1377:, so I'd only use it to confirm things otherwise sourced. That you haven't bothered to go to the library to get the GamePro articles does not invalidate them, and they are a long-running professionally produced magazine dedicated to the topic, so I this those are solid sources. As to WIS10, the content is short but not trivial, in that they selected it as an example of the type of site and talked a little about it. The link to the Usenet post is as a primary source; that can be problematic, but here it seems cricket. Hoping that helps,
1369:, part of the Gannett conglomerate, is the number three newspaper in Michigan; it qualfies as a reliable source and a source for notability, especially for these kinds of consumer topics. The Daily Cougar is a student paper, but given that the target audience for GameTZ is heavily student-biased, I'd say we shouldn't ignore it a priori. The subject of an article is a perfectly good source for noncontroversial information. AGE looks dodgy; it does appear to be third-party, but I don't think it has the heft of, say,
921:
genre-specific topic. That would make absolutely no sense. The requirement is multiple, non-related reliable sources. GamePro is not remotely connected to GameTZ, and neither are any of the other outside sources used in the article. The TV spot gives an entire third or more of the time to GameTZ, which is very significant in a TV spot covering the online trading phenomenon. As for the usage statistics from the site, where else are you going to get them from? As long as those aren't the
874:, and GamePro is definitely a reliable source in the gaming community (and therefore, by extension, the rest of the world). There is nothing anywhere in any of the policies and guidelines on Knowledge (XXG) that says that all (or even most) references have to be online references. There are some topics which are more easily rsearched using good old fashioned libraries using sources which are not (and may not ever) be available online. ···
80:
289:, per previous nom. Criteria to overturn original deletion fails, per biased interest and possible sockpuppetry. (pending investigation) As expressed, strong case of article ownership. Previous AfD was no-consensus, due to obvious lack of article notability being unable to generate sufficient traffic. This nonsense is getting out of hand.
57:, and discussion is far too contaminated with open-proxy sockpuppetry to achieve any consensus. Good-faith users are welcome to renominate the article if they see fit, but I strongly suggest it be monitored closely by an administrator. Note that I have no opinion on the matter and have not edited the article at any time in the past.
1470:
My argument still stands that these are trivial mentions. Other than the possibility of GamePro, I'm not comfortable with any of the references. Even with GamePro, the subject and reference share too much common interest. I'm also curious of how significant this mention is, so I will do more research
615:
Good news! It turns out that people still managed to conduct research in the dark ages before the invention of the World Wide Web. Libraries keep not just old books, but old magazines. You can also typically get back issues or copies of articles from publishers. Companies are also generally happy to
718:
This is precisely why I make anonymous contributions. When dealing with cases of article ownership, biased interest or edit conflicts, some users take it upon theirselves to disrupt other articles to illustrate their point. Keeping an active account means giving these users a route (my contribution
503:
seems to take strong ownership over the article, and is really the only reason why it was overturned. I'm not convinced that the overturn was necessary at all. These sources aren't very convincing either. There are a couple that look solid from a distance, but are one sentence mentions. The site in
1094:
I see this is quickly degrading into a flame-war. Bear in mind, we're here to discuss article notability. It just so happens that this particular nomination raises a lot of suspicion. I think we're starting to lose sight of the topic at hand -- whether or not GameTZ fulfills notability guidelines.
952:
has absolutely nothing to do with this discussion. No one is trying to keep you from editing the article. No one has said that you can't edit it, or that only a small, exclusive group of people can edit it. If you're going to bring up policy, please at least be familiar with what it's about before
680:
User
Dstumme is under pending investigation as a possible meatpuppet of user Nihonjoe. Bear in mind, these accounts are responsible for the original overturn (please review the deletion log) and most of the article's contributions. As brought up numerous times, this may be a strong case of article
906:
Let me make this easier for you. GamePro and Adult Gaming
Enthusiasts fails per dependance on the subject, as well as non-significant coverage. WIS10 fails per non-significant coverage. Various online blogs (I can't believe you're even bothering with these as references) fail per non-significant
1144:
I agree, we should stick to the issue at hand. So please stop accusing everyone who disagrees with you of being a sockpuppet, meatpuppet, or of having
Article Ownership issues, and we won't need to waste more time proving your accusations false. At this point, I'm seeing a lack on consensus on
1522:
a trivial mention. Reading through the article, one can clearly see that GameTZ.com is one of the article's main subjects, thus clearly non-trivial. Likewise with the WIStv source. While not a lot is written, it's enough to show that GameTZ.com definitely has reliable independent secondary
728:
Could you please link to the current investigation you describe? It is a very serious accusation, and if you aren't willing to prove it, you should withdraw it. Also, although anonymous contributions here may provide the benefit you describe, the lack of any track record makes it very hard to
1411:#1. Second, I never invalidated GamePro by bringing it up, but that I have not been able to research it (due to lack of necessary resources) does not necessarily validate it, either. Everything else is your opinion. Unfortunately, Wiki policy is not left up to subjective interpretation.
920:
GamePro has been around for years, and is an accepted reliable source for video gaming information. I fail to see how it comes even close to not being a reliable source. There is nothing in the guidelines or policies that says that a genre-specific source can't be used as a source for a
1440:
It's not necessary to demean other contributors to illustrate your point. Bringing up the subject of my seniority -- or pointing out my formatting -- falls under , as neither serves any purpose to this discussion, which is the notability of the GameTZ article. Please review
1425:
on the part of the contributor unless we have reason to believe otherwise. Ergo, we count them here. And on the role of policy, you're dead wrong. The policy is the best of our collective subjective judgment, organized for easy reference. That's why we
1581:
and cleanup. The
Gannett news wire article is not a trivial mention; it even includes a quote from the site operator. Several other sources are compelling as well. "Article ownership" is not a criterion for deletion, and AfD is not dispute resolution.
668:
Apparently, if you dislike an article enough, you can simply keep nominating it until you catch a day when the voting is in your favor. Looks like some sockpuppets in the voting, from where I sit, not on the editing of the page, as is implied above.
1420:
Sorry, from the way I had to tidy up your formatting and your curious intepretations of policy, I got the notion you were new. Anyhow, regarding the LSJ article, I wouldn't call 26% of the article a "trivial mention". With the GamePro articles we
616:
send you copies of press clippings in their file. Online sources are preferred to offline ones, but much of the world's knowledge is still on paper. That something can't be verified without leaving your chair does not mean it does not meet
1430:
if they get in the way of building a good encyclopedia. Not that we need to do that here; this isn't a fabulous article, but we only delete articles when we don't have a hope of writing a good one, and I don't think that's the case here.
729:
evaluate your contributions here. As you know, a similar pattern of editing under multiple accounts or IPs is used to cloak all sorts of nefarious activity, so your comments here will be given relatively little weight by most. Thanks,
504:
question sounds like a notable subject, but there has been a lot of time inbetween nomination and now for more references to be provided. Based on its history it doesn't look like its going anywhere. Is salting too much?
705:
LOL! Got any evidence there, other than that we both disagree with you? Got to love accusations of sock puppetry coming from an anonymous IP. Please note that nothing has been posted about this at
1163:
We generally wait at least 5 days, so the end of the day tomorrow would be when this AfD would be closed by an admin (one other than myself, though, as I'm obviously involved in the discussion). ···
212:
1480:
No offense was meant; I was just explaining my misunderstanding. With regard to the rest, I think you've made your opinion clear, and I'm sure that the closing admin will give it all due weight.
650:. I agree you haven't verified it, and neither have I, but either of us could, so we should presume that it's verifiable. As to the (unsourced) claims that it's not a great mag, could well be.
1242:
The content is distributed via a medium which is both well known and independent of the creators, either through an online newspaper or magazine, an online publisher, or an online broadcaster
870:
bent on deleting an article they don't like. This is ridiculous to have to keep defending this article every other week from obvious bad faith AfD nominations. The article clearly meets
1145:
whether or not the sources are relevant enough. Seeing as there is a mix of opinion on this (as in past AfD's), it seems like prevailing logic is to not delete in such a case, right?
1085:
I see 1500-2000 edits that are in the (Main) namespace. (NOT debates.) That's hardly a meat puppet. Please stop tossing around false accusations any time someone disagrees with you.
1319:, such as (1) newspaper articles that simply report the internet address, (2) newspaper articles that simply report the times at which such content is updated or made available, (3)
217:
207:
87:
202:
1614:
Secondly, "article ownership" was not the criteria for deletion -- it's an explaination as to why the article still exists and is being defended so vehemently by the same user. —
223:
279:
911:
Usage statistics quoted directly from the site fail per dependence on the subject. Usage statistics quoted from Google serve no interest to the article, either.
1190:
197:
1471:
on it. In the meantime, if we're assuming that GamePro is a legitimate reference, it's still not enough to establish the notability of this entire article.
925:
sources used in the article (which they aren't by any stretch of the imagination), referencing usage statistics from the site is perfectly acceptable. ···
755:
request or inquiry, please link to it. I couldn't find one at either location, and your edit history shows no evidence of you having done either. ···
738:
I put in a check user request. (for
Dtsumme only) I'm not sure where it went from there, as it's the first time I've ever excersized these features.
990:
as well-referenced article with verifiable and notable sources. I also think it's quite obvious that this is clearly a bad faith nomination. ···
469:
419:
532:
It does indeed seem like article ownership based on the logs, but I'm not sure if a salting is necessary. Also, nomination was a bit hasty.
598:
The sources include itself, USENET, a blog, and "a small, one man, company dedicated to creating and operating
Internet communities." Not
96:
848:
790:
690:
539:
856:
798:
706:
698:
547:
521:
473:
427:
332:
126:
719:
history) from which to further disrupt
Knowledge (XXG). Anonymously debating issues such as this helps to deter any such possibility.
513:
324:
306:
17:
602:. The WIST story only mentions the site in passing. The two GamePro references do not link to any articles viewable online. Not
1270:
The content itself has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the site itself.
1307:"Swapping Online" - this is simply a WMV file where someone mentioned GameTZ in a sentence. I'm not even sure where it's from.
1115:
252:
247:
112:
256:
1135:
1038:
1637:
38:
239:
58:
1596:
1573:
1536:
1509:
1484:
1475:
1435:
1415:
1381:
1360:
1217:
1199:
1169:
1158:
1149:
1139:
1099:
1089:
1080:
1071:
1060:
1042:
1013:
996:
972:
959:
944:
931:
915:
898:
880:
843:
839:. Personally I agree just leave the article to be. If it has another so-called problem then please do delete it.--
829:
814:
761:
742:
733:
723:
713:
685:
673:
654:
641:
624:
610:
590:
563:
508:
488:
456:
443:
394:
385:
376:
365:
348:
293:
85:
If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
63:
423:
158:
1636:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
1591:
37:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
852:
694:
465:
1566:
1006:
794:
543:
517:
361:
Problem is the article relies too heavily on primary sources. Also, this is too soon since last nomination.
1076:
Very prolific indeed. Look over the contribution history -- most all (98%) contributions point to debates.
747:
Not unless it's an invisible request. Let's keep things honest here. If you (or someone else) has put in a
142:
116:
413:
328:
302:
101:
1472:
1412:
1366:
1357:
1155:
1096:
1077:
1057:
969:
941:
840:
784:
739:
720:
682:
533:
461:
453:
912:
895:
633:
couldn't verify it. As noted previously, the description and alleged reputation of the magazine in the
505:
382:
373:
318:
298:
290:
1552:. Fairly obvious bad faith nomination, and the article has numerous verifiable sources, thus passing
1585:
1481:
1432:
1378:
730:
651:
621:
587:
1605:
Compelling, on what grounds? Please add something to the argument. This is not a popularity vote.
1560:
1386:
Confusion? Not at all. I've been contributing for years. Although, I do appreciate your interest.
1109:
965:
148:
79:
1365:
Since you appear to be new, let me help you out with some of your confusion here. In order: The
1321:
a brief summary of the nature of the content or the publication of internet addresses and site
31:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
1337:
Trivial distribution such as hosting content on user-submitted sites (GeoCities, Newgrounds,
1284:
Trivial distribution such as hosting content on user-submitted sites (GeoCities, Newgrounds,
748:
47:
1131:
1034:
606:
from where I sit. The article on GamePro itself casts doubt as to it's reliability as well.
574:. Nominating this again after four days is ridiculous. Further, there seem to be sufficient
1492:
1445:, and for the love of god, let's please stay on-topic. This discussion is cluttered enough.
1442:
1427:
1422:
1408:
1332:
1311:
1279:
1265:
1251:
1237:
949:
937:
867:
752:
579:
358:
54:
243:
1620:
599:
583:
575:
1523:
coverage, even if marginally significant. This earns it a place on
Knowledge (XXG) per
1126:
1029:
826:
638:
607:
1553:
1524:
1154:
Take your own advice, there. I'm only pointing out further oddities about nomination.
891:
871:
780:
647:
617:
603:
409:
1532:
1504:
1213:
1194:
1164:
1105:
1066:
954:
926:
875:
825:.In my opinion, I see no problem with the article. Correct me if I'm wrong, though.--
756:
582:
issues worry me some, so I'd encourage article authors to be especially strict about
500:
1244:
Lansing State
Journal is not well-known. GameTZ is a trivial, one-sentence mention.
1407:
still remains a trivial mention, as I pointed out above. Therefore, it still fails
1146:
1086:
1010:
991:
710:
670:
586:
and unintentional bias, but none of those things are cause to delete this article.
176:
164:
132:
273:
1254:, again #3. The Daily Cougar is NOT well-known. Furthermore, there is absolutely
111:
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to
1123:
1056:
appears to be a meatpuppet. His / her contributions point primarily to debates.
1053:
1026:
811:
560:
485:
440:
391:
362:
345:
235:
69:
646:
Actually, you said it wasn't a verifiable source, suggesting it doesn't meet
1227:
Now that I have more time on my hands, let's clear this up once and for all.
1528:
1370:
1209:
709:. He's basically trying to discredit the vote with a simple accusation.
1104:
Yeah... I'm not a meatpuppet: just an editor who happens to agree with
634:
390:
Didn't realise this was nominated for deletion previously this month.
1323:
or (4) content descriptions in internet directories or online stores.
412:. This was covered in all nominations and the deletion overturn log?
1208:- Seems notable, at least some references (esp. 1, 9) seem legit.
1095:
Let's try to focus on establishing this more thoroughly, please.
1630:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
1122:
want to get into a flamewar here, so let's focus on the issues.
1065:
For a meatpuppet, he's pretty prolific with over 4000 edits. ···
1374:
499:- I think we should salt the earth based on the history here.
74:
309:) has made four edits to Knowledge (XXG) outside this topic.
484:
I've linked to 3 sources. What's with all the new accounts?
105:(agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments,
95:
among
Knowledge (XXG) contributors. Knowledge (XXG) has
452:
as above. Can someone point out these supposed sources?
269:
265:
261:
936:
As stressed already, please familiarize yourself with
779:
as mentioned above nonreliable sources come short of
894:? Please point them out for the sake of discussion.
53:
this debate early; apparent bad faith nomination by
41:). No further edits should be made to this page.
381:Also, why did you change your vote so many times?
372:Non-trivial sources is the issue. Look closely...
866:as bad faith nomination yet again by yet another
213:Articles for deletion/GameTZ.com (4th nomination)
1640:). No further edits should be made to this page.
637:article would make me doubt it's reliability.
357:- article subject is notable and has multiple
968:to avoid cluttering this AfD debate anymore.
125:Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected
8:
1344:Result: fails to meet notability guidelines.
1327:Result: fails to meet notability guidelines.
1291:Result: fails to meet notability guidelines.
1274:Result: fails to meet notability guidelines.
1260:Result: fails to meet notability guidelines.
1246:Result: fails to meet notability guidelines.
1025:Multiple reliable sources, well referenced.
629:I did not say it does not exist, just that
578:to make a small but adequate article. The
218:Articles for deletion/GameTZ.com (5th nom)
208:Articles for deletion/GameTZ.com (2nd nom)
99:regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
203:Articles for deletion/GameTZ.com(3rd nom)
1189:Note: This debate has been added to the
224:Articles for deletion/GameTZ.com 4th nom
119:on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.
195:
1403:There are a few problems here. First,
707:Knowledge (XXG):Suspected_sock_puppets
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
1491:It should also be pointed out that
193:
24:
1272:GameTZ cannot reference itself.
198:Articles for deletion/GameTZ.com
78:
909:These are all trivial mentions.
804:This IP has been blocked as an
553:This IP has been blocked as an
433:This IP has been blocked as an
338:This IP has been blocked as an
1356:And there you have it, folks.
1:
1325:Yet another trivial mention.
115:on the part of others and to
1191:list of video game deletions
890:Which references don't fail
1518:I wouldn't really call the
1278:Adult Gaming Enthusiasts -
1657:
964:I brought this up on your
1520:The Lansing State Journal
1405:The Lansing State Journal
536:00:42, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
416:23:34, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
321:23:24, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
1633:Please do not modify it.
1597:03:23, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
1574:00:20, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
1537:04:20, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
1510:23:30, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
1485:00:35, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
1476:00:01, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
1436:23:25, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
1416:23:17, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
1382:23:07, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
1361:22:20, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
1236:Lansing State Journal -
1218:16:31, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
1200:15:34, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
1170:18:14, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
1159:19:40, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
1150:17:46, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
1140:16:58, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
1100:16:11, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
1090:16:02, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
1081:15:57, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
1072:15:50, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
1061:15:31, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
1043:14:35, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
1014:12:24, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
1005:This AfD nomination was
997:06:14, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
973:23:07, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
960:21:29, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
945:15:49, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
932:15:21, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
916:00:00, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
899:23:53, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
881:22:00, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
844:20:05, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
830:20:03, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
815:21:03, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
787:16:38, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
762:22:15, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
743:17:23, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
734:16:35, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
724:16:22, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
714:15:41, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
686:15:37, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
674:14:07, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
655:03:09, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
642:17:53, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
625:16:44, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
611:08:45, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
591:06:04, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
564:21:03, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
509:00:35, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
489:23:45, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
457:23:41, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
444:21:03, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
395:00:18, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
386:00:06, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
377:00:05, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
366:23:32, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
349:21:03, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
294:23:07, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
64:05:15, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
34:Please do not modify it.
317:per second nomination.
157:; accounts blocked for
127:single-purpose accounts
97:policies and guidelines
1299:unconfirmed as of yet.
287:Speedy delete and salt
192:AfDs for this article:
1367:Lansing State Journal
953:waving it around. ···
857:few or no other edits
799:few or no other edits
781:notability guidelines
699:few or no other edits
548:few or no other edits
522:few or no other edits
474:few or no other edits
428:few or no other edits
333:few or no other edits
1009:. It is listed now.
859:outside this topic.
801:outside this topic.
753:suspected sockpuppet
701:outside this topic.
580:conflict of interest
550:outside this topic.
524:outside this topic.
476:outside this topic.
430:outside this topic.
335:outside this topic.
46:The result was I am
1258:mention of GameTZ.
1250:The Daily Cougar -
604:a verifiable source
109:by counting votes.
88:not a majority vote
1268:, #1, #2 and #3.
1138:
1041:
860:
817:
802:
702:
584:original research
566:
551:
525:
477:
446:
431:
351:
336:
310:
190:
189:
186:
113:assume good faith
1648:
1635:
1618:
1595:
1588:
1572:
1571:
1507:
1428:ignore all rules
1331:Google Groups -
1317:Trivial coverage
1202:
1197:
1167:
1134:
1129:
1069:
1037:
1032:
994:
957:
929:
878:
846:
809:
803:
788:
759:
688:
600:reliable sources
576:reliable sources
558:
552:
537:
511:
459:
438:
432:
417:
343:
337:
322:
296:
277:
259:
184:
172:
156:
140:
121:
91:, but instead a
82:
75:
60:*** Crotalus ***
36:
1656:
1655:
1651:
1650:
1649:
1647:
1646:
1645:
1644:
1638:deletion review
1631:
1616:
1586:
1583:
1558:
1557:
1505:
1195:
1188:
1165:
1127:
1067:
1030:
992:
955:
927:
876:
805:
757:
554:
497:Delete and salt
434:
420:198.145.112.200
414:198.145.112.200
406:delete and salt
339:
250:
234:
231:
229:
226:
174:
162:
146:
130:
117:sign your posts
73:
39:deletion review
32:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
1654:
1652:
1643:
1642:
1626:
1625:
1624:
1623:
1609:
1608:
1607:
1606:
1600:
1599:
1587:brighterorange
1576:
1546:
1545:
1544:
1543:
1542:
1541:
1540:
1539:
1516:
1515:
1514:
1513:
1512:
1489:
1488:
1487:
1482:William Pietri
1457:
1456:
1455:
1454:
1453:
1452:
1451:
1450:
1449:
1448:
1447:
1446:
1433:William Pietri
1394:
1393:
1392:
1391:
1390:
1389:
1388:
1387:
1379:William Pietri
1351:
1350:
1349:
1348:
1347:
1346:
1339:personal blogs
1329:
1308:
1305:
1304:
1303:
1302:
1301:
1286:personal blogs
1276:
1262:
1248:
1229:
1228:
1221:
1220:
1203:
1185:
1184:
1183:
1182:
1181:
1180:
1179:
1178:
1177:
1176:
1175:
1174:
1173:
1172:
1161:
1142:
1046:
1045:
1019:
1018:
1017:
1016:
1000:
999:
984:
983:
982:
981:
980:
979:
978:
977:
976:
975:
901:
884:
883:
861:
833:
832:
819:
818:
773:
772:
771:
770:
769:
768:
767:
766:
765:
764:
731:William Pietri
716:
677:
676:
663:
662:
661:
660:
659:
658:
657:
652:William Pietri
622:William Pietri
593:
588:William Pietri
568:
567:
494:
493:
492:
491:
479:
478:
447:
402:
401:
400:
399:
398:
397:
369:
368:
352:
284:
283:
230:
228:
227:
222:
220:
215:
210:
205:
200:
194:
191:
188:
187:
83:
72:
67:
44:
43:
27:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1653:
1641:
1639:
1634:
1628:
1627:
1622:
1619:
1613:
1612:
1611:
1610:
1604:
1603:
1602:
1601:
1598:
1593:
1589:
1580:
1577:
1575:
1570:
1568:
1563:
1562:
1561:Sephiroth BCR
1555:
1551:
1548:
1547:
1538:
1534:
1530:
1526:
1521:
1517:
1511:
1508:
1502:
1498:
1494:
1490:
1486:
1483:
1479:
1478:
1477:
1474:
1473:74.242.102.16
1469:
1468:
1467:
1466:
1465:
1464:
1463:
1462:
1461:
1460:
1459:
1458:
1444:
1439:
1438:
1437:
1434:
1429:
1424:
1419:
1418:
1417:
1414:
1413:74.242.102.16
1410:
1406:
1402:
1401:
1400:
1399:
1398:
1397:
1396:
1395:
1385:
1384:
1383:
1380:
1376:
1372:
1368:
1364:
1363:
1362:
1359:
1358:74.242.102.16
1355:
1354:
1353:
1352:
1345:
1342:
1340:
1334:
1330:
1328:
1324:
1322:
1318:
1313:
1309:
1306:
1300:
1296:
1295:
1294:
1293:
1292:
1289:
1287:
1281:
1277:
1275:
1271:
1267:
1264:GameTZ.com -
1263:
1261:
1257:
1253:
1249:
1247:
1243:
1239:
1235:
1234:
1233:
1232:
1231:
1230:
1226:
1223:
1222:
1219:
1215:
1211:
1207:
1204:
1201:
1198:
1192:
1187:
1186:
1171:
1168:
1162:
1160:
1157:
1156:74.242.102.16
1153:
1152:
1151:
1148:
1143:
1141:
1137:
1133:
1130:
1125:
1121:
1117:
1114:
1111:
1107:
1103:
1102:
1101:
1098:
1097:74.242.102.16
1093:
1092:
1091:
1088:
1084:
1083:
1082:
1079:
1078:74.242.102.16
1075:
1074:
1073:
1070:
1064:
1063:
1062:
1059:
1058:74.242.102.16
1055:
1051:
1048:
1047:
1044:
1040:
1036:
1033:
1028:
1024:
1021:
1020:
1015:
1012:
1008:
1004:
1003:
1002:
1001:
998:
995:
989:
986:
985:
974:
971:
970:74.242.102.16
967:
963:
962:
961:
958:
951:
948:
947:
946:
943:
942:74.242.102.16
939:
935:
934:
933:
930:
924:
919:
918:
917:
914:
910:
905:
902:
900:
897:
893:
889:
886:
885:
882:
879:
873:
869:
865:
862:
858:
854:
850:
849:71.96.237.113
845:
842:
841:71.96.237.113
838:
835:
834:
831:
828:
824:
821:
820:
816:
813:
808:
800:
796:
792:
791:66.249.24.232
786:
785:66.249.24.232
782:
778:
775:
774:
763:
760:
754:
750:
746:
745:
744:
741:
740:74.242.99.173
737:
736:
735:
732:
727:
726:
725:
722:
721:74.242.99.173
717:
715:
712:
708:
704:
703:
700:
696:
692:
691:74.242.99.173
687:
684:
683:74.242.99.173
679:
678:
675:
672:
667:
664:
656:
653:
649:
645:
644:
643:
640:
636:
632:
628:
627:
626:
623:
619:
614:
613:
612:
609:
605:
601:
597:
594:
592:
589:
585:
581:
577:
573:
570:
569:
565:
562:
557:
549:
545:
541:
540:207.58.143.17
535:
534:207.58.143.17
531:
530:Hesitant salt
528:
527:
526:
523:
519:
515:
510:
507:
502:
498:
490:
487:
483:
482:
481:
480:
475:
471:
467:
463:
462:Chan-change^^
458:
455:
454:Chan-change^^
451:
448:
445:
442:
437:
429:
425:
421:
415:
411:
407:
404:
403:
396:
393:
389:
388:
387:
384:
380:
379:
378:
375:
371:
370:
367:
364:
360:
356:
353:
350:
347:
342:
334:
330:
326:
320:
316:
313:
312:
311:
308:
304:
300:
295:
292:
288:
281:
275:
271:
267:
263:
258:
254:
249:
245:
241:
237:
233:
232:
225:
221:
219:
216:
214:
211:
209:
206:
204:
201:
199:
196:
182:
178:
170:
166:
160:
154:
150:
144:
138:
134:
128:
124:
120:
118:
114:
108:
104:
103:
98:
94:
90:
89:
84:
81:
77:
76:
71:
68:
66:
65:
62:
61:
56:
52:
49:
42:
40:
35:
29:
28:
26:
19:
1632:
1629:
1615:
1578:
1564:
1559:
1549:
1519:
1500:
1496:
1404:
1343:
1338:
1336:
1335:, again #3.
1326:
1320:
1316:
1315:
1298:
1290:
1285:
1283:
1273:
1269:
1259:
1255:
1245:
1241:
1224:
1205:
1119:
1112:
1049:
1022:
987:
922:
913:74.242.99.62
908:
903:
896:74.242.99.62
887:
863:
836:
822:
806:
776:
665:
630:
595:
571:
555:
529:
514:74.242.99.95
506:74.242.99.95
496:
495:
449:
435:
405:
383:74.242.99.95
374:74.242.99.95
354:
340:
325:8.14.147.162
319:8.14.147.162
314:
299:Darkenedwing
291:Darkenedwing
286:
285:
180:
168:
159:sockpuppetry
152:
141:; suspected
136:
122:
110:
106:
100:
92:
86:
59:
50:
45:
33:
30:
25:
1550:Strong keep
1495:applies to
988:Strong keep
864:Strong Keep
855:) has made
797:) has made
697:) has made
681:ownership.
546:) has made
520:) has made
472:) has made
426:) has made
331:) has made
1297:GamePro -
1118:) here. I
1007:incomplete
907:coverage.
807:open proxy
556:open proxy
436:open proxy
341:open proxy
236:GameTZ.com
93:discussion
70:GameTZ.com
1499:, not to
966:talk page
827:Dalmation
749:checkuser
639:DarkAudit
608:DarkAudit
149:canvassed
143:canvassed
102:consensus
1567:Converse
1497:articles
1371:Gamespot
1310:WIS10 -
1136:contribs
1116:contribs
1106:Nihonjoe
1039:contribs
501:Nihonjoe
470:contribs
307:contribs
280:View log
181:username
175:{{subst:
169:username
163:{{subst:
153:username
147:{{subst:
137:username
131:{{subst:
1501:sources
1341:, etc.)
1288:, etc.)
1225:Comment
1147:Dstumme
1087:Dstumme
1050:Comment
1011:DumbBOT
904:Comment
888:Comment
711:Dstumme
671:Dstumme
635:GamePro
359:sources
253:protect
248:history
145:users:
51:CLOSING
1617:ROGUE
1493:WP:WEB
1443:WP:NPA
1423:WP:AGF
1409:WP:WEB
1333:WP:WEB
1314:, #1.
1312:WP:WEB
1282:, #3.
1280:WP:WEB
1266:WP:WEB
1252:WP:WEB
1240:, #3:
1238:WP:WEB
1054:Abeg92
950:WP:OWN
938:WP:OWN
812:zzuuzz
777:Delete
596:Delete
561:zzuuzz
486:Addhoc
441:zzuuzz
392:Addhoc
363:Addhoc
346:zzuuzz
257:delete
48:boldly
1503:. ···
1193:. ···
1120:don't
1052:User
1023:Keep.
450:salt
274:views
266:watch
262:links
123:Note:
16:<
1592:talk
1579:Keep
1554:WP:V
1533:talk
1525:WP:N
1214:talk
1206:Keep
1110:talk
923:only
892:WP:N
872:WP:N
853:talk
837:Keep
823:Keep
795:talk
695:talk
666:Keep
648:WP:V
618:WP:V
572:Keep
544:talk
518:talk
466:talk
424:talk
410:WP:N
408:per
355:Keep
329:talk
315:salt
303:talk
270:logs
244:talk
240:edit
1529:ikh
1506:日本穣
1375:IGN
1373:or
1210:ikh
1196:日本穣
1166:日本穣
1132:g92
1068:日本穣
1035:g92
956:日本穣
928:日本穣
877:日本穣
868:SPA
810:--
758:日本穣
751:or
559:--
439:--
344:--
278:– (
177:csp
173:or
165:csm
133:spa
107:not
55:SPA
1584:—
1556:.
1535:)
1527:.
1256:no
1216:)
1124:Ab
1027:Ab
993:巌流
940:.
847:—
789:—
783:.
689:—
620:.
538:—
512:—
468:•
460:—
418:—
323:—
305:•
297:—
272:|
268:|
264:|
260:|
255:|
251:|
246:|
242:|
183:}}
171:}}
161::
155:}}
139:}}
129::
1621:p
1594:)
1590:(
1569:)
1565:(
1531:(
1212:(
1128:e
1113:·
1108:(
1031:e
851:(
793:(
693:(
631:I
542:(
516:(
464:(
422:(
327:(
301:(
282:)
276:)
238:(
185:.
179:|
167:|
151:|
135:|
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
