User talk:Woodroar/Archive 6

600:, if reliable sources cover the name controversy/discrepancy/change/etc., then yes—or more accurately, maybe. So say a reputable site publishes an in-depth article covering the joke, where it came from, that some places were duped (if that's what happened), then that might deserve a sentence or two in the article. But if it's a trivial mention in a really short news report, then maybe it's not important enough for us to summarize at all. Or let's say that multiple sources cover it in-depth, then we'd almost certainly write about it and maybe even add an entire section. Our goal is to summarize what reliable sources say and roughly in proportion to how much coverage they give each aspect of the subject. So we really need to look to them and gauge whether such a section would deserve a sentence or a paragraph...or nothing at all. But the sources really need to come first. 1904:

skeptical. "We're looking for hundreds" seems like a fantastically extraordinary claim to me since that would likely require an editor to peruse through hundreds upon hundreds of "throwbacks" just to get to the "required" hundreds of "keepers", and that just does not sound believable to me from a practical standpoint, especially when even you yourself limited the numbers of sources to be reviewed by switching from the "all" tab to the "news" tab, and it makes more sense to me other editors would be seeking to lessen their workload in this same manner, not increase it by searching for an overkill amount of sources if they have enough to prove reliability. "Dozens" sounds more believable though. At least that sounds like it might be within the realm of possibility! Anyway, thanks again for your help. :)

2883:

Nietzsche Society meeting at Brown Univ. last October, 2022. This can be confirmed by inspecting the communication sent out to members during the conference, contacting Paul Kastafanas at Boston Univ. (who is presently the head of the organization) for confirmation, or contacting the organization itself, which is based at Stanford Univ. (North American Nietzsche Society or NANS). Also the keynote speaker at their conference in Atlanta in 2021 was Prof. Christa Davis Acampora of Emory Univ., who also was head of the Journal of Nietzsche Studies for years, and who also positively reviewed the film.

3015:

to prevent a reordering of the text while retaining whatever meaning Zarathustra imparts. Smith has shown this to be true in convincing detail. While about a third of the text is not adapted and several chapters are rearranged and combined, the film unfolds as smoothly as Nietzsche's text. Apart from its role as an interpretation, the video would also help to provoke discussion about Nietzsche's text itself. Several colleagues were surprised to learn that their criticisms of the set as too minimalistic and Zarathustra's voice as lacking inflection have no basis in Nietzsche's text.

348:, but mostly for basic, uncontroversial facts. In this case, we'd need high-quality sources to support any claims about the type of pornography someone makes, particularly if we're throwing around words like "violent". Likewise, a YouTube video from an unverified account is unlikely to meet our sourcing requirements. If reliable sources consider the video important enough to cover, then we can mention it in the article—but we'd cite them, not the YouTube video itself. Keep in mind that our "job" here at Knowledge (XXG) is to summarize what reliable sources say, not to highlight what 1751: 2975:, on the other hand, has been a legitimate journal for nearly 50 years—at least as far as I can tell. However, I'm not sure if their reviews are peer reviewed or simply submitted. In addition, the only parts that I've been able to read, pages 80 and 82, weren't very favorable; in fact, on page 82 it says "I feel compelled to discourage the purchase of this tape". I understand that, according to you, the reviewer later "complimented the improved sound and imagery"—but without that being published, there's not much for us to discuss. 2675:

especially since it is from an adaptation from a text, from a philosopher from the western tradition who is controversial for some. So let's talk about the existence of the film and what counts for putting it on Knowledge (XXG). I could easily refer you here to my website, which really is a kind of resume, but that would be self serving, self promoting, and only one source. In addition, like a resume, one must believe what is there is true. So all I can do now is explain things, then you must go check.

3019:

alter-ego often addresses Zarathustra in a way befitting a father speaking to his son - which is precisely how Nietzsche frequently referred to Zarathustra. Several scenes that address relationships between men and women, such as "On chastity" and "On little Old and Young women", take on a new meaning in the video as they become dialogues between Nietzsche and a woman. This woman is undoubtly Lou Salomé, with whom Nietzsche had an intense relationship shortly before writing the first book of Zarathustra.

2875:

also true that I neglected to tell you that the sound and images were greatly improved before the film was being distributed by Films for the Humanities and Sciences. In fact, when the film was being considered for viewing before the North American Nietzsche Society, 2021 - 2022, Prof. Domino saw the film again and complimented the improved sound and imagery. And the deep impression the film made on him again after almost 20 years. Communications between him and the film's creator confirm this.

1438:! A book written by an expert and published by a reputable publisher might be considered reliable, but it depends on the context. Is the expert widely cited by other reliable sources, or do they simply claim that they're an expert? Does the publisher have a transparent editorial process and are they known for publishing trustworthy books, or is it front for self-publishing? The specific claims being cited also matter. You can get more general (but important) information at 3061:

its submitted reviews. So to sum up, it's a questionable source (because of the unclear editorial process for its reviews) that gives an overall negative review of the film; either are disqualifiers for recommending your film in an external links section on Knowledge (XXG). As I said, if there were unequivocally positive reviews that published through the editorial process of a reliable source, that would satisfy me—but I haven't seen those sources yet.

31: 903: 680: 2493: 175: 2046: 299:

accurate. Also the other paragraph with new update about his life is accurate, and the cite for that video it is there. I don't know what can be better than a video with the person itself admitting and saying those things in front of camera to the public. How is it possible that a video of the person himself is taken into account less than information from third-party media ? I hope you could let this edition.

1933: 2190: 1119: 2521:. These are specially-designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Knowledge (XXG)’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced and Knowledge (XXG) administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project. 2100: 2295:, so it probably was released in 1978, not 1975. However, there aren't any good sources backing up that claim, so what we need is a reliable, third-party source. We can use primary sources like interviews in a limited capacity, but release dates—especially when it comes to "first" this or that—should really be cited to someone neutral. I'll start a discussion at 2063:. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Knowledge (XXG). If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Knowledge (XXG) (see 1292: 997:

that. STOP. I am trying to edit as people are free to do; I am not vandalising pages or adding incorrect information. I am correcting the pages. I am also asking for help within the confines of the Merseyside community. As people like yourself do not understand what I am editing and are trying to bully me off here. I won't have it. This is unjustified.

443:

all and that it was a meme that started in the Ice Poseidon subreddit. Everything points to Misrendino being the real name. The other sources which called him anything other than that has clearly not done enough research about his real name. The yearbook is literal proof and probably more reliable than the sources you've looked from.

3120:, which means that we neutrally (or fairly) summarize what reliable sources say, without adding our own interpretations, whether or not we agree. Reviews often include positives and negatives, but we need to respect their overall view. Otherwise, we'd all be cherry-picking praise from Siskel and Ebert's two-thumbs-down reviews. 2867:

works - you say you are a volunteer - but your rigor, here, is commendable. It is just the standards that are difficult for me. I suppose rapid clarity on some of these issues could be achieved by going right to a website, "bookb4face.wordpress" but that is just one source and could seem self promoting.

3146:

manuscript. Send three copies for a blind review process, with the author's name appearing only on a attached letter giving title, affiliation, and complete address. Contributors should keep copies of all materials submitted. Teaching Philosophy subscribes to APA guidelines for manuscript handling."

3060:

I don't have access to Teaching Philosophy, only what I've found online through a Google search, and the summary was that Domino couldn't recommend the film. I know that Teaching Philosophy is a journal, which I assume means that its articles are peer-reviewed, but I don't know if that's the case for

3022:

There are many other spendid flourishes throughout the production. Zarathustra's serpent, for example, is played by a woman in an undoing of Genesis of which Nietzsche would surely approve. When Zarathustra complains that his auditors have distorted his teachings, a portrait of Hitler is flashed on

3014:

page 81: "Ronald Gerard Smith, the dramatist, did a remarkable job of remaining faithful to Nietzsche's text while simultaneously offering a provocative interpretation of it. Postmodern interpreters of Nietzsche, among others, have long held that Zarathustra lacks a narrative structure rigid enough

2687:

The adaptation from the text and producer of both the theater and film productions were made by an Assistant Professor of Philosophy at the College of San Mateo, California (at the time). On his website, you will find a brochure that describes the scenes from the text that are in the film as well as

2597:

Films are not published. This film of "Thus Spoke Zarathustra" was distributed by Films for the Humanities and Sciences from 2012 - 2019, then I cancelled the contract. I am doing all this work to satisfy your need to know the legitimate existence of the film - what work are you doing to verify the

1542:

and mention the best three or four sources you've got. For the most part, those are the editors who would be commenting in any deletion discussion, and they should be able to gauge if it's worth going to the effort of creating the article. Even if they don't like your sources, they may know of better

1511:

I would love to write a draft, but getting everything deleted because of a lack of sources is...counter productive? It's not a video game, per se, so places like meta critic arn't really where the game exists at...and the word "Battlemaster" makes *any* information hard to find since every game since

1479:

This book was self published, but a quick google shows he's got several other books and teaches some courses at a university in Romania - I will admit I don't speak the language most of his qualifications are in. edit: also I figure there is little point to writing a draft and sending to the teahouse

1262:

Any time you see any version of an article or draft for a Bikram Malati, it's a sockpuppet of, well, Bikram Malati. I think there are at least 6 or 7 versions of page titles with his name that are on extended protection because he keeps recreating biographies of himself. I've reported this account at

3034:

I believe the way out of this is to make a distinction between the drama adaptation and the film. Although many "secondary" sources positively reviewed the film, as you have discovered, (and the flaws Domino refers to were corrected by Films for the Humanities and Sciences in 2012 when they began

2874:

You mentioned the review of the film in Teaching Philosophy by Prof. Brian Domino, Miami Univ., that is was short. Was what you read, the 2 pages (80 and 81) from the Journal? It is true, he critiqued the sound quality of the cassette but otherwise was very positive about the overall piece. It is

1704:

falls short of the criteria for inclusion. There's no age and it reads as comical, not an intentional "I'm broadcasting my specific date of birth to the Internet". It's clear that other editors agree with removing it. I will say that I'm not strongly opposed to including it, just leaning opposed. Of

1660:

As far as I understand BLP policy, having Quinn's birth date on their article wouldn't count as a privacy violation because they revealed it on a public venue (i.e. Twitter) and, as far as I know, made no effort whatsoever to hide it after Gamergate broke out. BLPPRIVACY does allow for the inclusion

548:

Yeah I'd like to apologize. I'm very new to this, so I shouldn't have edited the article without reading how it works. I understand now that Rinaudo is more commonly used with reliable sources and even Matthew refers himself as Rinaudo. So the obvious choice for the Knowledge (XXG) article is to use

132:

edited by Jonathan Lewis, an English professor at Troy University (Alabama, not Çanakkale Province). I linked to the collection's Google Books preview, which has a detailed ToC and part of the index, as well as a helpful Preface containing a biography of Stephenson and detailed descriptions of each

3154:

But before, without having the evidence for the "blind review process", and without knowing page 81 (unbelievable), you selectively choose the review's negative response to the tape (which is a different word than film, CD, streaming, and, most importantly, ADAPTATION, etc.). The only word constant

3004:

You have looked at pages 80 and 82 of the review - what happened to reading page 81? This leads me to believe you have looked at a version of the journal from March 1998, from the Philosophy Documentation Center, which seems to show only the first and last pages of the articles/reviews (unless you

2916:

because someone needs to be able to check that source. A review written by Kathleen Higgins to you hasn't been published, at least for our purposes. If it were posted online, it would still be a primary source and useless to us. The same is true about communications between you and Brian Domino, or

2744:

I understand the difficulty in determining the value of this object, both because it is original and not a Hollywood film. But know we have not had a miscommunication here but rather a clashing of worlds: the old idea of publishing and the new one; the old way of making films and the new one; the

2670:

This is a very difficult thing for me to write, not only because I've had to justify the relevance of this film so many times, but also because there have been so many interlocutioners, I'm never sure I'm talking to someone who can make responsible decisions about a culturally relevant object. But

558:: it's totally fine, really. I'll admit that this is a weird case. It's entirely possible that Rinaudo is a joke, but if he got The New York Times and ComicBook.com to go along with it, then that's kinda what we have to follow. And maybe sources will come along tomorrow that say "wait a minute, his 442:

There are also various of other proof that shows that Mizkif's real name is Matthew Joseph Misrendino. The name "Rinaudo" comes from an old meme in the 2017 era, where he called himself Rinaudo to jokingly act like he is siblings with Emily Rinaudo. There is proof that those two are not related at

298:

Excuse me Woodroar, but i think it's a total mistake to undone the edit about the subject in question. The information bringed is totally real and verifibly, i don't know if it's posible to cite porn pages to show you how the category of hardcore pornography and the type of porn he has realized are

3042:

In supporting the citation as an adaptation, it is making reference to a known artistic category (c.f. The Academy Awards, US Copyright office, etc.). In addition to the fact that the artistic object here is a drama adaptation, it is also true that the adaptation and film have always been treated

2886:

I hope this is all helpful for you. I do appreciate you digging into all this when you are so busy, the fact that you are volunteering, and that you are trying to develope standards for Knowledge (XXG). For my part, I continue to justify the importance of this film (especially for students), the

2866:

Thank you for responding to my prod and for doing so in a time that is so busy for you, especially moving. I am sorry I did not log-in before, I just get rather quickly quite confused in going through this whole process of justification, for so many times. I'm not really sure how Knowledge (XXG)

2818:

Nominations for prizes are rarely worth mentioning unless they receive significant coverage in reliable, secondary/third-party sources. We mention nominations for, say, the Academy Awards because there is significant coverage, even of nominations. Many smaller awards don't even garner coverage for

2674:

Woodroar, I appreciate the tone of your reponse to me, and of course your general point that there must be a standard by which something goes on Knowledge (XXG), as a kind of democratic encyclopedia. I also can appreciate the difficulty you might have in determining the significance of this film,

1338:

source, but not the type of source that we're looking for. A lyrics database is functionally equivalent to the "White & Nerdy" lyrics themselves; musixmatch is just hosting the lyrics, not providing any analysis or commentary. What we would need is a reliable secondary source that specifically

432:

shows the yearbook from Verona High School. In the yearbook, you will see pictures of a person who clearly is Mizkif, which he himself has stated to be the individual in the pictures. He also claims that he was a "class clown" which is why you see "Matt Misrendino" under the class clown section in

3038:

So the Knowledge (XXG) citation could read: "Drama Adaptation by Ronald Gerard Smith (1993), from which a theater production then film (1994, 97 minutes, with English Subtitles, distriibuted by Films for the Humanities and Sciences - 2012-2019) were made, of Nietzsche's "Thus Spoke Zarathustra",

2878:

In terms of any record of the film being distributed by Films for the Humanities and Sciences (2012 - 2019), I believe one could check their online catalog of films during those years, contact Kathy Tan at the company (who was in charge of acquisitions), determine who still has access to the film

2629:" have covered. To demonstrate that your film has influenced culture at large, we need reliable sources to say that—in reputable journal articles, news magazines, and so on. Lectures by an academic (who is widely recognized as an expert on the subject) can sometimes count, but they must have been 1903:

Ok, I see what you did there. Not really any advanced query strings, but just doing a correct set of Boolean operators. I have no formal training, and learn as I go, so for all I know that might just be enough to qualify as a query string, I dunno! Well, thank you for your help. However, I remain

946:

Fact: I am not doing anything of the sort to get my own way, have actually checked this "edit warring"? Also, why are you suggesting I am doing this to get my own way? I have looked at the specific page and admited my mistake. Instantly the other user went to the page to reverse this and then had

2882:

Regarding the value of its presentation at conferences - what greater validity to the cultural importance of this film can there be than it being made available to watch before a group of Nietzsche scholars? I refer here to the fact that it was made available for streaming at the North American

2870:

Regarding the reviews of the film of "Zarathustra", the most significant is the one from Prof. Kathleen Higgins, from the Univ. of Texas at Austin, who is a Nietzsche scholar and Zarathustra expert who wrote the review to the film's creator and was recommended to do so by another known Nietzsche

996:

I don't know who you are or where you come from. But I am simply trying to correct information for where people are from in the Liverpool city. Not one person has challenged me on this matter. Yet several people are singling me out. Advising I am being disruptive, I am canvassing, I am this I am

775:

as well. Note that most of the games in that section are cited to reliable, independent sources, they have pre-existing articles, and are connected in some way to Dungeons & Dragons—or at least the source makes that connection. By contrast, ICv2 is an industry/retailer site with questionable

471:

The problem with this argument, I believe, is that this argument is essentially synthesis of research, and Knowledge (XXG) is not a research website but a collection of sourced facts. Since the overwhelming majority of sources record Mizkif's name as Matthew Rinaudo, including himself personally

3141:

I can't really follow the argument anymore. The justifications for rejecting the citation have been many (too many computers involved, not reliable sources, etc.). Lately it's been the reliability of Teaching Philosophy (you mention it has been a "legitimate journal for 50 years" but then you

2982:

existed that were unequivocally positive and it was clear that these reviews went through the editorial structure or peer review, then I'd gladly argue for including a mention of your film. And that's not to say that only prestigious journals count here. Significant reviews or accolades in news

1495:

Unfortunately, self-publishing is usually an instant fail as far as experts go. Now there may be exceptions, of course, but you'd have to prove that this expert is widely cited by reputable media despite self-publishing. That's especially rare for academics, who are often pressured to submit to

529:

I've used the analogy before that editing articles about living persons is like playing a game on hardmode. You can get blocked or banned very easily if you're not familiar with our policies and guidelines. I'll leave some links on your Talk page. I suggest you read them before editing any more

2394:

that read "CHIIE", but we can't cite that to show that "Chiie" is a valid alternative name for Chile.) If you happen to know of a better source, you're more than welcome to restore the claim and cite that—or if you're not familiar or comfortable with our citation styles, you can always start a

3018:

Smith also makes the influences of Nietzsche's own life on the text apparent. Smith cleverly replaced the narrator of "Thus Spoke Zarathustra", "life", with a character that fuses an alternative side of Zarathustra with Nietzsche. Sporting a nineteenth century suit and bushy mustache, this

3145:

Quoting now from the inside of the Journal cover (from the March 1998 issue): "Manuscripts submitted for publication should be typewritten, double-spaced throughout, with wide margins on standard size bond paper. Notes, also double-spaced, should appear on seperate sheets at the end of the

1094:. That being said, if you're aware of reliable sources covering the game and you do write a draft, I'll be happy to take a look at it for you! I'll also leave a welcome message on your Talk page with some basic information about editing. Let me know if you have any questions at all. Cheers! 2751:

You have the burden of deciding what goes on Knowledge (XXG) and I am only one person writing to you. But go out and check the veracity of what is being said here about this film. Highlighting terms in blue regarding veracity does not change the fact that someone from you must take the

1813:. The "All" tab on Google can be hit or miss. In this case, it showed mostly social media sites, forums, etc. so I switched to the "News" tab. From there, I read through all of the 9 results (1 of them duplicated across 2 searches) to see if they cite Faigin as an expert—and most don't: 1629:, Foxella is in no way a reliable source suitable for claims about living persons. There's no author by-line, no editor, and it's not cited by reputable sources. It cites a random Blogspot blog—which itself isn't a reliable source—and includes a screenshot of a government document— 2823:

mean that content on Knowledge (XXG) skews towards the mainstream. My own work and much of the music I listen to and writers I read will likely never appear on Knowledge (XXG)—but we're here to summarize subjects that receive significant coverage in media, and that can't include

2275:

I agree the source wasn't up to standards. but the page for the game claims it was realised in 1975, so does the claim of when it came out need to be cited if the page of the game alrady has sources for that? If not, should the article for Moria be labeld as in need of rework?

1777:

Hi. If you don't mind me asking, what kind of query string did you use for your Google search on CAhighways.org? I would like to know how to be able to perform this kind of search. I know a small handful of basic Boolean modifiers, but not any advanced query strings. Thanks.

2728:

How many bought the DVD? How many saw it streamed from this company? There is really no idea from the royalty statements. I do know that when the distribution contract was being renewed, it was noticed mistakes were made in the streaming subtitles so the contract was

2745:

old idea of encyclopedias and the new one - and now making an encyclopedia that is democratic but reliable (note, on any search engine, the number of entries for films of "Zarathustra" - how does one know what is legit and not? - what a context we are living in today).

2633:

somewhere. For example, on their university's website or a conference's official YouTube account. (For our purposes, "published" just means that it must have been "recorded then broadcast, distributed, or archived by a reputable party". You can read more about that at

503:

There are probably dozens of reasons why we shouldn't use "Misrendino". It could be a middle name that he went by. It could be a mistake that he didn't mention in his video. It could be a birth name that he changed later on. We don't know. The yearbook is simply not a

247:. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions. 937:

How dare you say I am being disruptive and suggesting I am edit warring. I have not been "edit-warring" I have returned to one page and this has opened up a furore from the other user that reverted my edit. That user has then moved to the admin page to tell tales.

3103:

I think Woodroar has a good handle on Knowledge (XXG) policy and practice evaluating sources for reliability. If you want this film to be mentioned in a Knowledge (XXG) article, you need to point to accessible sources that satisfy the criteria for reliable sources.

1957:

until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

2688:

an explanation of the productions. It was produced by the College of San Mateo and the Goethe Institute, San Francisco. The theater production occurred at the EXITheater, San Francisco, in Spring, Summer, 1993 and was filmed at the end of the theater run.

2386:, which we can't do on Knowledge (XXG). After all, this could be an example of a rare coin or a mistake at the mint, and it doesn't necessarily follow that the spelling "Elfred" was widely adopted. (Here's a contemporary example: about 20 years ago, 2917:

the film being available to scholars. Similarly, we're not able to contact the distributor. Even if we could, it's not up to us, as editors, to decide if Films for the Humanities and Sciences distributing your film is somehow important. But if

2940:

Ok. And the fact that the film is mentioned in the published Kiss book (that you said you couldn't open) and reviewed in Teaching Philosophy, a published journal, by Brian Domino (which you said is really short but in fact is 2 pages long)?

942:" And you're edit warring to get your way. Your replies here aren't formatted correctly and others are cleaning up after you. Look, I don't know you and I'm reading about this dispute for the first time, so I'm trying to be neutral here. ". 1407:

Hey there! I spoke to you some time ago about adding a wikipage about Battlemaster, and about how sources work on wikipedia. I was wondering if a book published in 2006 counts, and/or if TVTropes does? edit: or if wikipedia itself counts?

2561: 1889:. We're looking for hundreds (or even dozens) of other reliable sources citing cahighways.org for their claims, interviewing Faigin for his expert opinion, or even calling him an expert on California highway history. I hope this helps! 508:

secondary source because yearbooks don't have a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. We can't use the opencorporates.com source because it's a copy of a public document, which isn't appropriate for claims about living persons per

2838:

I found part of the Teaching Philosophy review, but it's very short so doesn't count much towards significant coverage of the film. In addition, it doesn't sound like the author actually recommends your film, which we should take into

2959:. The option to search inside the book wasn't working for me. I wouldn't say it matters, though, because the volume was written and edited by Kiss and the publisher folded after about a year, publishing just over a dozen volumes. Our 2830:

I found the Endre Kiss book on Google Books but couldn't search inside it. It appears that Endre Kiss edited the book and the publisher only existed for a short time (and published less than 20 books), so it probably wouldn't meet

1719:

Based on the tweet's replies, though, Quinn's followers clearly understood that she was referring to her actual birthday. (As per your advice I'll most likely start a new discussion about this at the talk page in the near future.)

2921:

published an article stating that your film streaming at the North American Nietzsche Society or getting distributed by Films for the Humanities and Sciences or being positively reviewed by professor so-and-so is a big deal, now

3189:

Ronald, it's clear that you're not understanding what I've been writing here, or perhaps not reading the policies and guidelines that I've been linking to. I encourage you to take some time to read through the entire discussion

3171:

Where should the citation go in Knowledge (XXG)? A category that was earlier listed "Film/Visual" is now gone... Perhaps it should go under "Further Reading" or "Commentaries and Introductions" or under "See Also" - "Dramatic

947:

another go at me for not reverting my edit. But regardless of that you have saw fit to accuse me of edit warring and being disruptive and all I have done is try to make a point. A point I might add that has not been respected.

2681:"Thus Spoke Zarathustra", by Nietzsche, Film, Parts I - III of the Kaufmann Translation, (1993), 97 minutes with English Subtitles, by Ronald Gerard Smith, distributed by Films for the Humanities and Sciences (2012 - 2019). 1512:

runescape has had something called "battlemaster".....not including the endless dnd stuff I am sorting through. :D Battlemaster is a piece of internet history as well, so the sources vary *wildly* in quality. Hmmmm.....

1661:

of certain personal information if it's been published by "sources linked to the subject such that it may reasonably be inferred that the subject does not object to the details being made public," which runs contrary to

437:

it also clearly shows that Mizkif is Matthew Misrendino. If that wasn't enough proof, his close friend Erobb221 streamed with one of Matthew's close friend, where the friend accidentally used Matthew's real surname.

2235: 1162: 3196:

I'm done discussing Teaching Philosophy, unless on page 80 it says something along the lines of "I wholeheartedly endorse the purchase of this tape and kindly ignore the opposing statement on the following page".

1961:

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 the article.

2845:

Conference mentions/discussions would need to be recorded and published somewhere, and may also need coverage in reliable, secondary sources. I looked briefly for the conferences you mentioned and couldn't find

125:

I'm duplicating a message I posted on the NS article's Talk page. I now see that you were advising Dukezhou about secondary research, and not necessarily planning to collaborate with them on future edits to the

352:

think is important, and not to add our own commentary or opinions. You can click those links I added to read more about our policies and guidelines, and feel free to ask if you have any more questions. Cheers!

3161:

So what do you weight in what you could read of the review? My focus on the adaptation demonstrates the review is positive, even conceding the fact you couldn't read the whole review, and I am being generous

3035:

to distribute it), the only published, reliable source (according to you), giving a positive review is the one from Teaching Philosophy, and it makes a clear distinction between the adaptation and the film.

2467:

Thanks for your opinion! I think the information here is academically relevant & presented in the correct context, but it's a contentious subject so I felt it best to ask someone with experience here.

780:

independence, and in this case, it's covering a pre-publication Kickstarter launch. In short, that source is basically a rewritten press release. If you can find more reputable and independent sources and

389: 1083: 2691:

This film citation was on Knowledge (XXG) before and it was not taken down - perhaps policies have changed or challenges have been made about the film - I hope all this discussion clears alot of things

2983:

media, literary magazines, film sites, those all count, as long as they have that "a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy". To get an idea of what kind of sources we value, you can scroll through

2879:

through the company today, or inspect the royalty statements from the film's creator. If you know of this company, it has been around for a long time and they are scrupulous in what they distribute.

2219:. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose 1239:), so I figured it's best to let neutral admins and experienced editors give their thoughts. Aaand it's probably moot because Deicas appears to be fashioning nooses at a few different Talk pages.... 1146:. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose 133:

essay. The essays are not visible in the GB preview, but if this looks like a useful source of notable/reliable secondary research sources, I can contact the editor about making it available to you.

3075:

Adaptation? You say nothing of this, why not? You base your view of the piece not being able to read the middle page of the review? Perhaps a link other than "external links" for an adaptation?

424:

I disagree with your point about Matthew's surname. Your point about the Yearbook doesn't make any sense since Mizkif himself reacted to these photos and he claimed to be the individual in them (

374: 3001:

So, in the end, our discussion of positive verification rests on the value of the review in the journal Teaching Philosophy, which is a peer reviewed, published journal, in existence since 1975.

2141: 525:

are several high-quality reliable sources that give Mizkif's name as Matthew Rinaudo. It doesn't matter if it's wrong or if it's based on a joke, because it's what those reliable sources use.

2204: 1132: 198: 3193:

Yes, the default position is "no, it should not be included", because that is the default position on everything. Our requirement for inclusion is coverage in reliable, secondary sources.

2819:

the winners! In any case, I looked for coverage and couldn't find any. (As for your statement about the film not being a Hollywood release, I understand and empathize. Unfortunately, our

2449:

is that we should avoid graduate dissertations/theses unless the paper is widely cited by others. Now I'm no expert on scholarship sources, so you're welcome to get a second opinion at

2752:

responsibility of making a decision. You must determine reliable sources in your own manner. I am not a collection of interlocutioners, I am one person. But I do know what is true.

3168:

Of course "adaptation" matters - it is a known and accepted artistic category. This particular adaptation was positively reviewed in a reputable academic journal that you could read.

2552:

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics

3175:

In the end, it sort of feels like bad faith here, something almost pre-judged from the beginning. "That it exists, continues, and with truth with it, it will continue to exist."

631:: that's exactly right. In fact, our "core content policies"—the policies that say what should and shouldn't be on Knowledge (XXG)—are 3 different ways of saying the same thing: 472:

along with news articles reporting about the content creator Mizkif, that this is the commonly known name and should be the name used in reference to Mizkif on Knowledge (XXG).

214: 1051:

I am working on the page itself: give me some time, geez ;) It's one of the oldest still running browser games on the web and it's criminal that it doesn't have a wiki page.

1755: 1743: 1020: 1016: 1369:

personally think is important. That includes avoiding our own analysis of primary sources. If you have any other questions, feel free to ask! You can also get help at the

1954: 2441:, thanks for the message! My opinion is that we should not, especially as it would involve claims about a living person. The paper appears to have been published in the 3123:

As for being an adaptation, it really doesn't matter. It could be a parody or a commentary or a documentary—or something other than a film. Ultimately, we must look to

878:—which apply everywhere on Knowledge (XXG), even on Talk pages. I hope you enjoy your time on Knowledge (XXG) and please let me know if you have any questions! Cheers! 100: 378: 2420: 730:

Hello! Yes, that was my first edit. It allowed a website to be cited and I used the official product page itself. The actual article I intended to reference is here:

3116:

Ronald, my view is based on the statement "I feel compelled to discourage the purchase of this tape" from the final page. As editors, we need to adhere to the

639:(we need to fairly and accurately summarize what reliable sources say, we can't twist them, we can't cherry-pick claims, we balance around sources, etc.), and 2808:

Hi Ronald—at least I'm assuming this is Ronald. It would help communication immensely if you logged into your account. It would also be best to remember that

2617:! I'm sorry but I think there may be a miscommunication or perhaps a misconception about what Knowledge (XXG) is about. We don't need to know that your film 1944: 1091: 3165:

So the citation: "Drama Adaptation by Ronald Gerard Smith, (1993), of Nietzsche's "Thus Spoke Zarathustra", Parts I - III of the Kaufmann Translation."

2500: 2107: 1496:

prestigious publishers/journals/etc. by their universities. But it's up to you, if you'd rather not deal with writing the draft, I totally understand!

2328: 2296: 2075: 1539: 2382:—for example, a noted historian published by a reputable press—to make the claim that "Elfred" is a common alternative name. Citing a coin would be 2871:

scholar, Dr. Uschi Nussbaumer-Benz (who co-edited the above book mentioned, with Endre Kiss, and who also nominated the film for the Goethe prize).

2156:, and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to 499:). Sure, sometimes that means we get things wrong. But we're a tertiary source, which means that we summarize what reliable, secondary sources say. 344:

claims that could be seen as negative or controversial, the bar for sourcing is intentionally set very high. Now we do allow some claims based on

2967:", which means that we need to consider the lack of editorial process and peer review, the limited longevity and standing of the publisher, etc. 2055: 1984:

Hi Woodroar, thanks for making time to explain your logic. I will now go clean up some more Fantasy role playing Pages that have this Issue :)

128:

Hello Dukezhou and Woodroar. There is a 2006 collection of academic essays about Neal Stephenson and his fiction up through the Baroque Cycle,

228: 806: 2258: 1185: 491:: at Knowledge (XXG), we base our articles on "reliable, independent, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy" ( 104: 2157: 1263:

SPI but since you have had interactions with him, I'd thought I'd tell you in case you come across his drafts in the future. Thank you!

749: 2842:

Inclusion in "Films for Humanities & Sciences" isn't something we'd consider, unless it was covered by reliable, secondary sources.

1852: 2795: 194: 2719:

Cited in: Book: "Nietzsche, Postmodernity,and After" by Endre Kiss, et al, Traude Junghans Verlag Cuxhaven and Dartford, 2000.

2445:

while the author was a PhD candidate. The source has been only cited once, in another paper by the same author. My understanding of

1828: 2421:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/362359949_The_satsang_dispositif_Mooji's_teachings_power_authority_and_self-transformation

236: 1846: 1614: 870:

now so I'll be keeping an eye on it. Also, I've removed much of your message here because it ran afoul of our policies regarding

2160:. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the 2254: 1527: 1423: 1181: 847: 260: 219:

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means

2228: 1558:

That sounds like a great place to start! And it means I don't have to keep bothering you till the end of time either, thanks!

1155: 2503:, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, which has been designated a 1840: 1594: 458: 314: 3091: 2887:

only one yet made of "Zarathustra", understanding the difficulty of doing so in today's context, with something so original.

2748:

Yes, there is a trailer for this film on YouTube... But what does that mean? How many people are deceived by the Internet?

2059:. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Knowledge (XXG) under a 1767: 1849:

cites "Daniel Faigin’s California Highways.org". It's sloppy but it (barely) counts as reputable news media citing Faigin.

2064: 2060: 1439: 232: 3180: 3080: 3051: 2946: 2895: 2771: 2757: 2603: 2364: 1867: 1858: 1393: 1320: 84: 72: 67: 59: 1948: 244: 2240: 1167: 1662: 240: 220: 2161: 2147: 495:). And when it comes to claims about living persons, we must be "very firm about the use of high-quality sources" ( 38: 966:, if you had read the pages I linked, you'd understand why your behavior is disruptive. And now I see that you're 2134: 2119: 1365:.) Our "job" at Knowledge (XXG) is to summarize what reliable secondary sources say about our subjects, not what 1357: 3158:

What about page 80, which you could read? "... wonderful adaptation of Nietzsche's Thus Spoke Zarathustra ...".

2622: 256: 224: 2473: 2427: 1593:

I saw a recent report that cited Shane Carruth's birth date as July 25, 1972. Here's the link to that article:

108: 2446: 2216: 1143: 439: 3176: 3098: 3076: 3047: 2942: 2891: 2767: 2753: 2614: 2599: 2375: 2360: 1389: 1331: 1316: 1232: 863: 3105: 2799: 2292: 2144:. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page 2007: 1834: 1816: 745: 1819:

calls him an "enthusiast" and recommends cahighways.org for the primary material that Faigin has collected.

1689: 1630: 1602: 1515: 1411: 835: 737: 514: 510: 446: 302: 181:

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Knowledge (XXG). It does

2568: 2469: 2438: 2423: 1970: 1002: 952: 2964: 2913: 2832: 2809: 2653:

the one misunderstanding what you're looking for, please let me know and I'll see if I can help. Cheers!

2635: 2557: 2379: 1886: 345: 2396: 2112: 1881:

would consider this a reliable source "with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy" as required by

762: 741: 3046:

PS Brian Domino wrote his review while employed by Eastern Michigan Univ.. He is now at Miami Univ..

1461: 1370: 583:

that discusses the controversy around Mizkif's real name or is it irrelevant/there's not enough proof?

2124:, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was 1822: 2780:

Thanks, I'll take a look when I get time. I'm going to be incredibly busy over the next week or two.

2173: 1939: 1923: 1909: 1783: 1610: 731: 149: 2639: 2579: 2442: 2299:, the talk page for our Video Games project at Knowledge (XXG). Maybe someone there will know more. 2198: 1756:

Knowledge (XXG):Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents § Continued original research by Heesxiisolehh

1744:

Knowledge (XXG):Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents § Continued original research by Heesxiisolehh

1559: 1519: 1481: 1435: 1415: 1126: 1067: 1052: 967: 916: 859: 839: 2971: 2583: 1563: 1523: 1485: 1419: 1056: 920: 843: 693: 628: 615: 597: 584: 555: 550: 488: 450: 327: 306: 2314: 2277: 2212: 1205: 1139: 871: 3202: 3132: 3066: 2992: 2931: 2854: 2785: 2658: 2458: 2404: 2336: 2304: 2030: 1894: 1764: 1710: 1642: 1578: 1548: 1501: 1469: 1378: 1300: 1244: 1099: 1032: 983: 883: 790: 715: 697: 648: 619: 605: 588: 567: 535: 477: 454: 409: 358: 310: 283: 157: 138: 47: 17: 2732:

Conferences: Discussed: International Institute of European Ideas, Haifa, Israel, Summer, 1998

2504: 1866:

I also looked for backlinks in professional/paid SEO tools and found most of the same, plus the

1855:

cites "Daniel Faigin, a Southern California van-pool coordinator". Probably not the same person.

1618: 1075: 975: 275: 1480:

without decent sources first, and you seem like a cool person that knows what you talking about

2318: 2281: 1992: 1966: 1809:

to give results for "cahighways.org", "Daniel P. Faigin", and "Daniel Faigin" that are not at

1729: 1674: 1213: 1012: 998: 963: 948: 336:. That means reputable news sites and magazines, books, journals, and so on. When it comes to 252: 223:

administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the

3117: 2849:

Let me know if you have any links to published reviews/sources and I'll take a look. Cheers!

2598:

sources I have been providing you? I am on the defensive and I don't even know who you are.

2224: 1447: 1362: 1228: 1151: 429: 2642:.) In any case, we may need to verify that a source or sources meet our requirements at the 2356: 2247: 2025:

Ha, I fail at copy-and-pasting stuff allllll the time, so I could see myself doing it, too.

2015: 1236: 1174: 814: 401: 373:

Why are you editing articles you obviously have no knowledge about? What is your education?

2984: 2956: 2905: 2643: 2450: 2227:, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The 2220: 1878: 1634: 1538:

Yeah, I get that. How does this sound? If you ever do find more sources, start a thread at

1460:

I hope this helps! If you have any other questions, let me know or feel free to ask at the

1454: 1443: 1231:. But I'm not an administrator and I've had (relatively mild) disputes with Deicas before ( 1154:, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The 1147: 1079: 1071: 875: 782: 772: 640: 513:. The video from his friend can't be used for claims about other persons (like Mizkif) per 496: 397: 337: 2695:

PROOF THAT THE FILM IS INFLUENTIAL FOR CULTURE AT LARGE/IS A CULTURALLY INFLUENTIAL OBJECT

2169: 2083: 1905: 1794: 1779: 1626: 1606: 1595:

https://www.foxella.com/somehow-jail-watchers-missed-this-indie-director-getting-arrested/

970:

at article, category, and user talk pages. I urge you to self-revert those before you get

118: 2960: 2627:

reliable, independent, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy

2626: 2383: 1882: 971: 425: 2331:, by the way. You're welcome to contribute to the discussion if you know anything more! 902: 679: 434: 2909: 2827:

I wasn't able to find reviews from any of those professors. Where were they published?

2820: 2492: 867: 636: 632: 530:

articles about living persons because I'd like to see you become a productive editor.

492: 393: 388:

I know basically nothing about Max Kolonko, really. The first I'd heard of him was at

333: 174: 3198: 3128: 3062: 2988: 2927: 2850: 2781: 2766:

PS This is the only film of "Thus Spoke Zarathustra" that exists. Check this fact.

2654: 2454: 2400: 2332: 2300: 2026: 1890: 1759: 1706: 1638: 1574: 1544: 1497: 1465: 1374: 1345: 1296: 1240: 1095: 1028: 979: 879: 786: 711: 644: 601: 576: 563: 531: 473: 405: 354: 279: 153: 134: 2912:, which means cited to a reliable, secondary/third-party published source. The word 3206: 3184: 3155:

throughout the years since 1993, with all the changes in technology, is adaptation.

3136: 3108: 3084: 3070: 3055: 2996: 2950: 2935: 2899: 2858: 2803: 2789: 2775: 2761: 2662: 2607: 2587: 2564:. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the 2477: 2462: 2431: 2408: 2391: 2368: 2340: 2322: 2308: 2285: 2262: 2177: 2087: 2034: 2019: 1996: 1988: 1974: 1913: 1898: 1787: 1741: 1733: 1722: 1714: 1685: 1678: 1667: 1646: 1582: 1567: 1552: 1531: 1505: 1489: 1473: 1427: 1397: 1382: 1361:. (You can read more about the difference between primary and secondary sources at 1324: 1304: 1274: 1248: 1224: 1217: 1209: 1189: 1103: 1060: 1036: 1006: 987: 956: 924: 887: 851: 818: 794: 753: 719: 701: 652: 623: 609: 592: 571: 539: 481: 462: 413: 382: 362: 318: 287: 264: 161: 142: 130:

Tomorrow Through the Past: Neal Stephenson and the Project of Global Modernization,

112: 2189: 2041:

Orphaned non-free image File:Propagandhi - Where Quality Is Job Number 1 cover.jpg

1654: 1118: 1087: 3011:

page 80: "... wonderful adaptation of Nietzsche's "Thus Spoke Zarathustra" ..."

2507:. This standard message is designed as an introduction to contentious topics and 1692:

has changed somewhat since that discussion in 2019. I don't remember how new the

2517:

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as

2099: 2011: 1705:

course, you're certainly welcome to build a consensus at the talk page. Cheers!

810: 210: 46:

If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the

1090:, I don't see any reviews from critics. I also don't see any other coverage at 3151:

So now maybe we can agree about the legitimacy of the source, its reliability.

2151: 2079: 1086:

because there was no coverage in reliable sources. When I look at places like

2313:

thank you for hearing it out, I feel like that's the best way to go about it

3026:"Smith has done a marvelous job of dramatizing and interpretting "Thus Spoke 2725:

Distribution of Film: Films for the Humanities and Sciences (2012 - 2019)

2291:

Oh, that's a good question. Ironically, the page for that game got moved to

829: 93: 2545:

comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and

1871: 1315:

Wait, I'm confused. I provided a source. Unless that source doesn't count?

734:

Can that be changed or do I need to rewrite the edited section? Thank you.

1281: 1265: 206: 2231:

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

1227:! Yeah, I saw that and was initially going to !vote to un-topic-ban per 1158:

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

2741:

Streamed: North American Nietzsche Society, Brown Univ., October, 2022

2735:

North American Nietzsche Society, Georgia State Univ. Atlanta, October,

2208:

are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

1136:

are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

562:

is Misrendino!" and then we'll change it back. Definitely a weird one.

2815:

I'm still incredibly busy as I'm moving, but I went through your list:

2667:"Why This Film of "Thus Spoke Zarathustra" Must be on Knowledge (XXG)" 2138:

after Nintendo complained that the previous version encouraged piracy?

1373:, a place for editors to ask questions about Knowledge (XXG). Cheers! 3043:

separately, including the fact that they were copyrighted separately.

2128: 580: 579:: I have a question. Wouldn't it make sense to make a section in the 1343:

getting referenced in "White & Nerdy". That means a source like

2646:, but we can cross that bridge if there are any sources to verify. 2387: 1017:

Knowledge (XXG):Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Babydoll9799

732:

https://icv2.com/articles/news/view/37123/esper-genesis-sci-fi-rpg

271: 270:

Thank you for the alert, although I'm not sure that a festival in

202: 2704:

Reviews: Prof. Kathleen Higgins, The Univ. Texas, Austin (1995)

2625:. As an encyclopedia—a tertiary source—we're a summary of what " 2244:. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add 1171:. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add 768: 2234:

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review

2202:

is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All

1161:

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review

2722:

Journal (Reviewed): "Teaching Philosophy", 21:1, March, 1998.

2329:

Knowledge (XXG) talk:WikiProject Video games#Sources for Moria

1831:

links to cahighways.org in the comments, not the blog article.

1810: 1351: 1130:

is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All

185:

imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

99:

Thanks for protecting this page. The IP is an obvious sock of

25: 1837:

cites cahighways.org but it probably isn't a reliable source.

213:, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is 2044: 862:, thanks for your message! I can't say I did a whole lot at 785:, then maybe we can add it back. I hope this helps. Cheers! 2707:

Prof. David Hoy, The Univ. of California, Santa Cruz (1996)

2623:

Knowledge (XXG) isn't a directory of everything that exists

2142:

Template:Did you know nominations/Nintendo Switch emulation

2056:

File:Propagandhi - Where Quality Is Job Number 1 cover.jpg

1943:

is suitable for inclusion in Knowledge (XXG) according to

392:

about the article a month ago. Thankfully, we're here to

2957:

https://books.google.com/books?hl=de&id=xTwQAQAAIAAJ

807:

Knowledge (XXG):Sockpuppet investigations/Djm-leighpark‎

3142:

question if it is "peer reviewed or simply submitted").

2215:

is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the

1937:

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article

1825:

gives a standard credit for a primary source, an image.

1142:

is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the

2419:

Would this be considered a legitimate source to cite?

426:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G4mzILoBv6c&t=509s

400:. If you know of more sources, please suggest them at 1955:

Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/MK-Ultra (band)

2327:

I'm glad to help! I just started that discussion at

2140:

The nomination discussion and review may be seen at

1284:! His MO of posting at BLPN is so bizarre that I'll 101:

Knowledge (XXG):Sockpuppet investigations/Nair Saheb

2560:or you may learn more about this contentious topic 2539:

comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;

2399:with the source info and someone can help. Cheers! 332:most content on Knowledge (XXG) should be based on 3127:reliable sources to see what they think about it. 2513:imply that there are any issues with your editing. 2378:, thanks for the message. What we would need is a 2074:will be deleted after seven days, as described in 1635:our policies regarding claims about living persons 394:summarize what reliable sources say about subjects 2532:, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and: 1027:advice to heart and respond appropriately there. 2955:I'm assuming the Endre Kiss source is this one: 2710:Prof. Christa Davis Acampora, Emory Univ. (1995) 1874:without any other mention of the site or Faigin. 1021:proposed that you be topic-banned from this area 830:https://en.wikipedia.org/Motorcycle_Action_Group 2542:follow editorial and behavioural best practice; 2524:Within contentious topics, editors should edit 1453:As for TV Tropes and Knowledge (XXG), both are 1442:and also get details about specific sources at 635:(we need to base content on reliable sources), 278:. Regardless, it's good to know, so thank you. 2499:You have recently been editing articles about 2076:section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion 2070:Note that any non-free images not used in any 1015:, I've mentioned your continued canvassing at 235:. Administrators may impose sanctions such as 2794:I guess it's not going to be a speedy trial. 8: 2355:Coins do say Elfred, including those in the 2297:Knowledge (XXG) talk:WikiProject Video games 1540:Knowledge (XXG) talk:WikiProject Video games 771:—and the game would likely have to meet our 3039:Parts I - III of the Kaufmann Translation." 2965:a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy 2890:Sincerely, Ronald (yes, this is Ronald) 2536:adhere to the purposes of Knowledge (XXG); 1754:You are invited to join the discussion at 1702:Oh uh I guess it's my birthday now. Weird. 1113: 1078:. However, I don't believe the game meets 2116:was updated with a fact from the article 1945:Knowledge (XXG)'s policies and guidelines 1861:is a "letter to the editor" type article. 1543:ones in older magazines. Just a thought! 915:Thanks Woodroar, sincerely appreciated. 1872:https://www.cahighways.org/ROUTE236.html 1700:was added recently. Personally, I think 2701:Nominated: Goethe Prize, Germany, 1998 1803:"Daniel P. Faigin" -site:cahighways.org 1072:our guide to writing your first article 828:Hi Woodroar. Thank you for cleaning up 334:reliable, third-party published sources 189:Please carefully read this information: 2713:Prof. Brian Domino, Miami Univ. (1998) 2671:here goes, for the last time with you. 2380:reliable, third-party published source 1806: 1802: 1798: 1701: 1697: 1693: 1631:which our policies specifically forbid 832:. Thank you again. Neil F. Liversidge 643:(don't write based on what you know). 375:2A01:118F:555:9A00:F918:2418:7D4C:47D2 44:Do not edit the contents of this page. 1877:I don't think any of the regulars at 1799:"cahighways.org" -site:cahighways.org 1633:. I strongly suggest reading through 7: 2359:. Can I upload a picture as source? 2199:2022 Arbitration Committee elections 1807:"Daniel Faigin" -site:cahighways.org 1289: 1127:2021 Arbitration Committee elections 2217:Knowledge (XXG) arbitration process 2183:ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message 1144:Knowledge (XXG) arbitration process 1110:ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message 1080:our general notability requirements 1070:! You're certainly welcome to read 767:we would need better sourcing than 614:Ahh, so it's all 'bout the sources 2501:living or recently deceased people 2486:Introduction to contentious topics 2006:Lol, I have no idea how I managed 1082:. We did have an article once and 103:, Always trying to remove content. 24: 2093:DYK for Nintendo Switch emulation 1953:The article will be discussed at 2491: 2443:Journal of Contemporary Religion 2188: 2098: 1931: 1749: 1665:for leaving the birth date out. 1440:Knowledge (XXG):Reliable sources 1290: 1117: 901: 726:Editions of Dungeons and Dragons 678: 549:Rinaudo even though it's wrong. 398:write based on our own knowledge 346:what people say about themselves 173: 29: 2908:on Knowledge (XXG). All claims 2558:arbitration clerks' noticeboard 2548:refrain from gaming the system. 2238:and submit your choices on the 1696:section is, but the example of 1165:and submit your choices on the 783:start an article about the game 773:general notability requirements 201:to be used for pages regarding 2088:17:15, 18 September 2022 (UTC) 888:22:47, 30 September 2021 (UTC) 852:17:24, 30 September 2021 (UTC) 819:16:35, 28 September 2021 (UTC) 795:00:14, 23 September 2021 (UTC) 754:23:32, 22 September 2021 (UTC) 1: 3005:are a subscriber, I suppose). 2906:we don't do original research 2478:02:20, 11 February 2023 (UTC) 2463:01:59, 11 February 2023 (UTC) 2432:01:18, 11 February 2023 (UTC) 2409:00:49, 23 December 2022 (UTC) 2369:00:22, 23 December 2022 (UTC) 2263:00:24, 29 November 2022 (UTC) 2065:our policy for non-free media 1694:sources linked to the subject 1305:22:20, 12 December 2021 (UTC) 1275:21:39, 12 December 2021 (UTC) 1249:20:03, 23 November 2021 (UTC) 1218:18:46, 23 November 2021 (UTC) 1190:00:10, 23 November 2021 (UTC) 1104:16:31, 22 November 2021 (UTC) 1061:05:15, 22 November 2021 (UTC) 3118:neutral point of view policy 2963:requires that sources have " 2926:is something we could cite. 2644:reliable sources noticeboard 2341:21:20, 3 December 2022 (UTC) 2323:21:14, 3 December 2022 (UTC) 2309:21:10, 3 December 2022 (UTC) 2286:20:24, 3 December 2022 (UTC) 2178:00:02, 17 October 2022 (UTC) 1773:Cahighways.org Google search 1647:01:03, 3 February 2022 (UTC) 1619:00:51, 3 February 2022 (UTC) 1583:13:29, 28 January 2022 (UTC) 1568:04:27, 28 January 2022 (UTC) 1553:22:28, 27 January 2022 (UTC) 1532:22:16, 27 January 2022 (UTC) 1506:20:20, 27 January 2022 (UTC) 1490:20:02, 27 January 2022 (UTC) 1474:18:35, 27 January 2022 (UTC) 1428:18:12, 27 January 2022 (UTC) 1398:21:38, 26 January 2022 (UTC) 1383:02:44, 26 January 2022 (UTC) 1325:02:02, 26 January 2022 (UTC) 1037:17:21, 5 November 2021 (UTC) 1007:12:37, 5 November 2021 (UTC) 988:23:01, 30 October 2021 (UTC) 957:21:01, 30 October 2021 (UTC) 338:content about living persons 255:relates to these sanctions. 1811:https://www.cahighways.org/ 1457:, so they are not reliable. 1092:video game journalism sites 925:04:49, 4 October 2021 (UTC) 876:claims about living persons 720:00:20, 15 August 2021 (UTC) 702:23:53, 14 August 2021 (UTC) 653:00:20, 15 August 2021 (UTC) 624:23:51, 14 August 2021 (UTC) 610:20:38, 14 August 2021 (UTC) 593:20:22, 14 August 2021 (UTC) 572:20:14, 14 August 2021 (UTC) 540:19:54, 14 August 2021 (UTC) 482:19:31, 14 August 2021 (UTC) 463:19:22, 14 August 2021 (UTC) 3255: 2821:verifiability requirements 2384:your own original research 2255:MediaWiki message delivery 1914:09:10, 23 April 2022 (UTC) 1899:13:01, 18 April 2022 (UTC) 1788:05:47, 18 April 2022 (UTC) 1768:23:29, 24 March 2022 (UTC) 1734:05:17, 13 March 2022 (UTC) 1715:04:57, 13 March 2022 (UTC) 1679:04:35, 13 March 2022 (UTC) 1589:Shane Carruth's birth date 1588: 1182:MediaWiki message delivery 225:purpose of Knowledge (XXG) 2810:we're all volunteers here 2684:The film is 30 years old. 2588:16:32, 5 March 2023 (UTC) 2271:mmo history plato section 2152:Nintendo Switch emulation 2135:Nintendo Switch emulation 2132:revised an article about 2120:Nintendo Switch emulation 2045: 1698:today is my 50th birthday 1599:-Britton from Okiegolf55 900: 866:but the article is on my 677: 414:13:26, 28 July 2021 (UTC) 383:13:12, 28 July 2021 (UTC) 363:21:27, 25 July 2021 (UTC) 319:20:55, 25 July 2021 (UTC) 162:22:08, 30 June 2021 (UTC) 143:21:47, 30 June 2021 (UTC) 113:16:35, 28 June 2021 (UTC) 3207:12:10, 19 May 2023 (UTC) 3185:11:04, 19 May 2023 (UTC) 3137:21:38, 18 May 2023 (UTC) 3109:18:50, 18 May 2023 (UTC) 3085:13:26, 18 May 2023 (UTC) 3071:13:09, 18 May 2023 (UTC) 3056:12:01, 18 May 2023 (UTC) 2997:01:11, 18 May 2023 (UTC) 2951:09:23, 17 May 2023 (UTC) 2936:22:58, 16 May 2023 (UTC) 2914:"published" is important 2900:11:19, 16 May 2023 (UTC) 2859:17:18, 15 May 2023 (UTC) 2804:13:58, 15 May 2023 (UTC) 2556:you may ask them at the 2252:to your user talk page. 2035:19:27, 2 June 2022 (UTC) 2020:19:20, 2 June 2022 (UTC) 1997:12:55, 25 May 2022 (UTC) 1975:06:13, 15 May 2022 (UTC) 1947:or whether it should be 1843:isn't a reliable source. 1179:to your user talk page. 390:a noticeboard discussion 288:17:39, 8 July 2021 (UTC) 265:17:26, 8 July 2021 (UTC) 3029:page 82: Zarathustra". 3008:Positive things stated: 2961:reliable sources policy 2790:18:07, 3 May 2023 (UTC) 2776:15:15, 3 May 2023 (UTC) 2762:08:46, 3 May 2023 (UTC) 2698:(From Reliable Sources) 2663:23:14, 1 May 2023 (UTC) 2608:21:48, 1 May 2023 (UTC) 2293:Moria (1978 video game) 2008:Special:Diff/1091146680 864:Motorcycle Action Group 824:Motorcycle Action Group 199:discretionary sanctions 2978:If similar sources to 2162:Did you know talk page 2050: 1868:New York Times article 1455:user-generated sources 1280:That's good to know, @ 168:ARBIPA sanctions alert 148:I'll leave a reply at 2910:need to be verifiable 2904:So here's the thing: 2678:That the film exists: 2397:Talk:Alfred the Great 2213:Arbitration Committee 2196:Hello! Voting in the 2053:Thanks for uploading 2048: 1140:Arbitration Committee 1124:Hello! Voting in the 1023:. I suggest you take 909:The Original Barnstar 805:You are mentioned at 686:The Original Barnstar 637:Neutral Point of View 257:Georgethedragonslayer 229:standards of behavior 195:Arbitration Committee 42:of past discussions. 1859:Another Mercury News 1817:The Press-Enterprise 1288:remember that, too! 641:No Original Research 294:Logan Mccree article 237:editing restrictions 150:Talk:Neal Stephenson 2980:Teaching Philosophy 2972:Teaching Philosophy 2158:the statistics page 894:A barnstar for you! 671:A barnstar for you! 435:Mizkif Enterprises 433:the PDF. Also from 3177:Ronald Gerard Mith 3113:Thank you, Donald! 3099:Ronald Gerard Mith 3077:Ronald Gerard Mith 3048:Ronald Gerard Mith 2943:Ronald Gerard Mith 2892:Ronald Gerard Mith 2768:Ronald Gerard Mith 2754:Ronald Gerard Mith 2615:Ronald Gerard Mith 2600:Ronald Gerard Mith 2593:Film "Zarathustra" 2519:contentious topics 2390:minted about 1.5M 2376:AwesomePhilosopher 2361:AwesomePhilosopher 2229:arbitration policy 2051: 1390:Scarletpachyderm91 1332:Scarletpachyderm91 1317:Scarletpachyderm91 1156:arbitration policy 18:User talk:Woodroar 3092:talk page stalker 2505:contentious topic 2265: 2155: 2061:claim of fair use 1797:! I searched for 1605:comment added by 1518:comment added by 1414:comment added by 1259:Hello, Woodroar, 1197: 1196: 1192: 930: 929: 838:comment added by 740:comment added by 707: 706: 692:very cool person 449:comment added by 305:comment added by 253:Gadhimai festival 152:shortly. Cheers! 90: 89: 54: 53: 48:current talk page 3246: 3102: 3095: 2573: 2567: 2495: 2357:Ashmolean Museum 2253: 2251: 2192: 2145: 2102: 2047: 1987:Have a good day 1935: 1934: 1762: 1753: 1752: 1725: 1670: 1621: 1534: 1430: 1403:New Game Article 1295: 1294: 1293: 1273: 1180: 1178: 1121: 1114: 905: 898: 897: 854: 766: 756: 682: 675: 674: 465: 402:Talk:Max Kolonko 331: 321: 177: 81: 56: 55: 33: 32: 26: 3254: 3253: 3249: 3248: 3247: 3245: 3244: 3243: 3096: 3089: 2595: 2577: 2576: 2571: 2565: 2496: 2488: 2470:Confundototalus 2439:Confundototalus 2424:Confundototalus 2417: 2353: 2273: 2268: 2267: 2245: 2193: 2185: 2167: 2166: 2108:17 October 2022 2103: 2095: 2078:. Thank you. -- 2043: 2004: 1982: 1964: 1940:MK-Ultra (band) 1936: 1932: 1928: 1924:MK-Ultra (band) 1775: 1760: 1750: 1747: 1723: 1668: 1658: 1600: 1591: 1513: 1409: 1405: 1313: 1291: 1264: 1257: 1206:this discussion 1202: 1172: 1112: 1049: 935: 896: 833: 826: 803: 760: 735: 728: 673: 444: 422: 371: 325: 300: 296: 251:The article on 249: 248: 197:has authorised 178: 170: 122: 119:Neal Stephenson 97: 77: 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 3252: 3250: 3242: 3241: 3240: 3239: 3238: 3237: 3236: 3235: 3234: 3233: 3232: 3231: 3230: 3229: 3228: 3227: 3226: 3225: 3224: 3223: 3222: 3221: 3220: 3219: 3218: 3217: 3216: 3215: 3214: 3213: 3212: 3211: 3210: 3209: 3194: 3191: 3173: 3169: 3166: 3163: 3159: 3156: 3152: 3149: 3147: 3143: 3121: 3114: 3044: 3040: 3036: 3032: 3030: 3027: 3024: 3020: 3016: 3012: 3009: 3006: 3002: 2976: 2968: 2919:The New Yorker 2888: 2884: 2880: 2876: 2872: 2868: 2864: 2863:Dear Woodroar, 2847: 2843: 2840: 2836: 2828: 2825: 2816: 2813: 2749: 2746: 2742: 2739: 2736: 2733: 2730: 2726: 2723: 2720: 2717: 2716:and others ... 2714: 2711: 2708: 2705: 2702: 2699: 2696: 2693: 2689: 2685: 2682: 2679: 2676: 2672: 2668: 2647: 2594: 2591: 2550: 2549: 2546: 2543: 2540: 2537: 2530:constructively 2497: 2490: 2489: 2487: 2484: 2483: 2482: 2481: 2480: 2447:WP:SCHOLARSHIP 2416: 2413: 2412: 2411: 2395:discussion at 2352: 2349: 2348: 2347: 2346: 2345: 2344: 2343: 2272: 2269: 2236:the candidates 2205:eligible users 2194: 2187: 2186: 2184: 2181: 2104: 2097: 2096: 2094: 2091: 2042: 2039: 2038: 2037: 2003: 2000: 1981: 1980:Categorization 1978: 1930: 1929: 1927: 1922:Nomination of 1920: 1919: 1918: 1917: 1916: 1875: 1870:that links to 1864: 1863: 1862: 1856: 1850: 1844: 1838: 1832: 1826: 1820: 1774: 1771: 1746: 1742:Discussion at 1740: 1739: 1738: 1737: 1736: 1663:your rationale 1657: 1651: 1650: 1649: 1590: 1587: 1586: 1585: 1573:Glad to help! 1556: 1555: 1509: 1508: 1477: 1476: 1458: 1451: 1404: 1401: 1386: 1385: 1312: 1309: 1308: 1307: 1256: 1253: 1252: 1251: 1204:Have you seen 1201: 1198: 1195: 1194: 1163:the candidates 1133:eligible users 1122: 1111: 1108: 1107: 1106: 1084:it was deleted 1048: 1045: 1044: 1043: 1042: 1041: 1040: 1039: 991: 990: 944: 943: 934: 931: 928: 927: 912: 911: 906: 895: 892: 891: 890: 825: 822: 802: 799: 798: 797: 727: 724: 723: 722: 705: 704: 689: 688: 683: 672: 669: 668: 667: 666: 665: 664: 663: 662: 661: 660: 659: 658: 657: 656: 655: 581:Mizkif Article 543: 542: 527: 526: 519: 518: 501: 500: 486: 485: 484: 421: 418: 417: 416: 370: 367: 366: 365: 295: 292: 291: 290: 231:, or relevant 179: 172: 171: 169: 166: 165: 164: 121: 116: 105:42.109.129.157 96: 91: 88: 87: 82: 75: 70: 65: 62: 52: 51: 34: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 3251: 3208: 3204: 3200: 3195: 3192: 3188: 3187: 3186: 3182: 3178: 3174: 3172:Adaptations". 3170: 3167: 3164: 3160: 3157: 3153: 3150: 3148: 3144: 3140: 3139: 3138: 3134: 3130: 3126: 3122: 3119: 3115: 3112: 3111: 3110: 3107: 3106:Donald Albury 3100: 3093: 3088: 3087: 3086: 3082: 3078: 3074: 3073: 3072: 3068: 3064: 3059: 3058: 3057: 3053: 3049: 3045: 3041: 3037: 3033: 3031: 3028: 3025: 3023:the backdrop. 3021: 3017: 3013: 3010: 3007: 3003: 3000: 2999: 2998: 2994: 2990: 2986: 2981: 2977: 2974: 2973: 2969: 2966: 2962: 2958: 2954: 2953: 2952: 2948: 2944: 2939: 2938: 2937: 2933: 2929: 2925: 2920: 2915: 2911: 2907: 2903: 2902: 2901: 2897: 2893: 2889: 2885: 2881: 2877: 2873: 2869: 2865: 2862: 2861: 2860: 2856: 2852: 2848: 2844: 2841: 2837: 2834: 2829: 2826: 2822: 2817: 2814: 2811: 2807: 2806: 2805: 2801: 2797: 2793: 2792: 2791: 2787: 2783: 2779: 2778: 2777: 2773: 2769: 2765: 2764: 2763: 2759: 2755: 2750: 2747: 2743: 2740: 2737: 2734: 2731: 2727: 2724: 2721: 2718: 2715: 2712: 2709: 2706: 2703: 2700: 2697: 2694: 2690: 2686: 2683: 2680: 2677: 2673: 2669: 2666: 2665: 2664: 2660: 2656: 2652: 2648: 2645: 2641: 2637: 2632: 2628: 2624: 2620: 2616: 2612: 2611: 2610: 2609: 2605: 2601: 2592: 2590: 2589: 2585: 2581: 2575: 2570: 2569:Ctopics/aware 2563: 2559: 2555: 2547: 2544: 2541: 2538: 2535: 2534: 2533: 2531: 2527: 2522: 2520: 2515: 2514: 2512: 2506: 2502: 2494: 2485: 2479: 2475: 2471: 2466: 2465: 2464: 2460: 2456: 2452: 2448: 2444: 2440: 2436: 2435: 2434: 2433: 2429: 2425: 2422: 2414: 2410: 2406: 2402: 2398: 2393: 2392:Chilean pesos 2389: 2385: 2381: 2377: 2373: 2372: 2371: 2370: 2366: 2362: 2358: 2350: 2342: 2338: 2334: 2330: 2326: 2325: 2324: 2320: 2316: 2312: 2311: 2310: 2306: 2302: 2298: 2294: 2290: 2289: 2288: 2287: 2283: 2279: 2270: 2266: 2264: 2260: 2256: 2249: 2243: 2242: 2237: 2232: 2230: 2226: 2222: 2218: 2214: 2209: 2207: 2206: 2201: 2200: 2191: 2182: 2180: 2179: 2175: 2171: 2165: 2163: 2159: 2153: 2149: 2143: 2139: 2137: 2136: 2130: 2127: 2123: 2122: 2121: 2115: 2114: 2109: 2101: 2092: 2090: 2089: 2085: 2081: 2077: 2073: 2068: 2066: 2062: 2058: 2057: 2040: 2036: 2032: 2028: 2024: 2023: 2022: 2021: 2017: 2013: 2009: 2001: 1999: 1998: 1994: 1990: 1985: 1979: 1977: 1976: 1972: 1968: 1963: 1959: 1956: 1950: 1946: 1942: 1941: 1925: 1921: 1915: 1911: 1907: 1902: 1901: 1900: 1896: 1892: 1888: 1884: 1880: 1876: 1873: 1869: 1865: 1860: 1857: 1854: 1851: 1848: 1845: 1842: 1841:Atlas Obscura 1839: 1836: 1835:Green Prophet 1833: 1830: 1827: 1824: 1821: 1818: 1815: 1814: 1812: 1808: 1804: 1800: 1796: 1792: 1791: 1790: 1789: 1785: 1781: 1772: 1770: 1769: 1766: 1763: 1757: 1745: 1735: 1731: 1727: 1726: 1718: 1717: 1716: 1712: 1708: 1703: 1699: 1695: 1691: 1690:WP:BLPPRIVACY 1687: 1683: 1682: 1681: 1680: 1676: 1672: 1671: 1664: 1656: 1652: 1648: 1644: 1640: 1636: 1632: 1628: 1624: 1623: 1622: 1620: 1616: 1612: 1608: 1604: 1597: 1596: 1584: 1580: 1576: 1572: 1571: 1570: 1569: 1565: 1561: 1554: 1550: 1546: 1541: 1537: 1536: 1535: 1533: 1529: 1525: 1521: 1517: 1507: 1503: 1499: 1494: 1493: 1492: 1491: 1487: 1483: 1475: 1471: 1467: 1463: 1459: 1456: 1452: 1449: 1445: 1441: 1437: 1433: 1432: 1431: 1429: 1425: 1421: 1417: 1413: 1402: 1400: 1399: 1395: 1391: 1384: 1380: 1376: 1372: 1368: 1364: 1360: 1359: 1354: 1353: 1348: 1347: 1346:Rolling Stone 1342: 1337: 1333: 1329: 1328: 1327: 1326: 1322: 1318: 1310: 1306: 1302: 1298: 1287: 1283: 1279: 1278: 1277: 1276: 1272: 1270: 1269: 1260: 1254: 1250: 1246: 1242: 1238: 1234: 1230: 1226: 1222: 1221: 1220: 1219: 1215: 1211: 1207: 1199: 1193: 1191: 1187: 1183: 1176: 1170: 1169: 1164: 1159: 1157: 1153: 1149: 1145: 1141: 1135: 1134: 1129: 1128: 1123: 1120: 1116: 1115: 1109: 1105: 1101: 1097: 1093: 1089: 1085: 1081: 1077: 1076:start a draft 1073: 1069: 1065: 1064: 1063: 1062: 1058: 1054: 1047:Browser games 1046: 1038: 1034: 1030: 1026: 1022: 1018: 1014: 1010: 1009: 1008: 1004: 1000: 995: 994: 993: 992: 989: 985: 981: 977: 973: 969: 965: 961: 960: 959: 958: 954: 950: 941: 940: 939: 932: 926: 922: 918: 914: 913: 910: 907: 904: 899: 893: 889: 885: 881: 877: 873: 869: 865: 861: 857: 856: 855: 853: 849: 845: 841: 837: 831: 823: 821: 820: 816: 812: 808: 800: 796: 792: 788: 784: 779: 774: 770: 764: 763:Skydawnknight 759: 758: 757: 755: 751: 747: 743: 742:Skydawnknight 739: 733: 725: 721: 717: 713: 709: 708: 703: 699: 695: 691: 690: 687: 684: 681: 676: 670: 654: 650: 646: 642: 638: 634: 633:Verifiability 630: 627: 626: 625: 621: 617: 613: 612: 611: 607: 603: 599: 596: 595: 594: 590: 586: 582: 578: 575: 574: 573: 569: 565: 561: 557: 554: 553: 552: 547: 546: 545: 544: 541: 537: 533: 528: 524: 520: 516: 515:WP:BLPSELFPUB 512: 511:WP:BLPPRIMARY 507: 502: 498: 494: 490: 487: 483: 479: 475: 470: 469: 468: 467: 466: 464: 460: 456: 452: 448: 441: 436: 431: 427: 419: 415: 411: 407: 403: 399: 395: 391: 387: 386: 385: 384: 380: 376: 368: 364: 360: 356: 351: 347: 343: 339: 335: 329: 324: 323: 322: 320: 316: 312: 308: 304: 293: 289: 285: 281: 277: 273: 269: 268: 267: 266: 262: 258: 254: 246: 242: 238: 234: 230: 226: 222: 218: 216: 212: 208: 204: 200: 196: 191: 190: 186: 184: 176: 167: 163: 159: 155: 151: 147: 146: 145: 144: 140: 136: 131: 127: 120: 117: 115: 114: 110: 106: 102: 95: 92: 86: 83: 80: 76: 74: 71: 69: 66: 63: 61: 58: 57: 49: 45: 41: 40: 35: 28: 27: 19: 3124: 2979: 2970: 2923: 2918: 2833:WP:REPUTABLE 2824:everything.) 2796:90.90.133.74 2650: 2636:WP:PUBLISHED 2630: 2618: 2596: 2578: 2553: 2551: 2529: 2525: 2523: 2518: 2516: 2510: 2508: 2498: 2418: 2354: 2274: 2239: 2233: 2210: 2203: 2197: 2195: 2168: 2133: 2131: 2125: 2118: 2117: 2113:Did you know 2111: 2105: 2071: 2069: 2054: 2052: 2005: 1986: 1983: 1967:Schierbecker 1965: 1960: 1952: 1938: 1926:for deletion 1887:WP:REPUTABLE 1853:Mercury News 1823:True Blue LA 1776: 1748: 1721: 1688:! I believe 1666: 1659: 1601:— Preceding 1598: 1592: 1557: 1514:— Preceding 1510: 1478: 1410:— Preceding 1406: 1387: 1366: 1356: 1350: 1344: 1340: 1335: 1314: 1285: 1267: 1266: 1261: 1258: 1203: 1166: 1160: 1137: 1131: 1125: 1050: 1024: 1013:Babydoll9799 999:Babydoll9799 972:topic banned 964:Babydoll9799 949:Babydoll9799 945: 936: 908: 834:— Preceding 827: 804: 777: 776:reliability 736:— Preceding 729: 685: 559: 522: 505: 445:— Preceding 423: 372: 349: 341: 301:— Preceding 297: 274:falls under 250: 192: 188: 187: 182: 180: 129: 124: 123: 98: 78: 43: 37: 3125:independent 2574:template. 2241:voting page 1829:Streetsblog 1358:Consequence 1168:voting page 369:Max Kolonko 211:Afghanistan 36:This is an 2729:cancelled. 2640:WP:PUBLISH 2554:procedures 2453:. Cheers! 2225:topic bans 2170:Cwmhiraeth 2148:here's how 1906:Huggums537 1795:Huggums537 1780:Huggums537 1653:Regarding 1627:Okiegolf55 1607:Okiegolf55 1464:. Cheers! 1339:calls out 1286:definitely 1152:topic bans 1088:Metacritic 1025:everyone's 968:canvassing 404:. Cheers! 342:especially 221:uninvolved 2846:anything. 2631:published 2580:Rowing007 2526:carefully 2415:Mooji bio 2221:site bans 2126:... that 2010:this. -- 1655:Zoë Quinn 1560:Baron Rea 1520:Baron Rea 1482:Baron Rea 1436:Baron Rea 1416:Baron Rea 1148:site bans 1068:Baron Rea 1053:Baron Rea 917:TBirdNeil 868:Watchlist 860:TBirdNeil 840:TBirdNeil 560:real name 94:Sambandam 85:Archive 7 79:Archive 6 73:Archive 5 68:Archive 4 60:Archive 1 3199:Woodroar 3129:Woodroar 3063:Woodroar 2989:Woodroar 2928:Woodroar 2851:Woodroar 2839:account. 2782:Woodroar 2655:Woodroar 2621:because 2455:Woodroar 2401:Woodroar 2333:Woodroar 2301:Woodroar 2072:articles 2027:Woodroar 1891:Woodroar 1761:Gebagebo 1707:Woodroar 1639:Woodroar 1615:contribs 1603:unsigned 1575:Woodroar 1545:Woodroar 1528:contribs 1516:unsigned 1498:Woodroar 1466:Woodroar 1462:Teahouse 1424:contribs 1412:unsigned 1388:Thanks! 1375:Woodroar 1371:Teahouse 1297:Woodroar 1241:Woodroar 1096:Woodroar 1029:Woodroar 980:Woodroar 933:Comments 880:Woodroar 848:contribs 836:unsigned 787:Woodroar 750:contribs 738:unsigned 712:Woodroar 710:Thanks! 694:Exentily 645:Woodroar 629:Exentily 616:Exentily 602:Woodroar 598:Exentily 585:Exentily 577:Woodroar 564:Woodroar 556:Exentily 551:Exentily 532:Woodroar 521:What we 506:reliable 489:Exentily 474:BreckenK 459:contribs 451:Exentily 447:unsigned 406:Woodroar 396:and not 355:Woodroar 328:CyberBoB 315:contribs 307:CyberBoB 303:unsigned 280:Woodroar 276:WP:ARBIP 233:policies 207:Pakistan 154:Woodroar 135:Bridgman 126:article. 2315:FopCrow 2278:FopCrow 2248:NoACEMM 1989:Vinay84 1949:deleted 1847:VC Star 1724:Philroc 1686:Philroc 1669:Philroc 1448:WP:VG/S 1363:WP:PSTS 1341:D&D 1334:! It's 1225:Valjean 1210:Valjean 1175:NoACEMM 976:blocked 523:do have 440:The vid 428:) This 39:archive 3190:again. 2985:WP:RSP 2619:exists 2451:WP:RSN 2351:Alfred 2129:Kotaku 2012:ferret 2002:Thanks 1805:, and 1765:(talk) 1444:WP:RSP 1311:Source 872:outing 811:FDW777 497:WP:BLP 420:Mizkif 245:blocks 227:, our 209:, and 3162:here. 2509:does 2388:Chile 2080:B-bot 1883:WP:RS 1235:then 1208:? -- 272:Nepal 243:, or 203:India 16:< 3203:talk 3181:talk 3133:talk 3081:talk 3067:talk 3052:talk 2993:talk 2947:talk 2932:talk 2924:that 2896:talk 2855:talk 2800:talk 2786:talk 2772:talk 2758:talk 2738:2021 2659:talk 2638:and 2613:Hi @ 2604:talk 2584:talk 2562:here 2528:and 2474:talk 2459:talk 2437:Hi @ 2428:talk 2405:talk 2374:Hi @ 2365:talk 2337:talk 2319:talk 2305:talk 2282:talk 2259:talk 2211:The 2174:talk 2084:talk 2031:talk 2016:talk 1993:talk 1971:talk 1910:talk 1895:talk 1793:Hi @ 1784:talk 1730:talk 1711:talk 1684:Hi @ 1675:talk 1643:talk 1611:talk 1579:talk 1564:talk 1549:talk 1524:talk 1502:talk 1486:talk 1470:talk 1446:and 1434:Hi @ 1420:talk 1394:talk 1379:talk 1330:Hi @ 1321:talk 1301:talk 1245:talk 1237:here 1233:here 1229:ROPE 1223:Hi @ 1214:talk 1200:This 1186:talk 1138:The 1100:talk 1074:and 1066:Hi @ 1057:talk 1033:talk 1019:and 1003:talk 984:talk 953:talk 921:talk 884:talk 874:and 858:Hi @ 844:talk 815:talk 791:talk 769:ICv2 761:Hey 746:talk 716:talk 698:talk 649:talk 620:talk 606:talk 589:talk 568:talk 536:talk 493:WP:V 478:talk 455:talk 410:talk 379:talk 359:talk 311:talk 284:talk 261:talk 241:bans 215:here 193:The 158:talk 139:talk 109:talk 2692:up. 2651:I'm 2649:If 2511:not 2106:On 2067:). 1879:RSN 1758:. 1355:or 1352:NME 1349:or 1282:Liz 1255:FYI 974:or 801:FYI 430:PDF 183:not 3205:) 3183:) 3135:) 3083:) 3069:) 3054:) 2995:) 2987:. 2949:) 2934:) 2898:) 2857:) 2802:) 2788:) 2774:) 2760:) 2661:) 2606:) 2586:) 2572:}} 2566:{{ 2476:) 2461:) 2430:) 2407:) 2367:) 2339:) 2321:) 2307:) 2284:) 2261:) 2250:}} 2246:{{ 2223:, 2176:) 2164:. 2150:, 2110:, 2086:) 2033:) 2018:) 1995:) 1973:) 1951:. 1912:) 1897:) 1801:, 1786:) 1732:) 1713:) 1677:) 1645:) 1637:. 1617:) 1613:• 1581:) 1566:) 1551:) 1530:) 1526:• 1504:) 1488:) 1472:) 1426:) 1422:• 1396:) 1381:) 1367:we 1323:) 1303:) 1271:iz 1247:) 1216:) 1188:) 1177:}} 1173:{{ 1150:, 1102:) 1059:) 1035:) 1005:) 986:) 978:. 955:) 923:) 886:) 850:) 846:• 817:) 809:. 793:) 778:or 752:) 748:• 718:) 700:) 651:) 622:) 608:) 591:) 570:) 538:) 480:) 461:) 457:• 412:) 381:) 361:) 350:we 340:, 317:) 313:• 286:) 263:) 239:, 217:. 205:, 160:) 141:) 111:) 64:← 3201:( 3179:( 3131:( 3101:: 3097:@ 3094:) 3090:( 3079:( 3065:( 3050:( 2991:( 2945:( 2930:( 2894:( 2853:( 2835:. 2812:. 2798:( 2784:( 2770:( 2756:( 2657:( 2602:( 2582:( 2472:( 2457:( 2426:( 2403:( 2363:( 2335:( 2317:( 2303:( 2280:( 2257:( 2172:( 2154:) 2146:( 2082:( 2049:⚠ 2029:( 2014:( 1991:( 1969:( 1908:( 1893:( 1885:/ 1782:( 1728:( 1709:( 1673:( 1641:( 1625:@ 1609:( 1577:( 1562:( 1547:( 1522:( 1500:( 1484:( 1468:( 1450:. 1418:( 1392:( 1377:( 1336:a 1319:( 1299:( 1268:L 1243:( 1212:( 1184:( 1098:( 1055:( 1031:( 1011:@ 1001:( 982:( 962:@ 951:( 919:( 882:( 842:( 813:( 789:( 765:, 744:( 714:( 696:( 647:( 618:( 604:( 587:( 566:( 534:( 517:. 476:( 453:( 408:( 377:( 357:( 330:: 326:@ 309:( 282:( 259:( 156:( 137:( 107:( 50:.

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

Index