1507:
difficulty in establishing its notability from such sources. However, the sum of what has been presented is: 2 brief mentions in a
Guardian article; 1 sentence in another Guardian article; half a sentence in the Financial Times, plus a 9-word description in a table summarising 13 similar groups; brief mentions (1 sentence at most, but usually just mentioning the group's existence) in various other articles (Guardian, Independent, New Statesman). The rest is about affiliates or not from reliable, independent sources. That's not enough to establish notability, context or no context.
31:
1143:
736:, where "Britain for Europe" is mentioned only once, in a list of similar outfits, i.e. verbatim "The groups involved are the all‐party Parliamentary Group on EU Relations; Open Britain; Best for Britain; the European Movement UK; InFacts; Scientists for EU; Healthier IN the EU; Britain for Europe; and The New European newspaper." And that's all as far as
787:“There were about 40 organisations there,” says Turvey. “More dialled in on Skype. We had somebody from Gibraltar. There are a lot of expat organisations – people who travel from France and Germany to the meetings. It’s about collaboration, how we can work together, and grow the movement. We’re all linked now, and there’s work going on all the time.”
1158:
By the way, you might be under the impression that this discussion is shaped by politics or Brexit itself. (The signs of boiling blood have already appeared above.) I don't know about others, but as far as I'm concerned the only issue here is notability and the encyclopaedic merit of an article about
1550:
It's not a misunderstanding or something that's been missed. Being an affiliate is a weak connection; it just means being associated in some way with a group, not being a formal part of a group. The problem here is that there's almost no information about
Britain for Europe in reliable, independent,
1506:
I'm all for taking the nature of the subject (context) into account, as
Jonpatterns suggests. The context here is Brexit, which is the topic for innumerable media pieces (from reliable sources) every day and has been for the last few years. There should then, if this is a notable organisation, be no
978:
article but I somehow doubt there's significant coverage of the subject in it. I mean, the headline reads "Britain's
Europhiles splinter into dozens of grassroots movements"! And the quote in our Knowledge (XXG) article is this: "The FT described the groups as 'diehards' that splintered off from the
771:
The three of them are among the 15 people behind EU in Brum, an amazingly active set-up that was founded in the days after last year’s referendum. None of them did any formal campaigning prior to the vote; they fully expected the leave campaign to amount to nothing more threatening than a sizeable
1360:
Not only does coverage of EU in Brum not contribute towards notability of
Britain for Europe, but the relationship between the two of them seems to be overstated. Britain for Europe claims EU in Brum as a member group, but EU in Brum doesn't consider this affiliation important enough to mention
772:
protest vote, and for remain to convincingly win. Late last year, EU in Brum was also the host for a “national grassroots remain strategy meeting”, organised by the new national pressure group
Britain for Europe, and intended to coordinate the work of a whole host of campaigns.
332:- the nature of the subject means that media coverage talks about BoF along with other groups that collaborate. Some articles are about the work of several groups. In these cases the whole article is about the groups collectivity not just a passing mention. For example see
905:, with the closest example in the text being "A corporation is not notable merely because it owns notable subsidiaries". And that said, I don't think EU in Brum meets notability requirements unless there are more articles like the John Harris one linked...
726:
is about the ostensible resurgence of pro-EU sentiment in the UK; the subject of this contested article, "Britain for Europe," is mentioned only twice, in passing. Nothing substantial about the organization itself at all. Same thing with
1223:
Nope. Still no cigar, sorry. An affiliation is not the same as being "part of," as any lawyer worth his shiny leather shoes would explain to you. If, for instance, EU for Brum vandalizes a property, do you expect
Britain for Europe to be
883:
A one sentence mention giving a basic description of the group seems to be a passing mention to me? I certainly wouldn't consider it significant coverage of the group, and it doesn't help at all with writing an article about the
1205:. Therefore, in this specific instance there is no difference between being "part of" and "affiliated with" the group, therefore EU for Brum is part of BfE. If you don't know the difference, others do. For more information see
762:
The whole of the
Guardian article is based around interviews with people from EU in Brum, a Britain for Europe affiliate group. Note Britain for Europe is an affiliation organisation consisting of roughly fifty groups.
269:
Article mostly cited from a combination of unreliable sources and self-published articles. Coverage in the media seems to be predominantly a one-sentence description of the organisation, which is not enough to satisfy
238:
619:
Thanks for the clarification. A "contentious" issue is, of course, not the same as a "garbage" issue, or in your words "flotsam and jetsam." One can read the lines as well as between them. Let's leave this be.
1046:...the official campaign has split in two: a pragmatic Open Britain that is resigned to Brexit but hoping to soften its terms, and a more radical Britain for Europe, which is still determined to overturn it.
495:
The nature of the subject means that media coverage talks about BoF along with other groups that collaborate. Whole articles are about the work of several groups, therefore it is more than just a mention.
1187:
False. There is a rather big difference between being "part of" something and being "affiliated with" something, which is what EU for Brum is to BfE. If you don't know the difference, others do. -
1438:
Fair enough, I missed that. Thanks for the correction. It doesn't change the notability argument, or that coverage of EU in Brum doesn't contribute towards the notability of
Britain for Europe.
455:
Article already had refs from The
Guardian and The Independent. Now has extra refs from reliable sources and has been cleaned up. Objections are just flotsam and jetsam of Brexit really. --
841:
Britain for Europe and the European Movement maintain branches around the country, keeping the conversation alive and preparing to spring into action the moment a referendum is announced.
1587:
I know. If only we had some sources stating how close the link is... it looks weak and sources haven't been supplied and presumably don't exist, which takes us back to the main problem.
733:
528:
That would only be the case if the notability was derived from the other groups. However, Britain for Europe is more than a passing mention in some of the articles. See comment below.
291:
1001:, and a nine-sentence description in a glossary of the various groups. There's more material in the article about a nn group called "EU Flag Mafia" than about Britain for Europe.
568:, did you just label "flotsam and jetsam" every suggestion by another editor contrary to yours? And did you just append bias to their suggestions? I'm afraid your comments are
1555:
requires "significant coverage provides an overview, description, commentary, survey, study, discussion, analysis, or evaluation of the product, company, or organization".
232:
191:
1228:? Would property damages caused by EU for Brum be remedied by Britain for Europe? Yes or no? Because this is what happens when some entity is "part of it" instead of being
310:
1294:
This works the other way as well. An organization may be notable, but individual members (or groups of members) do not "inherit" notability due to their membership.
944:
This works the other way as well. An organization may be notable, but individual members (or groups of members) do not "inherit" notability due to their membership.
40:
764:
723:
123:
138:
510:
By your own logic, you should be arguing for a merger as the subject's argued notability is derived by association with the other groups. Take a look at
1609:
In reply to the many Brexit articles argument. Its probably easier for media companies to grab concoct an article around big name donors for groups like
362:
198:
477:. Regardless, the Guardian article mentions the group just twice, and the Independent article just once. That's definitely not enough to fulfill
164:
159:
901:
Having an affiliate which has received significant coverage in one reliable source doesn't seem to me to contribute to notability either. See
946:
This is an argument for an article about EU in Brum being deleted on the grounds that it's "inherited" notability comes from playing host to
168:
151:
1489:
and give this group a sentence in one of the consolidated pro EU group pages. We shouldn't have a page for every minor pressure group
333:
118:
111:
17:
1688:
1135:, the text you copied actually supports, and quite forcefully too, my position: the group "Britain for Europe" gets less space than
1251:
organised by the new national pressure group Britain for Europe, and intended to coordinate the work of a whole host of campaigns.
253:
744:
sources. They are useful when we want direct access to what they represent, but they do not, of course, establish notability. -
220:
1649:
1429:
1319:
1259:
1095:
1063:
965:
862:
690:
604:
550:
460:
132:
128:
682:
646:
1670:
69:
46:
1225:
1076:(That's literally all there is about this organisation in the FT article – 22 words – confirming The Gnome's doubts.)
1640:
to some of the arguments being made. It's been over a fortnight since the OP was made (when the article looked like
214:
591:
The Vintage Feminist, did you just label "flotsam and jetsam" every suggestion by another editor contrary to yours?
1573:- 'an organization that coordinates the activities of a number of member organisations to promote a common goal'.
336:. It could be argued to merge all the Pro-EU groups into one page but the information is clearer in this format.
1645:
1425:
1315:
1255:
1091:
1059:
961:
858:
686:
600:
565:
546:
456:
1653:
1622:
1596:
1582:
1564:
1545:
1516:
1498:
1481:
1447:
1433:
1374:
1323:
1281:
1263:
1241:
1218:
1196:
1182:
1168:
1139:, an organization that does not even have a Knowledge (XXG) article. (But I guess we might see one pretty soon.
1099:
1085:
1067:
1024:
1010:
988:
979:
Open Britain group; saying they seek to reverse Brexit rather look for favourable terms of exit." Come on now. -
969:
914:
866:
808:
753:
694:
667:
629:
608:
585:
554:
537:
523:
505:
490:
464:
447:
422:
400:
374:
345:
321:
302:
283:
93:
210:
1268:
Bold away as much as you feel like, but notability for EU for Brum is not notability for Britain for Europe.
1229:
435:
155:
1289:
939:
902:
511:
260:
1552:
1269:
1666:
1618:
1578:
1541:
1533:
1214:
1178:
804:
533:
501:
418:
341:
65:
1532:
The main misunderstanding here seems to be to miss that the organisation is a collective of groups, or
1570:
1569:
Affiliation can be weak or strong depending on the terms of affiliation. Also, see the definition of
1155:, as the policy demands?! What can I say. I'll let those who'll read the article see for themselves.
741:
1592:
1560:
1512:
1494:
1277:
1237:
1192:
1164:
1081:
1020:
984:
749:
625:
581:
246:
1249:
Late last year, EU in Brum was also the host for a “national grassroots remain strategy meeting”,
677:
There is also a discussion on the deletion of the image, File:Britain for Europe Logo, removed in
1443:
1370:
1090:
36 + 12 = 48 not 22, but even if it were 22 I don't think it would confirm The Gnome's doubts. --
1006:
910:
443:
147:
99:
226:
1309:
a “national grassroots remain strategy meeting”, organised by the new national pressure group
948:
a “national grassroots remain strategy meeting”, organised by the new national pressure group
314:
295:
107:
58:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
1665:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
709:
64:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
1614:
1610:
1574:
1537:
1210:
1174:
1132:
800:
529:
497:
414:
396:
388:
337:
569:
478:
474:
271:
1644:). The article now has reliable, notable sources which are more than a single sentence. --
729:
519:
486:
370:
279:
737:
410:
1588:
1556:
1508:
1490:
1273:
1233:
1202:
1188:
1160:
1077:
1016:
980:
745:
658:
621:
577:
84:
1475:
poorly soured and dubious notability - anything of value can be merged elsewhere -----
705:
1682:
1527:
1439:
1366:
1002:
906:
439:
1151:
is a passing one in relation to the other outfit. And you seriously find this to be
1056:
Britain for Europe: Open Britain splinter group still fighting Brexit. The diehards.
1476:
998:
719:
185:
1638:
These mentions are Beef flavoured, I prefer Cheese & Onion flavoured mentions
392:
1206:
1038:
article but I somehow doubt there's significant coverage of the subject in it.
515:
482:
366:
275:
1417:
438:
is the best I can find, but even that barely contributes towards notability.
1424:
The link goes to Britain for Europe's interactive map of local groups. --
1362:
1201:
False. In this case Britain for Europe is an affiliation of groups, an
573:
1232:, i.e. simply affiliated. Would you like to think this over a bit? -
1015:
Quick correction of a slip: "nine-sentence" should be "nine-word".
387:
might be possible but I am not sure where - possibly a merge with
1303:
on the grounds that it is trying to "inherit" its notability from
1361:
anywhere on their website, only listing Britain for Europe in a
365:. It should thus be merged there, if there is to be a merger. --
1661:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
1254:
One of those campaigns being - quite obviously - EU in Brum. --
1052:
and in a list of pro-Europe groups at the end of the article -
25:
997:
article. It's mentioned in one sentence as more radical than
649:
to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
512:
Knowledge (XXG):Notability#Whether to create standalone pages
413:. However, the information is clearer as separate articles.
1136:
993:
The paraphrase in the article is all the material in the
1299:
An argument is being made for deleting an article about
935:"Passing mention" is in the eye of the beholder I guess.
599:
I labelled Brexit as a contentious issue which it is. --
597:
Objections are just flotsam and jetsam of Brexit really.
1641:
1634:
I don't think these mentions are quite mention-y enough
822:
678:
181:
177:
173:
245:
655:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
259:
292:list of Organizations-related deletion discussions
363:Opposition to Brexit in the United Kingdom#Groups
72:). No further edits should be made to this page.
1673:). No further edits should be made to this page.
1613:than report what is happening at a local level.
1314:." but this AfD is about Britain for Europe. --
309:Note: This discussion has been included in the
290:Note: This discussion has been included in the
434:There is no substantial coverage of the group.
1147:) The only mention of "Britain for Europe" in
857:That's more than a passing mention as well. --
799:This constitutes more than a passing mention.
740:are concerned, which is nothing. The rest are
8:
1416:was founded in July 2016 and is a part of a
1042:Two quotes (which I have added to the ref):
543:It would be appreciated if you could WP:AGF.
311:list of England-related deletion discussions
139:Help, my article got nominated for deletion!
1173:EU in Brum is part of Britain for Europe.
361:a page about all of the pro-EU groups, at
308:
289:
1536:. Each affiliate is a part of the group.
1411:Quote from EU in Brum "about" web page —
45:For an explanation of the process, see
1412:
1293:
1152:
1033:
943:
596:
590:
542:
717:Examining the sources shows that up:
545:- I always have and I always will. --
473:It would be appreciated if you could
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
1140:
1363:longer list of pro-EU organisations
960:article that's just been added. --
409:A better target would probably be
24:
1270:And you should know why it's not
1141:
124:Introduction to deletion process
41:deletion review on 2018 August 2
29:
1288:I wrote higher up — "Also from
47:Knowledge (XXG):Deletion review
1551:etc. sources. For notability,
821:Additional Guardian ref added
704:on account of subject lacking
1:
1418:national grass roots movement
1034:I do not have access to the
974:I do not have access to the
114:(AfD)? Read these primers!
1705:
1482:00:33, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
1307:as it is playing host to
1264:13:32, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
1219:19:37, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
1197:07:55, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
1183:20:57, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
1169:20:16, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
1159:the subject. Take care. -
989:20:24, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
970:19:03, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
915:16:57, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
867:14:44, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
809:14:14, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
754:23:12, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
695:09:48, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
668:07:09, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
630:10:29, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
609:01:53, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
586:23:12, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
555:01:53, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
538:14:14, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
524:21:53, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
506:17:04, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
491:16:06, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
465:00:30, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
448:20:02, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
423:10:34, 21 June 2018 (UTC)
401:10:29, 21 June 2018 (UTC)
375:12:45, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
346:10:00, 21 June 2018 (UTC)
322:22:12, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
303:22:11, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
284:21:43, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
1689:Pages at deletion review
1663:Please do not modify it.
1654:01:41, 6 July 2018 (UTC)
1623:04:24, 6 July 2018 (UTC)
1597:14:48, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
1583:14:41, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
1565:13:50, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
1546:12:13, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
1517:11:37, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
1499:07:01, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
1448:17:19, 4 July 2018 (UTC)
1434:15:48, 4 July 2018 (UTC)
1375:14:56, 1 July 2018 (UTC)
1324:15:48, 4 July 2018 (UTC)
1282:07:17, 1 July 2018 (UTC)
1242:07:17, 1 July 2018 (UTC)
1100:01:15, 6 July 2018 (UTC)
1086:20:41, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
1068:19:19, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
1025:11:43, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
1011:15:01, 1 July 2018 (UTC)
94:09:46, 6 July 2018 (UTC)
61:Please do not modify it.
1632:There's quite a lot of
1630:Comment / Observation
1571:umbrella organization
1534:umbrella organization
572:. We're not debating
112:Articles for deletion
1646:The Vintage Feminist
1426:The Vintage Feminist
1316:The Vintage Feminist
1256:The Vintage Feminist
1153:significant coverage
1092:The Vintage Feminist
1060:The Vintage Feminist
962:The Vintage Feminist
859:The Vintage Feminist
687:The Vintage Feminist
601:The Vintage Feminist
576:here. Simmer down. -
566:The Vintage Feminist
547:The Vintage Feminist
457:The Vintage Feminist
1030:Re: Financial Times
1311:Britain for Europe
1305:Britain for Europe
1226:liable for damages
950:Britain for Europe
738:acceptable sources
683:discussion is here
148:Britain for Europe
100:Britain for Europe
1420:of people who....
956:There's also the
670:
666:
475:assume good faith
324:
305:
129:Guide to deletion
119:How to contribute
92:
53:
52:
39:was subject to a
1696:
1611:Best for Britain
1531:
1146:
1145:
1144:
765:Guardian article
665:
663:
656:
654:
652:
650:
389:Best for Britain
319:
300:
264:
263:
249:
201:
189:
171:
109:
91:
89:
82:
63:
33:
32:
26:
1704:
1703:
1699:
1698:
1697:
1695:
1694:
1693:
1679:
1678:
1677:
1671:deletion review
1525:
1230:at arm's length
1207:BfE -our groups
1142:
1036:Financial Times
995:Financial Times
976:Financial Times
958:Financial Times
730:The Independent
671:
659:
657:
645:
643:
315:
296:
206:
197:
162:
146:
143:
106:
103:
85:
83:
77:The result was
70:deletion review
59:
37:This discussion
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
1702:
1700:
1692:
1691:
1681:
1680:
1676:
1675:
1657:
1656:
1626:
1625:
1607:
1606:
1605:
1604:
1603:
1602:
1601:
1600:
1599:
1520:
1519:
1501:
1484:
1469:
1468:
1467:
1466:
1465:
1464:
1463:
1462:
1461:
1460:
1459:
1458:
1457:
1456:
1455:
1454:
1453:
1452:
1451:
1450:
1422:
1392:
1391:
1390:
1389:
1388:
1387:
1386:
1385:
1384:
1383:
1382:
1381:
1380:
1379:
1378:
1377:
1343:
1342:
1341:
1340:
1339:
1338:
1337:
1336:
1335:
1334:
1333:
1332:
1331:
1330:
1329:
1328:
1327:
1326:
1297:
1246:
1245:
1244:
1203:umbrella group
1156:
1125:
1124:
1123:
1122:
1121:
1120:
1119:
1118:
1117:
1116:
1115:
1114:
1113:
1112:
1111:
1110:
1109:
1108:
1107:
1106:
1105:
1104:
1103:
1102:
1071:
1070:
1050:
1049:
1048:
1040:
954:
936:
924:
923:
922:
921:
920:
919:
918:
917:
892:
891:
890:
889:
888:
887:
886:
885:
874:
873:
872:
871:
870:
869:
850:
849:
848:
847:
846:
845:
844:
843:
831:
830:
829:
828:
827:
826:
814:
813:
812:
811:
794:
793:
792:
791:
790:
789:
779:
778:
777:
776:
775:
774:
757:
756:
714:
713:
708:, independent
698:
697:
653:
642:
641:
640:
639:
638:
637:
636:
635:
634:
633:
632:
612:
611:
594:
563:
562:
561:
560:
559:
558:
557:
540:
468:
467:
450:
428:
427:
426:
425:
404:
403:
380:
379:
378:
377:
349:
348:
326:
325:
306:
267:
266:
203:
142:
141:
136:
126:
121:
104:
102:
97:
75:
74:
54:
51:
50:
44:
34:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1701:
1690:
1687:
1686:
1684:
1674:
1672:
1668:
1664:
1659:
1658:
1655:
1651:
1647:
1643:
1639:
1635:
1631:
1628:
1627:
1624:
1620:
1616:
1612:
1608:
1598:
1594:
1590:
1586:
1585:
1584:
1580:
1576:
1572:
1568:
1567:
1566:
1562:
1558:
1554:
1549:
1548:
1547:
1543:
1539:
1535:
1529:
1524:
1523:
1522:
1521:
1518:
1514:
1510:
1505:
1502:
1500:
1496:
1492:
1488:
1485:
1483:
1480:
1479:
1474:
1471:
1470:
1449:
1445:
1441:
1437:
1436:
1435:
1431:
1427:
1423:
1421:
1419:
1415:
1410:
1409:
1408:
1407:
1406:
1405:
1404:
1403:
1402:
1401:
1400:
1399:
1398:
1397:
1396:
1395:
1394:
1393:
1376:
1372:
1368:
1364:
1359:
1358:
1357:
1356:
1355:
1354:
1353:
1352:
1351:
1350:
1349:
1348:
1347:
1346:
1345:
1344:
1325:
1321:
1317:
1313:
1312:
1306:
1302:
1298:
1295:
1291:
1290:WP:INHERITORG
1287:
1286:
1285:
1284:
1283:
1279:
1275:
1271:
1267:
1266:
1265:
1261:
1257:
1253:
1252:
1247:
1243:
1239:
1235:
1231:
1227:
1222:
1221:
1220:
1216:
1212:
1208:
1204:
1200:
1199:
1198:
1194:
1190:
1186:
1185:
1184:
1180:
1176:
1172:
1171:
1170:
1166:
1162:
1157:
1154:
1150:
1149:The Gurardian
1138:
1134:
1131:
1130:
1129:
1128:
1127:
1126:
1101:
1097:
1093:
1089:
1088:
1087:
1083:
1079:
1075:
1074:
1073:
1072:
1069:
1065:
1061:
1057:
1054:
1053:
1051:
1047:
1044:
1043:
1041:
1039:
1037:
1031:
1028:
1027:
1026:
1022:
1018:
1014:
1013:
1012:
1008:
1004:
1000:
996:
992:
991:
990:
986:
982:
977:
973:
972:
971:
967:
963:
959:
955:
952:
951:
945:
941:
940:WP:INHERITORG
937:
934:
933:
932:
931:
930:
929:
928:
927:
926:
925:
916:
912:
908:
904:
903:WP:INHERITORG
900:
899:
898:
897:
896:
895:
894:
893:
882:
881:
880:
879:
878:
877:
876:
875:
868:
864:
860:
856:
855:
854:
853:
852:
851:
842:
839:
838:
837:
836:
835:
834:
833:
832:
824:
820:
819:
818:
817:
816:
815:
810:
806:
802:
798:
797:
796:
795:
788:
785:
784:
783:
782:
781:
780:
773:
769:
768:
766:
761:
760:
759:
758:
755:
751:
747:
743:
739:
735:
732:
731:
725:
722:
721:
716:
715:
711:
707:
703:
700:
699:
696:
692:
688:
684:
680:
676:
673:
672:
669:
664:
662:
651:
648:
631:
627:
623:
618:
617:
616:
615:
614:
613:
610:
606:
602:
598:
595:
592:
589:
588:
587:
583:
579:
575:
571:
567:
564:
556:
552:
548:
544:
541:
539:
535:
531:
527:
526:
525:
521:
517:
513:
509:
508:
507:
503:
499:
494:
493:
492:
488:
484:
480:
476:
472:
471:
470:
469:
466:
462:
458:
454:
451:
449:
445:
441:
437:
433:
430:
429:
424:
420:
416:
412:
411:People's Vote
408:
407:
406:
405:
402:
398:
394:
390:
386:
382:
381:
376:
372:
368:
364:
360:
356:
353:
352:
351:
350:
347:
343:
339:
335:
331:
328:
327:
323:
320:
318:
312:
307:
304:
301:
299:
293:
288:
287:
286:
285:
281:
277:
273:
262:
258:
255:
252:
248:
244:
240:
237:
234:
231:
228:
225:
222:
219:
216:
212:
209:
208:Find sources:
204:
200:
196:
193:
187:
183:
179:
175:
170:
166:
161:
157:
153:
149:
145:
144:
140:
137:
134:
130:
127:
125:
122:
120:
117:
116:
115:
113:
108:
101:
98:
96:
95:
90:
88:
80:
73:
71:
67:
62:
56:
55:
48:
42:
38:
35:
28:
27:
19:
1662:
1660:
1637:
1633:
1629:
1553:WP:CORPDEPTH
1503:
1486:
1477:
1472:
1413:
1310:
1308:
1304:
1300:
1250:
1248:
1148:
1055:
1045:
1035:
1029:
999:Open Britain
994:
975:
957:
949:
947:
840:
786:
770:
728:
720:The Guardian
718:
706:demonstrable
701:
674:
660:
644:
452:
431:
384:
358:
354:
334:this article
329:
317:CAPTAIN RAJU
316:
298:CAPTAIN RAJU
297:
268:
256:
250:
242:
235:
229:
223:
217:
207:
194:
105:
86:
78:
76:
60:
57:
36:
1615:Jonpatterns
1575:Jonpatterns
1538:Jonpatterns
1211:Jonpatterns
1175:Jonpatterns
1133:Jonpatterns
801:Jonpatterns
570:out of line
530:Jonpatterns
498:Jonpatterns
415:Jonpatterns
338:Jonpatterns
233:free images
1414:EU in Brum
1301:EU in Brum
1137:EU in Brum
938:Also from
710:notability
661:Sandstein
357:- There's
87:Sandstein
1667:talk page
1589:EddieHugh
1557:EddieHugh
1509:EddieHugh
1491:Lyndaship
1274:The Gnome
1234:The Gnome
1189:The Gnome
1161:The Gnome
1078:EddieHugh
1017:EddieHugh
981:The Gnome
746:The Gnome
679:this diff
622:The Gnome
578:The Gnome
66:talk page
1683:Category
1669:or in a
1528:Ralbegen
1440:Ralbegen
1367:Ralbegen
1003:Ralbegen
907:Ralbegen
825:. Quote:
647:Relisted
440:Ralbegen
192:View log
133:glossary
68:or in a
1478:Snowded
742:primary
734:article
724:article
675:Comment
593:- Nope.
359:already
355:Comment
239:WP refs
227:scholar
165:protect
160:history
110:New to
1504:Delete
1487:Delete
1473:Delete
884:group.
702:Delete
681:. The
574:Brexit
479:WP:GNG
432:Delete
393:Vorbee
272:WP:GNG
211:Google
169:delete
79:delete
516:RaviC
483:RaviC
385:merge
367:RaviC
276:RaviC
254:JSTOR
215:books
199:Stats
186:views
178:watch
174:links
16:<
1650:talk
1642:this
1636:and
1619:talk
1593:talk
1579:talk
1561:talk
1542:talk
1513:talk
1495:talk
1444:talk
1430:talk
1371:talk
1320:talk
1278:talk
1260:talk
1238:talk
1215:talk
1193:talk
1179:talk
1165:talk
1096:talk
1082:talk
1064:talk
1021:talk
1007:talk
985:talk
966:talk
911:talk
863:talk
823:diff
805:talk
750:talk
691:talk
685:. --
626:talk
605:talk
582:talk
551:talk
534:talk
520:talk
514:. --
502:talk
487:talk
461:talk
453:Keep
444:talk
436:This
419:talk
397:talk
371:talk
342:talk
330:Keep
280:talk
247:FENS
221:news
182:logs
156:talk
152:edit
1272:. -
261:TWL
190:– (
1685::
1652:)
1621:)
1595:)
1581:)
1563:)
1544:)
1515:)
1497:)
1446:)
1432:)
1373:)
1365:.
1322:)
1292::
1280:)
1262:)
1240:)
1217:)
1209:.
1195:)
1181:)
1167:)
1098:)
1084:)
1066:)
1058:--
1032::
1023:)
1009:)
987:)
968:)
953:."
942::
913:)
865:)
807:)
767::
752:)
693:)
628:)
607:)
584:)
553:)
536:)
522:)
504:)
489:)
481:--
463:)
446:)
421:)
399:)
391:.
383:A
373:)
344:)
313:.
294:.
282:)
274:.
241:)
184:|
180:|
176:|
172:|
167:|
163:|
158:|
154:|
81:.
43:.
1648:(
1617:(
1591:(
1577:(
1559:(
1540:(
1530::
1526:@
1511:(
1493:(
1442:(
1428:(
1369:(
1318:(
1296:"
1276:(
1258:(
1236:(
1213:(
1191:(
1177:(
1163:(
1094:(
1080:(
1062:(
1019:(
1005:(
983:(
964:(
909:(
861:(
803:(
748:(
712:.
689:(
624:(
620:-
603:(
580:(
549:(
532:(
518:(
500:(
485:(
459:(
442:(
417:(
395:(
369:(
340:(
278:(
265:)
257:·
251:·
243:·
236:·
230:·
224:·
218:·
213:(
205:(
202:)
195:·
188:)
150:(
135:)
131:(
49:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.