550:
Bauer, Raul
Hilberg, Leni Yahil, and David Cesarini. Where there are changes and differences of opinion based on new discoveries, that is another matter altogether. Incidentally, European history is my area of expertise. My primary concentration was Romano-Germanic contact but my secondary ones are intellectual history and modern Germany. As an aside, I have also done some post-grad work on strategic studies and conflict, using statistical modeling against known outcomes. Anyway, I am not here to have a drawn-out debate about Holocaust historiography, when our difference of opinions was essentially about leads requiring or not requiring citations. You've established that they do for sensitive subjects. Now do I have permission to remove that "cautionary" post from my Talk Page or is there an established time period for such things when posted by an Admin, even if as I would argue, was premature in this instance. --
478:; one among many, many, articles where I have added content from RS sources throughout, using only top-notch scholars in the field. Namely since I have in my personal library some 300+ academic volumes gathered from a lifetime of study on this subject. My concern was about citing the lead, which I wrongly believed was not required from having worked with many editors, some of whom are also Admins on articles, where we merely summarized the article contents in the lead. Nevertheless, you immediately assumed the worst from me and then sent me a "cautionary" warning about this subject. Don't worry about me messing with that article now, you've sufficiently distanced me from it.--
75:
960:
accounts of the same pogrom. That's part of the purpose of YV--to be a repository of souices for further analysis. And many of its publications do have a somewhat confusing POV, officially that almost nobody supported the jews, but a great many did. As analogy, the best accessible sources for
American radical history in the 20th center are those of the Hoover Institution, They were collected for the purpose of fighting left wing tendencies , ranging from communism to trade unions.
212:
186:
140:
119:
830:
Unilaterally removing 23,000 bytes of text without discussion then edit warring to keep the changes is also usually not considered "fixing the article" nor does it constitute a collaborative approach to editing. Same goes for trying to force their way through on an article despite lack of consensus by filing spurious AE reports on flimsy pretexts (AE is not a substitute for engaging in good faith in discussion and seeking compromise).
130:
349:
234:
1219:
34:
discovered the full protection. Seven years is a long time for full protection, during which the actor has grown up and had new roles. I have not yet reviewed the draft. What I am requesting is to change the protection of the redirect from admin to extended-confirmed (which did not exist when you protected it). If you aren't actively working on such requests, I will make the request at
269:
508:
article, some to the responsibility article, and I forget where else. After that, several of us began adding sources. You are likely to find out-of-date sources in these early efforts. Since then, the main
Holocaust article has been rewritten (completely or almost completely) with different sources, but some of the others may carry the traces (or more) of those old articles.
201:
175:
167:
705:, then the simplest way to find out is to ask me. I'm not sure why you have to make that query with the words "perhaps an admin could ask them". As to the matter at hand, the answer is straight forward, the text Buidhe wishes to add is based on a sentence which doesn't even mention the topic of the article, hence it's a simple matter of
496:, you used a secondary source from 1975, something Holocaust historians would avoid because so much changed once they had access to the archives in Eastern Europe. What we need is for Holocaust articles on Knowledge (XXG) to reflect mainstream Holocaust historiography and to use standard definitions of the Holocaust. That's it.
1242:. - Thank you for your position in the arb case request, - I feel I have to stay away, but there are conversations further down on the page, in case of interest, - in a nutshell: "... will not improve kindness, nor any article". - Yesterday, I made sure on a hike that the flowers are actually blooming ;) --
959:
the material at Yad Vashem; it is not only a memorial, but also a collection of documents of different origin, often reminiscences years after the fact, often contemporary accounts, and not all of these are in exact agreement with teach other. I knew people from the same shtetl who have contradictory
549:
in their work. Anyway, if you are attempting to challenge content based solely on newer sources, find an RS that disagrees with what she wrote on that particular issue and edit away. One may find that the new source is often citing somebody like her--plenty of modern works cite her, as well as Jehuda
888:
Your first paragraph spoils your second. Please speak to me as though we're both adults.Yad Vashem is a mixed bag, as are all the museum sites. You would have to show me which page you say reflects mainstream scholarship. This is one of
Poeticbent's pages. Whether it has been rewritten since then, I
870:
The "sources are being removed" by Buidhe are high quality reliable sources, such as Yad Vashem, so ... yeah, it's a problem. Last I checked publications like Yad Vashem and academic journals dedicated to the topic of
Holocaust studies ARE in fact "mainstream scholarship". I fail to see how removing
1080:
Yes, GCB, Sarah offended me, but I know it came from a place of genuine pain â yes, I realize she said "frustration," but I'll be less understated by putting words in her mouth and say "pain." Anyway, I think the best thing moving forward is to approach this from a place of healing. My feelings are
817:
is in poor shape, including close paraphrasing in the lead from a source (a source copied from another article), and no mention in the lead or background of Polish antisemitism. It appears in a dedicated section with nothing about pre-invasion pogroms; emphasis on the rescuers but no mention of how
33:
There were repeated efforts to create an article on this child actor in 2013 and 2014, but it has been cut down to a redirect, and you then fully protected it due to repeated re-creation. There is now a draft on this teenage actor. I tried to tag the redirect as a redirect with possibilities, but
862:
that you've recently made. These are especially troubling coming from an administrator and they constitute "conduct unbecoming". For whatever reason you've chosen not to do me the courtesy of reciprocating in kind. Your comment referring to my attempt to answer you in good faith as "sophistry" is
733:
Speaking of Yad Vashem, somehow you haven't brought up the fact that the MAIN problem with Buidhe's edits to the article is the massive removal of 23000k worth of text, text which is based on reliable sources. Buidhe is removing Yad Vashem as a source. Buidhe is removing Yale
University Press as a
564:
As I said on your page, I didn't give you the alert as an admin, but as an editor. You can remove it, yes. The point of it is simply that you've been alerted; the ArbCom requires this before we can complain about someone's editing under the discretionary-sanctions system. You should follow some of
461:
What you say is true about other articles, but you're writing about the
Holocaust. If you were writing a medical article, you would use medical sources. When writing a history article, please use history sources. Also, see the tag at the top of the talk page about another ArbCom case. High-quality
409:
Hi Sarah -- While I agree with the tag about clarifying the one sentence, which was poorly written in the opening (I corrected to reflect what I think the author intended based on the article contents), I have always understood that the opening (lede/Summary) for articles do not require citations.
900:
I am speaking to you as one adult to another, and I am being as courteous as one can under the circumstances (specifically, after being personally attacked and insulted by you). You are unfortunately making sure to include at least one personal attack or swipe or false aspersion (like insinuating
829:
Thanks for your feedback. However this does not address any of the issues raised. Buidhe is removing reliable sources such as Yad Vashem, Yale
University Press, Holocaust and Genocide Studies, and other reliable sources from the article. I'm not clear how that constitutes "fixing the article".
544:
In this case, the 1975 work is from Lucy
Dawidowicz and very little of what she wrote years ago appears on that page. Nonetheless, she was considered among the foremost experts and where she's quoted is not especially debatable. Furthermore, her opinion would still be respected by contemporary
507:
Some background to these articles, which may help: some or all of the early drafts of certain
Holocaust articles were written by an editor who is an historian. He wrote them in sandboxes without sources, and gave us permission to carry them over into mainspace. Some went to the main Holocaust
1046:
some space, as in a fighting chance. I mean the whole thing about the "150 localities," etc. â if that is what that Cambridge University Press work is saying, then, to me, that comes across as critical context. It's important that genuine scholarly views are not drowned by numbers. That the
462:
sources are required at every point throughout the text. The truth is that this is a very poor article that was copied over from an old version of the main Holocaust article in or around 2006. I don't really want to get involved in it, but I was trying to make the lead less counterfactual.
689:: "n editor who is involved in a significant controversy or dispute with another individualâwhether on- or off-wikiâor who is an avowed rival of that individual, should not edit that person's biography or other material about that person, given the potential conflict of interest."
1003:
SlimVirgin, the "poor shape" of the article is just your opinion you have the right to hold. Others might not agree with you as far as that "poor shape" of the article. Do others have the right to not agree with you Sarah? I believe they do. What strikes me in your reply is that
1122:, apologies for the belated reply, but I feel I need to stress that I did mean frustration. The editors complaining about this situation are frustrated that we can't edit these articles like any other history article, namely by summarizing the best history sources. That's it.
1085:
editing the subject of your former respective bans. It's all rather tenuous. It shouldn't be about who slips first, but about ensuring that editorial work in this area is bar none. That it rivals any top-tier university or research institute. Again, I'm a dreamer.
937:
Well, you're trying to justify removal of text sourced to Yad Vashem. Calling it a "mixed bag" is kind of like trying to say they're unreliable without having to use the word "unreliable" because it's obvious that calling it unreliable outright would be a fringe
720:"Jews lived in Poland for 800 years before the Nazi occupation. On the eve of the occupation 3.3 million Jews lived in Poland â more than any other country in Europe. Their percentage among the general population â about 10% â was also the highest in Europe.
565:
the links on the template to inform yourself about this. Thank you for explaining your background. My preference is to source Holocaust articles to reasonably up-to-date specialist Holocaust historians. Please do look at the tag at the top of
871:
such sources from the article is helping the article "reflect current mainstream scholarship". If anything, it's doing the opposite. And that's the crux of the matter here, which you have repeatedly side stepped or deflect addressing.
729:
Notice that there isn't anything in there of the sort that Buidhe wants to SYNTHesize into the Knowledge (XXG) article? I don't know about you, but personally I consider how YV organizes their article a pretty good template for ours.
863:
just more of the same. If you wish to have a serious conversation about this matter then you will need to cut that out and treat your fellow Wikipedians with respect and courtesy that is required by our policies. This is a
738:
journal. Etc. I did mention this four or five times but I guess it escaped your notice. Perhaps an admin could ask Buidhe why they are removing these reliable sources from the article? Or maybe you could ask Buidhe that?
818:
they were scared their neighbours would find out they had helped Jews. Buidhe is trying to fix the article. It would make sense to give her space, instead of repeatedly reverting so that she can't even get started.
901:
that I am not "speaking to you as an adult") per each of your comments. Let's remember here that YOU are the administrator, so really, YOU are suppose to set the example. So why am I the only one being civil here?
1081:
not as important as the body of work that the project features on this key subject. Obviously, Buidhe finds it challenging to collaborate. And obviously, both of you and VM are formerly banned editors who are
925:
You see the problem? I wrote: "Yad Vashem is a mixed bag." You summarize that as "going down the road of insisting that Yad Vashem is not reliable". This is why I had to stop editing in this area in May 2020.
447:
Well evidently, I have been misinformed for years then. Nonetheless, I can point to dozens upon dozens of articles where that is the case. BTW -- thanks for being profoundly terse, it's really appreciated.--
473:
Funny that you'd tell a professional historian about citing a history article. Let's overstate the obvious that "this is a very poor article"...which is why I was going to start cleaning it up, like I did
627:
They are posting links to sources such as, HOLOCAUST DEPROGRAMMING COURSE â Free yourself from a lifetime of Holo-brainwashing about âSix Millionâ Jews âgassedâ in âGas Chambers Disguised as Shower Rooms
569:. There is more than one ArbCom remedy in place; high-quality sourcing is a requirement (not optional) at those articles for anything related to Poland. If you don't mind, I'd prefer to close this now.
1008:. Your onslaughts against other editors, including hard-working administrators, were out of line. You offended your fellow editors but you seem not to incline to even slightly apologize for it.
847:
The sophistry is really unhelpful. She's rewriting, so sources are being removed and others are being added. The article needs a rewrite to make sure it reflects current mainstream scholarship.
492:
I don't want to have a discussion about what you do in real life, because I don't know, and I don't know what you mean by "professional historian" or what area of history. I did notice that in
250:
904:
And I'm sorry, but if you're going down the road of insisting that Yad Vashem is not reliable, then you're the one who's left "mainstream scholarship" behind and are walking down that
1290:
1282:
1277:
You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at
858:
SlimVirgin, I've taken care to reply to your comments in as polite and collegial manner as possible and in doing so I've chosen to ignore your insults, false accusations and
314:
319:
1047:
discussion proceeds in a manner which represents prevailing views among the best sources, with arguments to that effect taken to their logical conclusion, truly.
1294:
309:
1319:
You know I was on the "other side" but more than anything I want a resolution to the tug of war over a minor figure, so you may wish to wade in :) Be well.
1278:
133:
106:
976:
This is true but in this case the source is a Yad Vashem article, not primary sources. I don't think anyone would argue that they're not reliable.
709:. In regard to your assertion that "this is bog-standard Holocaust history" that is not true either. It's interwar history. For example, here is
333:
1195:
633:
609:
889:
don't know, but it wasn't based on the scholarship then, and in any event scholarship moves on. These articles have to be updated.
493:
475:
254:
329:
215:
189:
155:
151:
147:
143:
219:
193:
404:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
599:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
296:
779:
so we could further review it together. And what Buidhe does? Buidhe restores her preferred version into the main space
337:
356:
714:
43:
765:
623:
There is a holocaust denier that is trying to put Neo Nazi websites as sources Can something be done about this?
1199:
1022:
814:
800:
637:
613:
1191:
281:
1247:
566:
211:
185:
139:
1315:
Hiya. Just though I'd give you a headsup that the Patxi Xabier Lezama Perier page has been recreated as
426:
285:
1039:
979:
941:
911:
874:
833:
745:
671:
555:
483:
452:
415:
39:
17:
129:
1324:
1181:
Mass POV pushing /source removal by Volunteer Marek on the Institute of National Remembrance page
905:
686:
369:
subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by
1281:. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at
1238:, who stood up for future with the striking school children when he was in his 90s, - a model, -
1133:
Sure, Sarah. Emphasis noted. Obviously, your fortitude greatly exceeds mine in this area. //Out.
1075:
1035:
1015:
793:
630:
https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=The_Pink_Swastika&diff=1005035677&oldid=1004876187
79:
67:
1146:
706:
246:
1257:
1243:
392:
35:
382:
1328:
1305:
1266:
1251:
1203:
1187:
https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Institute_of_National_Remembrance&action=history
1164:
1153:
1137:
1128:
1114:
1103:
1090:
1066:
1051:
1029:
971:
950:
932:
920:
895:
883:
859:
853:
842:
824:
807:
754:
695:
680:
653:
641:
617:
575:
559:
514:
502:
487:
468:
456:
435:
419:
386:
370:
366:
96:
59:
47:
1261:
1159:
1123:
1109:
1061:
927:
890:
848:
819:
690:
648:
570:
551:
509:
497:
479:
463:
448:
442:
430:
411:
284:
will begin on 05 February 2021, 14:00 (UTC) and end on 26 February 2021, 13:59 (UTC). The
91:
54:
118:
1320:
378:
1303:
1235:
967:
1287:
Please add your evidence by March 13, 2021, which is when the evidence phase closes.
53:
I think I'd prefer to leave this to RfPP, but thank you for checking with me first.
1056:
The sourcing in that article needs work, and the citations aren't written clearly.
725:
After the conquest of Poland by Germany and the Soviet Union in September 1939..."
233:
1043:
1218:
710:
85:
344:
Feedback request: Knowledge (XXG) policies and guidelines request for comment
1226:
1150:
1134:
1119:
1100:
1087:
1048:
268:
200:
174:
27:
1298:
962:
289:
365:
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of
1149:
redirect earlier today. Hope that helps, even if only in a small way.
166:
288:
of current stewards is being held in parallel. You can automatically
608:
I have opened a section on the talk page. Please have a look. Love,
701:
Hi SlimVirgin, if you're ever wondering why I made an edit I made,
360:
on a "Knowledge (XXG) policies and guidelines" request for comment
1099:
you, even though you're here and this is your talk page, Sarah!
1316:
259:
post-1992 politics of United States and closely related people
1060:. It makes sense to let Buidhe see what she can do with it.
1042:, honestly, I also would recommend that maybe you both give
347:
165:
112:
1006:
you don't mention anything about Buidhe's improper behavior
1291:
Knowledge (XXG):Arbitration/Requests/Case/RexxS/Workshop
1283:
Knowledge (XXG):Arbitration/Requests/Case/RexxS/Evidence
1239:
1186:
1057:
780:
702:
665:
629:
1289:
You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage,
771:
the background section with Buidhe; I asked Buidhe to
867:
standard of conduct, especially for an administrator.
790:Do you have anything to tell about such conduct? -
1108:That's okay. I find this whole thing exhausting.
764:Did you give trouble to look at this conversation
425:There has never been an exception for leads. See
80:Talk:The Holocaust § RfC - First sentence in lede
68:Talk:The Holocaust § RfC - First sentence in lede
1295:Knowledge (XXG):Arbitration/Guide to arbitration
775:for me to compose the background that I aimed to
1279:Knowledge (XXG):Arbitration/Requests/Case/RexxS
788:"talk page consensus to work from this version"
1293:. For a guide to the arbitration process, see
8:
1217:
1213:
1189:
102:Administrators' newsletter â February 2021
78:You are invited to join the discussion at
713:'s article on basically the same subject
101:
760:Continuation of my response to you at AE
295:Knowledge (XXG) has now been around for
1317:https://en.wikipedia.org/Xabier_Lezama
377:Message delivered to you with love by
299:, and recently saw its billionth edit!
258:
7:
1145:Also noting that I have created the
647:Thanks, I see they've been blocked.
400:The following discussion is closed.
109:from the past month (January 2021).
107:News and updates for administrators
24:
1297:. For the Arbitration Committee,
595:The discussion above is closed.
494:Responsibility for the Holocaust
476:Responsibility for the Holocaust
267:
247:standard discretionary sanctions
232:
210:
199:
184:
173:
138:
128:
117:
73:
355:Your feedback is requested at
736:Holocaust and Genocide Studies
545:historians, many of whom cite
1:
1329:12:39, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
1306:04:53, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
1252:14:54, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
1165:05:57, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
1154:05:50, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
1138:05:41, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
1129:05:31, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
1115:05:25, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
1104:23:01, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
1091:22:59, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
1067:22:51, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
1052:21:46, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
1030:12:02, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
972:07:17, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
951:13:04, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
933:02:45, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
921:02:24, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
896:02:10, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
884:02:01, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
854:00:59, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
843:00:35, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
696:02:23, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
1185:Just wanted to let you know.
825:23:01, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
808:08:39, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
755:07:36, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
681:22:16, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
654:04:53, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
642:04:50, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
618:11:16, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
576:03:00, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
560:02:44, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
515:02:29, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
503:02:02, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
488:01:53, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
469:01:32, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
457:01:28, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
436:01:22, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
420:01:02, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
387:00:30, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
381::) | Is this wrong? Contact
362:. Thank you for helping out!
338:19:10, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
261:, replacing the 1932 cutoff.
97:17:48, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
60:01:19, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
48:16:09, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
1234:Today, we have a DYK about
777:post on the talk page first
734:source. Buidhe is removing
358:Talk:GameStop short squeeze
1344:
703:as apparently you are here
668:? BOTH parts of it please.
330:MediaWiki message delivery
1267:04:06, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
1225:
1216:
1204:02:39, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
664:You want to explain this
597:Please do not modify it.
402:Please do not modify it.
367:Feedback Request Service
1273:Arbitration Case Opened
815:The Holocaust in Poland
716:. The "background" is:
310:Discuss this newsletter
1158:Good idea, thank you.
567:Talk:Holocaust victims
352:
290:check your eligibility
282:2021 Steward elections
170:
351:
169:
123:Administrator changes
410:Has that changed? --
286:confirmation process
18:User talk:SlimVirgin
1260:, thanks for this.
1095:Sorry for speaking
1058:Current references
403:
371:removing your name
353:
171:
1265:
1232:
1231:
1206:
1194:comment added by
1163:
1127:
1113:
1079:
1065:
1028:
987:
949:
931:
919:
894:
882:
852:
841:
823:
806:
753:
694:
679:
652:
574:
513:
501:
467:
434:
401:
393:Holocaust victims
374:
340:
255:amended by motion
251:American Politics
229:
228:
205:Oversight changes
179:CheckUser changes
58:
1335:
1301:
1264:
1221:
1214:
1162:
1126:
1112:
1073:
1064:
1027:
1025:
1020:
1013:
986:
984:
982:Volunteer Marek
977:
948:
946:
944:Volunteer Marek
939:
930:
918:
916:
914:Volunteer Marek
909:
893:
881:
879:
877:Volunteer Marek
872:
860:personal attacks
851:
840:
838:
836:Volunteer Marek
831:
822:
805:
803:
798:
791:
767:? I'm trying to
752:
750:
748:Volunteer Marek
743:
693:
678:
676:
674:Volunteer Marek
669:
651:
573:
512:
500:
466:
446:
433:
364:
350:
327:
271:
236:
214:
203:
188:
177:
142:
132:
121:
113:
94:
88:
77:
76:
57:
1343:
1342:
1338:
1337:
1336:
1334:
1333:
1332:
1313:
1299:
1275:
1212:
1183:
1040:Volunteer Marek
1023:
1016:
1014:
1010:That's not okay
980:
978:
942:
940:
912:
910:
875:
873:
834:
832:
813:To VM and GCB:
801:
794:
792:
762:
746:
744:
672:
670:
662:
625:
606:
601:
600:
440:
406:
396:
383:my bot operator
348:
346:
341:
325:
324:
249:authorized for
230:
104:
90:
86:
74:
71:
40:Robert McClenon
31:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
1341:
1339:
1312:
1309:
1274:
1271:
1270:
1269:
1230:
1229:
1223:
1222:
1211:
1210:Green for hope
1208:
1182:
1179:
1178:
1177:
1176:
1175:
1174:
1173:
1172:
1171:
1170:
1169:
1168:
1167:
1117:
1070:
1069:
1054:
1001:
1000:
999:
998:
997:
996:
995:
994:
993:
992:
991:
990:
989:
988:
957:
956:
955:
954:
953:
902:
868:
761:
758:
699:
698:
661:
658:
657:
656:
624:
621:
605:
602:
594:
593:
592:
591:
590:
589:
588:
587:
586:
585:
584:
583:
582:
581:
580:
579:
578:
526:
525:
524:
523:
522:
521:
520:
519:
518:
517:
505:
407:
398:
397:
395:
390:
363:
345:
342:
326:
323:
322:
317:
312:
306:
305:
304:
303:
302:
301:
300:
293:
280:Voting in the
265:
264:
263:
262:
227:
226:
223:
222:
197:
196:
163:
161:
159:
158:
136:
111:
103:
100:
70:
66:Discussion at
64:
63:
62:
38:. Thank you.
30:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1340:
1331:
1330:
1326:
1322:
1318:
1310:
1308:
1307:
1304:
1302:
1296:
1292:
1288:
1284:
1280:
1272:
1268:
1263:
1259:
1256:
1255:
1254:
1253:
1249:
1245:
1241:
1237:
1236:Wilhelm Knabe
1228:
1224:
1220:
1215:
1209:
1207:
1205:
1201:
1197:
1196:80.56.198.213
1193:
1188:
1180:
1166:
1161:
1157:
1156:
1155:
1152:
1148:
1144:
1141:
1140:
1139:
1136:
1132:
1131:
1130:
1125:
1121:
1118:
1116:
1111:
1107:
1106:
1105:
1102:
1098:
1094:
1093:
1092:
1089:
1084:
1077:
1076:edit conflict
1072:
1071:
1068:
1063:
1059:
1055:
1053:
1050:
1045:
1041:
1037:
1036:GizzyCatBella
1034:
1033:
1032:
1031:
1026:
1021:
1019:
1018:GizzyCatBella
1011:
1007:
985:
983:
975:
974:
973:
969:
965:
964:
958:
952:
947:
945:
936:
935:
934:
929:
924:
923:
922:
917:
915:
907:
903:
899:
898:
897:
892:
887:
886:
885:
880:
878:
869:
866:
861:
857:
856:
855:
850:
846:
845:
844:
839:
837:
828:
827:
826:
821:
816:
812:
811:
810:
809:
804:
799:
797:
796:GizzyCatBella
789:
785:
781:
778:
774:
770:
766:
759:
757:
756:
751:
749:
740:
737:
731:
727:
726:
722:
721:
717:
715:
712:
708:
704:
697:
692:
688:
685:
684:
683:
682:
677:
675:
667:
659:
655:
650:
646:
645:
644:
643:
639:
635:
631:
622:
620:
619:
615:
611:
603:
598:
577:
572:
568:
563:
562:
561:
557:
553:
548:
543:
542:
541:
540:
539:
538:
537:
536:
535:
534:
533:
532:
531:
530:
529:
516:
511:
506:
504:
499:
495:
491:
490:
489:
485:
481:
477:
472:
471:
470:
465:
460:
459:
458:
454:
450:
444:
439:
438:
437:
432:
428:
424:
423:
422:
421:
417:
413:
405:
394:
391:
389:
388:
385:. | Sent at
384:
380:
375:
372:
368:
361:
359:
343:
339:
335:
331:
321:
318:
316:
313:
311:
308:
307:
298:
294:
291:
287:
283:
279:
278:
277:
276:
275:
274:
273:Miscellaneous
270:
260:
256:
252:
248:
244:
243:
242:
241:
240:
239:
235:
225:
221:
217:
213:
209:
208:
207:
206:
202:
195:
191:
190:Berean Hunter
187:
183:
182:
181:
180:
176:
168:
164:
162:
157:
153:
149:
145:
141:
137:
135:
131:
127:
126:
125:
124:
120:
115:
114:
110:
108:
99:
98:
95:
93:
89:
81:
69:
65:
61:
56:
52:
51:
50:
49:
45:
41:
37:
29:
26:
19:
1314:
1286:
1276:
1244:Gerda Arendt
1233:
1190:â Preceding
1184:
1142:
1096:
1082:
1017:
1009:
1005:
1002:
981:
961:
943:
913:
876:
864:
835:
795:
787:
783:
776:
772:
768:
763:
747:
741:
735:
732:
728:
724:
723:
719:
718:
700:
673:
666:edit summary
663:
634:78.92.85.246
626:
610:46.221.87.49
607:
596:
546:
527:
408:
399:
376:
357:
354:
272:
266:
237:
231:
224:
204:
198:
178:
172:
160:
144:Mattflaschen
122:
116:
105:
83:
72:
32:
1227:Lenten Rose
427:WP:LEADCITE
238:Arbitration
216:Someguy1221
711:Yad Vashem
552:Obenritter
480:Obenritter
449:Obenritter
443:SlimVirgin
412:Obenritter
1321:Akerbeltz
906:WP:FRINGE
687:WP:BLPCOI
379:Yapperbot
315:Subscribe
257:to cover
148:Nandesuka
28:Dev Joshi
1240:see here
1192:unsigned
1147:WP:APLRS
1083:actively
908:highway.
784:claiming
742:Thanks!
707:WP:SYNTH
604:Misogyny
328:Sent by
297:20 years
292:to vote.
134:Hog Farm
84:warmly,
1262:SarahSV
1160:SarahSV
1124:SarahSV
1110:SarahSV
1062:SarahSV
928:SarahSV
891:SarahSV
865:minimal
849:SarahSV
820:SarahSV
769:discuss
691:SarahSV
660:Ummm...
649:SarahSV
571:SarahSV
510:SarahSV
498:SarahSV
464:SarahSV
431:SarahSV
320:Archive
152:Savidan
55:SarahSV
1311:Lezama
1044:Buidhe
87:ezlev.
1258:Gerda
1097:about
968:talk
938:view.
253:were
156:Wangi
16:<
1325:talk
1248:talk
1200:talk
1151:El_C
1143:P.S.
1135:El_C
1120:El_C
1101:El_C
1088:El_C
1049:El_C
1012:. -
786:...
773:wait
638:talk
614:talk
556:talk
528:â
484:talk
453:talk
416:talk
334:talk
245:The
220:Xeno
194:Xeno
92:talk
44:talk
36:RFPP
1300:SQL
963:DGG
547:her
82:.
1327:)
1285:.
1250:)
1202:)
1038:,
1024:đ
970:)
802:đ
782:,
640:)
616:)
558:)
486:)
455:)
429:.
418:)
336:)
218:â˘
192:â˘
154:â˘
150:â˘
146:â˘
46:)
1323:(
1246:(
1198:(
1078:)
1074:(
966:(
636:(
632:.
612:(
554:(
482:(
451:(
445::
441:@
414:(
373:.
332:(
42:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
