492:"Zionist editing on Knowledge (XXG)" is a notorious phenomenon stretching from CAMERAs campaign, Jewish Internet Defense League campaigns, to the Yesha councils and My Israels campaigns and most likely many other organizations. There is a lot of information about this. This article: "Church of Scientology editing on Knowledge (XXG)" is literally a couple of sentences that can be merged with the Scientology main article. This article was also most likely only created as a "reply" to "Zionist editing on Knowledge (XXG)". --
48:. There is a clear consensus to keep. Since the article was expanded during the course of the discussion, there haven't been any compelling reasons raised to delete or merge the article, certainly not any that have attained any substantial level of support. On the other hand, the strength of the keep side, however you choose to measure it (arguments or numbers), is overwhelming.
1109:. The sources establish the article as viable. This episode shows why it's important nowadays to have an article draft fairly complete before its posted or else somebody will nominate it for deletion far too quickly instead of trying to improve it themselves. Robofish, why didn't you do what Cirt just did instead of nominating it for deletion so quickly?
860:
Good well written article with good sources. News and other information that becomes noteworthy is always recorded in
Knowledge (XXG), and news thats directly related to WP or an WP article is as well and should be recorded in WP, as long as it's not self referential. The article isn't WP:OR and is
506:
If we strip away your personal opinion in what is "notorious" or your speculation about what is "most likely", it seems the only policy-based arguments for the differing votes is that you seem to think there is not enough material or sources for this article (vs. the other) - so if this article is
1726:- Like all controversial articles relating to the editing of Knowledge (XXG), this article is going to be pulled off the line again and again. Sometimes I don't get deletionists. It's a well written, relavent, notable article. Smashing the delete button is going to get Knowledge (XXG) nowhere...
1345:
Knowledge (XXG) is one of the most notable websites, so sometimes it definitely happens that notable stuff related to WP is covered in RS, and thus we have to be self-referential. While we shouldn't actively navel-gaze, we shouldn't either ignore when our navel is gazed by external sources.
385:, and that we already have an existing article that covers this topic overall, including already having a paragraph of its own on this very facet of it, that can be expanded as needed. Furthermore, we don't need a project-space essay like this when we actually have the arbitration case
752:- With Cirt's recent work, I don't think anyone can claim this is not notable, or has not received significant coverage in mainstream, reliable sources. At least not with a straight face. I encourage those who voted early on to review the article on its current state.
523:
Its only connected to the Church of
Scientology, so it can be merged to that. Its not notable enough to have a separate article. There are at least 4 pro-Israeli groups who have orchestrated campaigns at Knowledge (XXG), all these should be merged to one article.
160:
390:
1273:- This is not encyclopedic in any way and imo this type writing is not what we are here for, awful naval gazing article close to outing. Perhaps there should be another article from the opposite point of view.
366:
The article is only a few days old. I doubt it will become a decent article but am sure there is a rule about giving a week before nominationg new articles for deletion. Perhaps consider making it an essay?
88:
83:
791:. I double HupHollandHup's remarks. Cirt has performed nothing short of a miracle with the stub I created. Phenomenal. There is obviously a lot more information about this than I had thought. Well done!
425:
Regardless, that remains the point that was made above, and the answer to the question that you asked. I'm amused that you are trying to tell me how article rescue and article development work, kiddo.
154:
92:
410:
No the point I was making was to give a new article a chance before deleting it. Thanks to Cirt's hard work look now. You can't expect every article to become a featured article in less than a week.
75:
733:
sources. The article now has a chronological model, with subsections for years from 2006 through 2009. There is still quite a bit more to add, from an additional 100 sources or perhaps more. --
1295:
As flattered as I am to be mentioned in this article, this is really something that belongs on
Wikinews. We should not be this self-referential. I don't see the encyclopedic content here.
1368:- Wikinews only accepts articles about recent (last 2-3 days) news. Without a recent news event to hang it on, there is no way this would be published at Wikinews, regardless of quality.
1320:
That said, I think this would be excellent on
Wikinews, and it is a very well written article. I just think that the subject itself is fatally flawed for inclusion on Knowledge (XXG).
1538:
contain nearly the information given by article in question. 3. Alleged lack of notability not argued by proposer. 4. Specific notability given as a quick web search demonstrates. //
1020:
120:
115:
880:
992:
964:
936:
79:
908:
1274:
633:
I did a lot of editing to support Obama during the campaign, or at least to correct misinformation by the other side. I wasn't organized with anyone else though.
175:
71:
63:
661:
142:
664:
136:
1739:
1718:
1699:
1677:
1661:
1647:
1617:
1596:
1569:
1551:
1508:
1490:
1473:
1444:
1423:
1403:
1376:
1360:
1340:
1315:
1285:
1265:
1240:
1215:
1186:
1164:
1147:
1118:
1101:
1078:
1055:
1037:
1009:
981:
953:
925:
897:
870:
852:
835:
816:
800:
781:
761:
744:
717:
696:
677:
642:
624:
607:
583:
560:
533:
516:
501:
487:
465:
435:
420:
405:
376:
358:
304:
282:
259:
238:
220:
57:
1236:
132:
1064:
247:
1411:
Cirt has done a fantastic job with this article; it is sourced adequately to demonstrate compliance with our policies and guidelines. See
182:
17:
593:
571:
1579:
1135:
1535:
556:
529:
497:
461:
270:
208:
148:
1468:
1092:
it were not sourced to reliable sources independent of WP, the charge of navel-gazing would stick, but it is, so it doesn't.
1497:
Thanks, I have added some citations to the lede/intro itself, for ease of verification for direct attributed statements. --
1051:
1207:
475:
453:
192:
1754:
1605:
1253:
36:
1249:
1691:- if only all withered little stubs could be nurtured like this pretty sprout. ;) 70 refs? And all good? My word. —
1396:
552:
525:
493:
457:
1531:
204:
1753:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
1733:
1547:
1211:
1068:
1047:
300:
278:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
1412:
1097:
848:
757:
512:
483:
416:
372:
1074:
1440:
1088:- It's an exemplary article, in terms of style and sourcing. Cirt deserves congratulations for this work.
1624:
No, should be kept with the title it was initially created with. The vast majority of a preponderance of
1590:
1389:
1372:
1160:
866:
620:
603:
579:
328:
53:
1652:
I actually was thinking of a new article, not renaming this one. Sorry if I didn't make myself clear.
1326:
1301:
1281:
1140:
474:
Could you perhaps explain the discrepancy between your vote here, above, and your "Keep" vote on the
1523:
1257:
196:
1728:
1543:
1261:
296:
274:
168:
1715:
1466:
1417:
1358:
1232:
1184:
1093:
844:
831:
796:
767:
753:
508:
479:
412:
368:
216:
1527:
826:: par Cirt's work. The reliable sources used in the article show that the subject is notable. --
200:
1565:
1436:
713:
692:
431:
401:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
653:
1693:
1657:
1613:
1585:
1486:
1369:
1203:
1156:
862:
638:
616:
599:
575:
354:
324:
234:
49:
1224:
312:
1321:
1296:
1277:
1130:
1114:
255:
1625:
1560:. Man, I wish all unpromising, seemingly-not-notable stubs could be Cirt-ized like this.
1453:
1336:
1311:
730:
657:
320:
316:
729:
I have started an initial framework, and added additional information from 10 different
246:
per nom. I wouldn't be surprised if someone eventually tried starting an article called
1673:
1643:
1504:
1033:
1005:
977:
949:
921:
893:
812:
777:
740:
673:
1708:
1481:
with many external references, but the introduction should better get more "ref" tags.
1457:
1712:
1461:
1347:
1228:
1173:
827:
792:
212:
1561:
709:
688:
427:
397:
1275:
Knowledge (XXG) editor writes, multiple anti
Scientology articles under pseudonym
109:
1653:
1609:
1482:
1195:
634:
350:
230:
1110:
291:
How did Cirt do that? I was sure I would be the only one to buck the trend...
251:
1668:
1638:
1499:
1028:
1000:
972:
944:
916:
888:
807:
772:
735:
668:
1435:
in the media and is likely to be something readers would want to look up -
1431:- with the disclaimer that I'm named in it (not that I care). But this was
349:
But it's much better to be bashed on WP than in person, less painful. :-)
1223:- due to Cirt's significant contributions to this article, it meets the
686:- Knowledge (XXG) is not Knowledge (XXG) news. Ample coverage elsewhere.
1126:
Plenty of coverage in many independent sources, indicating notability.
507:
expanded with more material an sources, you'd change our vote to keep?
770:, very much, for your kind comments about my work on this article. --
1577:
Over 69 sources, many of them specifically about this topic, such as
452:
and looks like it was created as a "reply" to another article called
1608:, which could cover both pro- and anti-Scientology activity on WP?
843:
Whoa, Cirt put in some serious keyboard time on that, very nice.
1747:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
1194:
Looks like this article needs to be nominated for GA status...
656:. Has received significant discussion and coverage in multiple
478:
article? Both articles are sourced to similar media stories.
195:(which is also up for AfD). It suffers from the same issues:
347:
due to reliable sources that say it's notable. But still...
211:; it's not notable enough to justify a separate article.
381:
The point being made above is that this is, basically,
203:. This information is already included in the articles
105:
101:
97:
1583:, are sufficient to meet the notability requirement.
167:
1522:
No valid rationale on behalf of proposer: 1. Neither
248:
191:
I noticed this article was created as a parallel to
181:
1021:list of Organizations-related deletion discussions
805:Thanks very much! Much appreciated! ;) Cheers, --
1063:The article is well written and properly cited.
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
1757:). No further edits should be made to this page.
1580:Why Knowledge (XXG) was wrong to ban Scientology
72:Church of Scientology editing on Knowledge (XXG)
64:Church of Scientology editing on Knowledge (XXG)
1256:as I fail to see why it needs its own article.
881:list of California-related deletion discussions
594:Organized political editing on Knowledge (XXG)
572:Organized political editing on Knowledge (XXG)
1155:per article meeting notability requirements.
993:list of Religion-related deletion discussions
965:list of Websites-related deletion discussions
937:list of Internet-related deletion discussions
8:
909:list of Florida-related deletion discussions
311:He must be an involved administrator with a
658:independent and reliable secondary sources.
1626:independent and reliable secondary sources
1015:
987:
959:
931:
903:
875:
574:(or somesuch) for that to be worthwhile.
1666:Ah, thank you for the clarification. --
1388:, seems to be notable and well sourced.
1172:, meets GNG perfectly. Kudos to Cirt. --
1046:- Important topic. Reliable sources. --
1019:: This debate has been included in the
991:: This debate has been included in the
963:: This debate has been included in the
935:: This debate has been included in the
907:: This debate has been included in the
879:: This debate has been included in the
450:this is clearly a non notable article
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
315:. We must immediately report him to
1415:to put my vote in context, though.
1248:Unnecessary Content fork, We have
476:Zionist editing on Knowledge (XXG)
454:Zionist editing on Knowledge (XXG)
193:Zionist editing on Knowledge (XXG)
24:
389:to refer to directly, as well as
1252:where it would be a better fit.
1606:Scientology and Knowledge (XXG)
1536:Scientology versus the Internet
271:Scientology versus the Internet
209:Scientology versus the Internet
1542:Article should be renamed. //
1:
708:- You're gooooooooood, Cirt.
570:There are enough sources on
1740:17:00, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
1719:21:43, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
1700:22:47, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
1678:21:15, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
1662:22:14, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
1648:21:39, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
1618:21:34, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
1597:21:24, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
1570:19:40, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
1552:14:31, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
1509:01:42, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
1491:01:33, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
1474:01:25, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
1445:20:57, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
1424:20:23, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
1404:17:43, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
1377:23:02, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
1361:19:30, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
1341:17:40, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
1316:17:38, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
1286:17:36, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
1266:17:23, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
1250:Scientology Vs the Internet
1241:17:21, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
1216:17:05, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
1187:16:51, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
1165:14:57, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
1148:23:09, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
1119:06:22, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
1102:12:50, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
1079:08:13, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
1056:03:50, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
1038:22:55, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
1010:22:55, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
982:22:55, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
954:22:55, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
926:22:55, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
898:22:55, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
871:20:29, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
853:18:16, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
836:17:54, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
817:17:50, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
801:17:48, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
782:17:38, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
762:17:34, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
745:17:10, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
718:21:38, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
697:16:08, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
678:15:52, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
643:15:35, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
625:19:25, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
608:14:51, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
584:13:34, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
561:20:44, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
534:14:42, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
517:14:35, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
502:14:21, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
488:14:05, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
466:11:29, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
436:13:23, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
421:03:58, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
406:10:18, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
377:03:50, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
359:03:42, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
305:00:46, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
283:02:49, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
260:02:22, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
239:00:57, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
221:00:52, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
58:04:37, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
1774:
1707:- due to such policies as
1532:Scientology controversies
615:per recent expansion. --
205:Scientology controversies
1750:Please do not modify it.
383:one paragraph of content
32:Please do not modify it.
652:. Definitely satisfies
551:per Cirts expansion. --
323:. Bawwww;! Bawwww;! --
1604:What about an article
1452:as there is plenty of
1413:User:The Wordsmith/COI
553:Supreme Deliciousness
526:Supreme Deliciousness
494:Supreme Deliciousness
458:Supreme Deliciousness
1225:notability guideline
1048:Playmobilonhishorse
1366:Comment re Wikinews
660:Examples including
568:Why not merge them?
1530:apply. 2. Neither
44:The result was
1338:
1313:
1040:
1024:
1012:
996:
984:
968:
956:
940:
928:
912:
900:
884:
861:clearly notable.
273:is quite enough.
1765:
1752:
1738:
1736:
1696:
1593:
1588:
1464:
1454:reliable sources
1422:
1400:
1393:
1356:
1350:
1337:
1334:
1333:
1330:
1324:
1312:
1309:
1308:
1305:
1299:
1200:
1182:
1176:
1145:
1143:
1138:
1133:
1082:
1025:
997:
969:
941:
913:
885:
186:
185:
171:
123:
113:
95:
34:
1773:
1772:
1768:
1767:
1766:
1764:
1763:
1762:
1761:
1755:deletion review
1748:
1734:
1727:
1694:
1591:
1586:
1471:
1462:
1416:
1398:
1391:
1354:
1353:
1348:
1331:
1328:
1327:
1322:
1306:
1303:
1302:
1297:
1196:
1180:
1179:
1174:
1141:
1136:
1131:
1128:
1072:
128:
119:
86:
70:
67:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
1771:
1769:
1760:
1759:
1743:
1742:
1721:
1702:
1685:
1684:
1683:
1682:
1681:
1680:
1621:
1620:
1599:
1572:
1555:
1544:Morton Shumway
1512:
1511:
1494:
1493:
1476:
1469:
1447:
1426:
1406:
1383:
1382:
1381:
1380:
1379:
1363:
1351:
1289:
1288:
1268:
1243:
1218:
1189:
1177:
1167:
1150:
1121:
1104:
1083:
1077:comment added
1065:99.153.162.173
1058:
1041:
1013:
985:
957:
929:
901:
873:
855:
838:
821:
820:
819:
786:
785:
784:
747:
723:
722:
721:
720:
700:
699:
680:
646:
645:
630:
629:
628:
627:
586:
564:
563:
546:
545:
544:
543:
542:
541:
540:
539:
538:
537:
536:
469:
468:
444:
443:
442:
441:
440:
439:
438:
361:
335:
334:
333:
332:
308:
307:
297:Magog the Ogre
286:
285:
275:Magog the Ogre
262:
241:
189:
188:
125:
121:AfD statistics
66:
61:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1770:
1758:
1756:
1751:
1745:
1744:
1741:
1737:
1732:
1731:
1725:
1722:
1720:
1717:
1714:
1710:
1706:
1703:
1701:
1698:
1697:
1690:
1687:
1686:
1679:
1675:
1671:
1670:
1665:
1664:
1663:
1659:
1655:
1651:
1650:
1649:
1645:
1641:
1640:
1635:
1631:
1627:
1623:
1622:
1619:
1615:
1611:
1607:
1603:
1600:
1598:
1595:
1594:
1589:
1582:
1581:
1576:
1573:
1571:
1567:
1563:
1559:
1556:
1553:
1549:
1545:
1541:
1537:
1533:
1529:
1525:
1521:
1517:
1514:
1513:
1510:
1506:
1502:
1501:
1496:
1495:
1492:
1488:
1484:
1480:
1477:
1475:
1472:
1467:
1465:
1459:
1456:to establish
1455:
1451:
1448:
1446:
1442:
1438:
1434:
1430:
1427:
1425:
1421:
1420:
1419:The Wordsmith
1414:
1410:
1407:
1405:
1402:
1401:
1395:
1394:
1387:
1384:
1378:
1375:
1374:
1371:
1367:
1364:
1362:
1359:
1357:
1344:
1343:
1342:
1339:
1335:
1325:
1319:
1318:
1317:
1314:
1310:
1300:
1294:
1291:
1290:
1287:
1283:
1279:
1276:
1272:
1271:Strong delete
1269:
1267:
1263:
1259:
1255:
1251:
1247:
1244:
1242:
1238:
1237:contributions
1234:
1230:
1226:
1222:
1219:
1217:
1213:
1209:
1205:
1201:
1199:
1193:
1190:
1188:
1185:
1183:
1171:
1168:
1166:
1162:
1158:
1154:
1151:
1149:
1146:
1144:
1139:
1134:
1125:
1122:
1120:
1116:
1112:
1108:
1105:
1103:
1099:
1095:
1094:MartinPoulter
1091:
1087:
1084:
1080:
1076:
1070:
1066:
1062:
1059:
1057:
1053:
1049:
1045:
1042:
1039:
1035:
1031:
1030:
1022:
1018:
1014:
1011:
1007:
1003:
1002:
994:
990:
986:
983:
979:
975:
974:
966:
962:
958:
955:
951:
947:
946:
938:
934:
930:
927:
923:
919:
918:
910:
906:
902:
899:
895:
891:
890:
882:
878:
874:
872:
868:
864:
859:
856:
854:
850:
846:
845:Sol Goldstone
842:
839:
837:
833:
829:
825:
822:
818:
814:
810:
809:
804:
803:
802:
798:
794:
790:
787:
783:
779:
775:
774:
769:
768:HupHollandHup
765:
764:
763:
759:
755:
754:HupHollandHup
751:
748:
746:
742:
738:
737:
732:
728:
725:
724:
719:
715:
711:
707:
704:
703:
702:
701:
698:
694:
690:
687:
685:
681:
679:
675:
671:
670:
665:
662:
659:
655:
651:
648:
647:
644:
640:
636:
632:
631:
626:
622:
618:
614:
611:
610:
609:
605:
601:
597:
595:
591:
587:
585:
581:
577:
573:
569:
566:
565:
562:
558:
554:
550:
547:
535:
531:
527:
522:
521:
520:
519:
518:
514:
510:
509:HupHollandHup
505:
504:
503:
499:
495:
491:
490:
489:
485:
481:
480:HupHollandHup
477:
473:
472:
471:
470:
467:
463:
459:
455:
451:
449:
445:
437:
433:
429:
424:
423:
422:
418:
414:
413:Stupidstudent
409:
408:
407:
403:
399:
395:
394:
388:
384:
380:
379:
378:
374:
370:
369:Stupidstudent
365:
362:
360:
356:
352:
348:
345:
342:
341:
337:
336:
330:
326:
322:
318:
314:
310:
309:
306:
302:
298:
294:
290:
289:
288:
287:
284:
280:
276:
272:
268:
267:
263:
261:
257:
253:
249:
245:
242:
240:
236:
232:
229:. Hear hear.
228:
225:
224:
223:
222:
218:
214:
210:
206:
202:
198:
194:
184:
180:
177:
174:
170:
166:
162:
159:
156:
153:
150:
147:
144:
141:
138:
134:
131:
130:Find sources:
126:
122:
117:
111:
107:
103:
99:
94:
90:
85:
81:
77:
73:
69:
68:
65:
62:
60:
59:
55:
51:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
1749:
1746:
1729:
1723:
1704:
1692:
1688:
1667:
1637:
1633:
1629:
1601:
1584:
1578:
1574:
1557:
1539:
1519:
1515:
1498:
1478:
1449:
1437:David Gerard
1432:
1428:
1418:
1408:
1397:
1390:
1385:
1373:
1365:
1292:
1270:
1245:
1220:
1197:
1191:
1169:
1152:
1127:
1123:
1106:
1089:
1085:
1060:
1043:
1027:
1016:
999:
988:
971:
960:
943:
932:
915:
904:
887:
876:
857:
840:
823:
806:
788:
771:
749:
734:
726:
705:
683:
682:
667:
649:
612:
589:
588:
567:
548:
447:
446:
392:
386:
382:
363:
346:
343:
339:
338:
292:
265:
264:
243:
226:
201:navel gazing
190:
178:
172:
164:
157:
151:
145:
139:
129:
45:
43:
31:
28:
1724:Strong keep
1695:La Pianista
1587:Will Beback
1370:Bencherlite
1221:Strong Keep
1157:John Carter
1073:—Preceding
863:scope_creep
766:Thank you,
617:Petri Krohn
600:Petri Krohn
576:TheGrappler
325:Petri Krohn
155:free images
50:Mkativerata
1636:topic. --
1632:with this
1524:WP:NOTNEWS
1458:notability
1278:Off2riorob
1254:EPIC CFORK
197:WP:NOTNEWS
1479:Weak keep
1258:Weaponbb7
1198:Doc James
364:Weak keep
1713:Claritas
1634:specific
1630:directly
1540:Comment:
1528:WP:NAVEL
1470:Contribs
1463:Armbrust
1229:Sjones23
1208:contribs
828:Europe22
793:Chesdovi
727:Comment:
393:Signpost
213:Robofish
116:View log
1602:Comment
1562:28bytes
1520:Reaons:
1075:undated
710:Carrite
689:Carrite
654:WP:NOTE
428:Uncle G
398:Uncle G
161:WP refs
149:scholar
89:protect
84:history
1654:Borock
1610:Borock
1483:Jusjih
1332:Jester
1307:Jester
1293:Delete
684:Delete
635:Borock
448:Delete
387:itself
351:Borock
340:Delete
313:WP:COI
266:Delete
244:Delete
231:Drmies
227:Delete
133:Google
93:delete
1628:deal
1246:Merge
1212:email
1142:comms
1132:fetch
1111:Cla68
731:WP:RS
666:. --
592:with
590:Merge
321:WP:AE
317:WP:AN
252:Laval
176:JSTOR
137:books
110:views
102:watch
98:links
16:<
1711:....
1709:WP:N
1705:Keep
1689:Keep
1674:talk
1669:Cirt
1658:talk
1644:talk
1639:Cirt
1614:talk
1592:talk
1575:Keep
1566:talk
1558:Keep
1548:talk
1526:nor
1516:Keep
1505:talk
1500:Cirt
1487:talk
1450:Keep
1441:talk
1433:huge
1429:Keep
1409:Keep
1386:Keep
1349:Cycl
1329:SWAT
1304:SWAT
1282:talk
1262:talk
1233:talk
1204:talk
1192:Keep
1175:Cycl
1170:Keep
1161:talk
1153:Keep
1124:Keep
1115:talk
1107:Keep
1098:talk
1086:Keep
1069:talk
1061:Keep
1052:talk
1044:Keep
1034:talk
1029:Cirt
1026:—--
1017:Note
1006:talk
1001:Cirt
998:—--
989:Note
978:talk
973:Cirt
970:—--
961:Note
950:talk
945:Cirt
942:—--
933:Note
922:talk
917:Cirt
914:—--
905:Note
894:talk
889:Cirt
886:—--
877:Note
867:talk
858:Keep
849:talk
841:Keep
832:talk
824:Keep
813:talk
808:Cirt
797:talk
789:Keep
778:talk
773:Cirt
758:talk
750:Keep
741:talk
736:Cirt
714:talk
706:Keep
693:talk
674:talk
669:Cirt
663:and
650:Keep
639:talk
621:talk
613:Keep
604:talk
580:talk
557:talk
549:Keep
530:talk
513:talk
498:talk
484:talk
462:talk
456:. --
432:talk
417:talk
402:talk
391:the
373:talk
355:talk
344:Keep
329:talk
319:and
301:talk
293:keep
279:talk
256:talk
235:talk
217:talk
207:and
199:and
169:FENS
143:news
106:logs
80:talk
76:edit
54:talk
46:keep
1735:Mar
1730:Res
1534:or
1518://
1399:iro
1355:pia
1181:pia
1071:)
598:--
396:.
183:TWL
118:•
114:– (
1676:)
1660:)
1646:)
1616:)
1568:)
1550:)
1507:)
1489:)
1460:.
1443:)
1392:He
1346:--
1284:)
1264:)
1239:)
1235:-
1227:.
1214:)
1210:·
1206:·
1163:)
1117:)
1100:)
1090:If
1054:)
1036:)
1023:.
1008:)
995:.
980:)
967:.
952:)
939:.
924:)
911:.
896:)
883:.
869:)
851:)
834:)
815:)
799:)
780:)
760:)
743:)
716:)
695:)
676:)
641:)
623:)
606:)
582:)
559:)
532:)
524:--
515:)
500:)
486:)
464:)
434:)
419:)
404:)
375:)
357:)
303:)
295:.
281:)
269:-
258:)
250:.
237:)
219:)
163:)
108:|
104:|
100:|
96:|
91:|
87:|
82:|
78:|
56:)
1716:§
1672:(
1656:(
1642:(
1612:(
1564:(
1554:.
1546:(
1503:(
1485:(
1439:(
1352:o
1323:⇒
1298:⇒
1280:(
1260:(
1231:(
1202:(
1178:o
1159:(
1137:·
1129:—
1113:(
1096:(
1081:.
1067:(
1050:(
1032:(
1004:(
976:(
948:(
920:(
892:(
865:(
847:(
830:(
811:(
795:(
776:(
756:(
739:(
712:(
691:(
672:(
637:(
619:(
602:(
596:.
578:(
555:(
528:(
511:(
496:(
482:(
460:(
430:(
415:(
400:(
371:(
353:(
331:)
327:(
299:(
277:(
254:(
233:(
215:(
187:)
179:·
173:·
165:·
158:·
152:·
146:·
140:·
135:(
127:(
124:)
112:)
74:(
52:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.