:18, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
704:from editing for a period of
394:this edit to List of suicides
307:" userright, allowing you to
286:19:08, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
794:01:44, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
682:20:48, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
649:13:48, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
475:, as you did to the article
457:00:10, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
427:biography of a living person
1820:and submit your choices on
1583:Arlington National Cemetery
1228:, who declined the request.
993:, who accepted the request.
611:14:00, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
414:00:40, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
343:Knowledge:Reviewing process
78:New contributors' help page
1934:
1826:MediaWiki message delivery
1779:20:31, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
1409:OK, here's an example. In
1198:, but you should read the
966:, but you should read the
780:) 19:07, October 16, 2011
764:, but you should read the
666:Knowledge style guidelines
537:02:12, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
324:a small number of articles
1862:significantly contributed
1714:Edits without logging in?
1336:guide to appealing blocks
1200:guide to appealing blocks
1180:make useful contributions
968:guide to appealing blocks
948:make useful contributions
766:guide to appealing blocks
746:make useful contributions
722:this unreferenced article
510:03:10, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
362:18:32, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
309:review other users' edits
201:Contributing to Knowledge
1899:01:04, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
637:Knowledge:Citing sources
493:Knowledge:Citing sources
328:Special:OldReviewedPages
273:Good luck, and have fun.
92:Finding your way around:
1885:the configuration page
1221:
1166:
1142:Can you explain this?
986:
921:
813:or drop a line at the
696:
542:Lack of edit summaries
300:
292:You are now a Reviewer
172:The Simplified Ruleset
45:Hi Searcher 1990, and
1798:Arbitration Committee
1627:James E. Robinson Jr.
1523:James E. Robinson Jr.
1273:change block settings
1220:
1194:Your reason here ~~~~
1165:
1033:change block settings
985:
962:Your reason here ~~~~
920:
760:Your reason here ~~~~
695:
299:
164:Knowledge's 5 pillars
61:Welcome to Knowledge!
50:Welcome to Knowledge!
1860:, to which you have
1748:
1615:Charles H. T. Collis
1515:Charles H. T. Collis
1435:And can you explain
805:disambiguation links
441:verifiability policy
402:blocked from editing
382:No Original Research
116:Department directory
1868:or if it should be
1802:arbitration process
1759:Knowledge:Consensus
1665:Boing! said Zebedee
1531:Boing! said Zebedee
1481:Boing! said Zebedee
1444:Boing! said Zebedee
1393:Boing! said Zebedee
1363:Boing! said Zebedee
1318:Boing! said Zebedee
1204:Boing! said Zebedee
1186:by adding the text
954:by adding the text
831:fix with Dab solver
752:by adding the text
33:since December 2011
1814:arbitration policy
1692:for more on this.
1590:. Also, a link to
1222:
1167:
987:
922:
864:Unreferenced edits
697:
301:
229:Additional tips...
1588:WP:Citing sources
1360:....</ref: -->
1184:appeal this block
952:appeal this block
940:Freeman V. Horner
823:William H. Macomb
818:
750:appeal this block
730:Leroy A. Mendonca
633:Leroy A. Mendonca
269:
268:
224:
223:
188:How you can help:
183:
182:
126:
125:
105:Table of Contents
39:
38:
1925:
1851:
1850:
1755:User:Brightgalrs
1732:disruptive edits
1650:Claron A. Windus
1638:
1632:
1608:Claron A. Windus
1603:Claron A. Windus
1511:Claron A. Windus
1430:Claron A. Windus
1421:rank he reached.
1349:
1343:
1292:
1290:
1279:
1261:
1259:deleted contribs
1219:
1197:
1164:
1052:
1050:
1039:
1021:
1019:deleted contribs
984:
965:
919:
827:check to confirm
808:
763:
694:
670:Bernard A. Byrne
631:, as you did to
619:
618:
609:
606:
600:
582:reliable sources
571:
570:
470:
469:
432:Alberto Pandolfi
420:Alberto Pandolfi
390:Reliable Sources
375:
306:
245:
235:
213:Community Portal
194:
137:
98:
52:
23:
16:
1933:
1932:
1928:
1927:
1926:
1924:
1923:
1922:
1903:
1902:
1887:. Delivered by
1852:
1848:
1845:
1822:the voting page
1788:
1751:
1716:
1636:
1630:
1355:
1347:
1341:
1340:, then use the
1329:
1306:
1280:
1270:
1256:
1239:
1232:blocking policy
1217:
1214:
1187:
1162:
1159:
1089:
1088:
1066:
1040:
1030:
1016:
999:
982:
979:
955:
936:Robert T. Henry
917:
898:manual of style
866:
815:DPL WikiProject
801:
781:
753:
692:
689:
658:
616:
604:
602:
598:
574:John B. Babcock
568:
565:
544:
517:
483:reliable source
467:
464:
437:reliable source
423:
369:
313:two-month trial
304:
294:
289:
270:
231:
225:
190:
184:
133:
127:
94:
55:
54:
47:
12:
11:
5:
1931:
1929:
1921:
1920:
1915:
1905:
1904:
1846:
1844:
1839:Nomination of
1837:
1791:
1787:
1782:
1750:
1747:
1715:
1712:
1684:Regarding the
1682:
1681:
1680:
1679:
1675:
1661:
1657:WP:Clean start
1653:
1641:
1640:
1639:
1624:
1618:
1612:
1596:
1579:John F. Weston
1569:
1568:
1563:
1562:
1546:
1545:
1544:
1543:
1542:
1541:
1499:John F. Weston
1492:
1491:
1457:
1456:
1455:
1454:
1433:
1422:
1414:
1406:
1405:
1404:
1403:
1374:
1373:
1330:
1313:
1309:Decline reason
1301:
1297:Request reason
1294:
1215:
1168:You have been
1160:
1158:
1155:
1073:
1061:
1057:Request reason
1054:
980:
923:You have been
915:
902:
865:
862:
843:
842:
841:
840:
836:was linked to
800:
797:
698:You have been
690:
688:
685:
662:James S. Casey
657:
655:James S. Casey
652:
564:
561:
543:
540:
516:
513:
481:please cite a
463:
460:
422:
417:
368:
365:
339:BLP violations
293:
290:
267:
266:
263:
262:
249:
248:
247:
233:
227:
222:
221:
218:
217:
207:
206:
205:
192:
186:
181:
180:
177:
176:
168:
158:
157:
156:
148:
135:
129:
124:
123:
120:
119:
110:
109:
108:
96:
90:
82:
56:
44:
43:
41:
37:
36:
24:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1930:
1919:
1916:
1914:
1911:
1910:
1908:
1901:
1900:
1896:
1892:
1891:
1886:
1881:
1880:the article.
1878:
1873:
1871:
1867:
1863:
1859:
1858:
1842:
1838:
1836:
1835:
1831:
1827:
1823:
1819:
1815:
1811:
1807:
1803:
1799:
1795:
1786:
1783:
1781:
1780:
1776:
1772:
1771:IcarusPhoenix
1768:
1764:
1760:
1756:
1746:
1745:
1741:
1737:
1736:Bullmoosebell
1733:
1729:
1725:
1721:
1720:84.193.82.180
1713:
1711:
1710:
1706:
1702:
1697:
1693:
1691:
1687:
1678:Searcher_1990
1676:
1674:
1670:
1666:
1662:
1658:
1654:
1651:
1647:
1642:
1635:
1628:
1625:
1622:
1619:
1616:
1613:
1609:
1604:
1600:
1597:
1593:
1589:
1584:
1580:
1577:
1576:
1573:
1572:
1571:
1570:
1565:
1564:
1561:
1557:
1553:
1548:
1547:
1540:
1536:
1532:
1527:
1526:
1524:
1520:
1516:
1512:
1508:
1504:
1500:
1496:
1495:
1494:
1493:
1490:
1486:
1482:
1477:
1476:
1475:
1474:
1470:
1466:
1465:Bullmoosebell
1462:
1453:
1449:
1445:
1441:
1440:
1438:
1434:
1431:
1427:
1423:
1419:
1415:
1412:
1408:
1407:
1402:
1398:
1394:
1390:
1389:
1388:
1384:
1380:
1379:Bullmoosebell
1376:
1375:
1372:
1368:
1364:
1357:
1356:
1354:
1353:
1346:
1339:
1337:
1328:
1327:
1323:
1319:
1312:
1310:
1305:
1300:
1298:
1293:
1288:
1284:
1278:
1274:
1269:
1265:
1260:
1255:
1251:
1250:global blocks
1247:
1246:active blocks
1243:
1238:
1237:Searcher 1990
1233:
1229:
1227:
1226:administrator
1213:
1209:
1205:
1201:
1195:
1191:
1185:
1181:
1177:
1173:
1172:
1157:December 2011
1156:
1154:
1153:
1149:
1145:
1140:
1138:
1134:
1129:
1127:
1124:
1121:
1118:
1114:
1112:
1108:
1105:
1102:
1099:
1096:
1093:
1087:
1086:
1082:
1078:
1072:
1070:
1069:Accept reason
1065:
1060:
1058:
1053:
1048:
1044:
1038:
1034:
1029:
1025:
1020:
1015:
1011:
1010:global blocks
1007:
1006:active blocks
1003:
998:
997:Searcher 1990
994:
992:
991:administrator
977:
973:
969:
963:
959:
953:
949:
945:
941:
937:
932:
928:
927:
914:
913:
909:
905:
904:Bullmoosebell
901:
899:
895:
894:Searcher 1990
891:
887:
883:
882:Searcher 1990
877:
875:
871:
863:
861:
860:
856:
852:
848:
839:
835:
834:
832:
828:
824:
821:
820:
819:
816:
812:
806:
798:
796:
795:
791:
787:
779:
775:
771:
767:
761:
757:
751:
747:
743:
739:
735:
731:
727:
723:
719:
715:
711:
707:
703:
702:
686:
684:
683:
679:
675:
671:
667:
663:
656:
653:
651:
650:
646:
642:
638:
634:
630:
628:
624:it by citing
623:
613:
612:
607:
601:
595:
591:
587:
583:
579:
575:
562:
560:
559:
555:
551:
550:Georgejdorner
547:
541:
539:
538:
534:
530:
526:
522:
514:
512:
511:
507:
503:
499:
495:
494:
489:
488:verifiability
485:
484:
478:
474:
461:
459:
458:
454:
450:
446:
443:. Please add
442:
438:
434:
433:
428:
421:
418:
416:
415:
411:
407:
403:
399:
395:
391:
387:
386:Verifiability
383:
379:
374:
366:
364:
363:
359:
355:
350:
348:
344:
340:
336:
331:
329:
325:
321:
320:autoconfirmed
316:
314:
310:
298:
291:
287:
283:
279:
275:
274:
265:
260:
259:
258:
252:
251:
250:
244:
239:
238:
237:
236:
232:
230:
220:
215:
214:
210:
209:
208:
203:
202:
198:
197:
196:
195:
191:
189:
179:
174:
173:
169:
166:
165:
161:
160:
159:
154:
153:
149:
146:
145:
141:
140:
139:
138:
134:
132:
122:
118:
117:
113:
112:
111:
107:
106:
102:
101:
100:
99:
95:
93:
88:
87:
81:
79:
74:
72:
68:
64:
63:
62:
53:
51:
42:
34:
30:
29:
25:
22:
18:
17:
1888:
1882:
1874:
1855:
1853:
1843:for deletion
1789:
1752:
1717:
1698:
1694:
1683:
1552:JamesBWatson
1460:
1458:
1437:this removal
1351:
1333:
1331:
1314:
1308:
1307:
1302:
1296:
1295:
1268:creation log
1235:
1223:
1193:
1175:
1169:
1141:
1136:
1130:
1115:
1090:
1074:
1068:
1067:
1062:
1056:
1055:
1028:creation log
995:
988:
961:
944:Paul B. Huff
930:
924:
885:
879:
878:
867:
844:
802:
782:
759:
705:
699:
659:
626:
614:
566:
563:October 2011
548:
545:
524:
518:
498:welcome page
491:
480:
472:
465:
430:
424:
397:
378:last warning
377:
376:This is the
370:
367:January 2011
351:
332:
317:
302:
272:
271:
264:
255:
254:
228:
226:
219:
211:
199:
187:
185:
178:
170:
162:
150:
142:
130:
128:
121:
114:
103:
91:
89:
83:
75:
71:Introduction
59:
58:
57:
49:
40:
32:
26:
1701:Nightscream
1690:WP:CIRCULAR
1426:this change
1411:this change
1144:Nightscream
1131:Also, with
1077:Nightscream
972:Nightscream
870:Nightscream
847:suggestions
786:Nightscream
774:Nightscream
406:Nightscream
261:is for you.
1907:Categories
1810:topic bans
1646:Adam Paine
1599:Adam Paine
1507:Adam Paine
1264:filter log
1202:first. --
1024:filter log
592:or ask at
578:verifiable
525:20 minutes
521:Main Study
477:Henry Knox
462:April 2011
445:references
354:Courcelles
152:Cheatsheet
131:Need help?
1890:SDZeroBot
1806:site bans
1634:Cite book
1334:read the
1283:checkuser
1242:block log
1133:this edit
1043:checkuser
1002:block log
838:Commodore
734:this edit
726:this edit
622:verifying
529:cooldenny
335:vandalism
144:Questions
1728:contribs
1606:for the
1418:this one
1254:contribs
1192:|reason=
1014:contribs
970:first.
960:|reason=
890:contribs
758:|reason=
674:Jipinghe
627:reliable
502:GcSwRhIc
305:reviewer
1870:deleted
1416:And in
1345:unblock
1277:unblock
1190:unblock
1176:1 month
1171:blocked
1111:WP:PAIC
1037:unblock
958:unblock
931:2 weeks
926:blocked
851:DPL bot
756:unblock
701:blocked
687:Blocked
629:sources
608:(Cindy)
449:LaraBot
257:Sandbox
1796:. The
1660:going.
876:page:
732:, and
718:WP:BLP
714:WP:NOR
706:1 week
490:. See
396:, you
1338:first
641:Bbb23
605:amuse
599:Cind.
276:FWIW
1895:talk
1830:talk
1775:talk
1740:talk
1724:talk
1705:talk
1669:talk
1648:and
1556:talk
1535:talk
1485:talk
1469:talk
1461:talk
1448:talk
1397:talk
1383:talk
1367:talk
1322:talk
1208:talk
1148:talk
1081:talk
976:talk
908:talk
886:talk
874:talk
855:talk
845:Any
790:talk
778:talk
710:WP:V
678:talk
645:talk
586:here
554:talk
533:talk
506:talk
453:talk
410:talk
398:will
358:talk
347:here
282:talk
278:Bzuk
67:stay
1790:Hi,
1753:So
1424:In
1287:log
1234:).
1137:and
1047:log
872:'s
811:FAQ
736:to
728:to
400:be
388:or
337:or
1909::
1897:)
1872:.
1832:)
1808:,
1777:)
1742:)
1734:.
1726:|
1707:)
1671:)
1637:}}
1631:{{
1558:)
1537:)
1487:)
1471:)
1450:)
1439:?
1399:)
1385:)
1369:)
1348:}}
1342:{{
1324:)
1311::
1299::
1281:•
1275:•
1271:•
1266:•
1262:•
1257:•
1252:•
1248:•
1244:•
1210:)
1196:}}
1188:{{
1150:)
1128:.
1125:,
1122:,
1119:,
1106:,
1103:,
1100:,
1097:,
1094:,
1083:)
1071::
1059::
1041:•
1035:•
1031:•
1026:•
1022:•
1017:•
1012:•
1008:•
1004:•
964:}}
956:{{
942:,
938:,
910:)
888:|
857:)
833:)
829:|
792:)
762:}}
754:{{
724:,
680:)
672:.
647:)
556:)
535:)
508:)
479:,
455:)
429::
412:)
404:.
384:,
360:)
349:.
330:.
284:)
80:.
73:.
1893:(
1828:(
1773:(
1738:(
1722:(
1703:(
1667:(
1554:(
1533:(
1483:(
1467:(
1446:(
1395:(
1381:(
1365:(
1320:(
1291:)
1289:)
1285:(
1240:(
1206:(
1146:(
1079:(
1051:)
1049:)
1045:(
1000:(
974:(
906:(
884:(
853:(
825:(
817:.
788:(
776:(
716:/
712:/
676:(
643:(
552:(
531:(
504:(
451:(
408:(
356:(
288:.
280:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
