2005:: I was brought here, like many others by Wiggins2, or as he wants to be called, "Wiggie". I think we shouldn't be so quick to shoot him down, as I, & probably many others, are grateful for his post to draw our attention to this subject. I wouldn't mind if the other "side" did the same. But we cannot ignore the fact that this is defintely going to open wikipedia into two halves; Those who want to keep. Those who don't. I.E. Christians, & others. However, this should not be about religion. I would be ashamed of the christians on here if they only voted to keep the articles because they were christian orientated. This should strictly be business as usual, even though it does seem strange an editor would nominate so many christian articles. Maybe a hidden agenda? If an article's crap, then it should be deleted. Being an inclusionist, I will probably keep the most mundane article. However, the list of notable people list is like many others, & should not be here. To do so would be obvious bias. I ask everyone to not be drawn in with a strict "You're wrong, I'm right" situation, but be open & find a way to keep peaceful....
1332:
not crawling all over the artcile, who was? Is that a reason i cannot vote in AfD? I was however involved in the discussion on the LBU page that spawned all these unnotable alumni pages. At the LBU talk page there is a circular argument being presented that justifies the inclusion of people as notable alumni based on the fact they have a page in wikipedia. Yet that page was created by the very person making the argument. This is bad faith editing and these article deserve to be judged by the community. Personally i find them remarkably unnotable.
1257:: Can you please cite an example of a WP policy or guideline supporting your claim? The example I cited states that when using information from a personal website, it is necessary to "...proceed with great caution and...avoid relying on information from the website as a sole source. This is particularly true when the subject is controversial..." Mr. Kim's personal website is the sole source, and the information it purports to verify is plainly controversial, as evinced by this AFD. -
1445:, who voted in this AFD and self-identifies as a native speaker of Korean. If the caption lists which award is being given, that'd be a starting point toward finding a citable print source. If they say something like "receiving award from mayor" and we can identify the mayor from an outside photo, I'd probably also count that as partial confirmation. As they are right now, they're just pictures of a guy handing a folder to another guy. We'll have to wait and see.-
1103:
904:
767:
712:
654:
535:
427:
246:
670:: The federal accreditation listing says that it has 436 students, or around 200 in a typical graduating class. It's not a four-year degree program, but it does have admissions standards: a requirement for a high school diploma or GED for all programs, and additional certification or outside course credit requirements for specific programs (such as R.N. certification or 30 semesters' worth of college-level credits in natural sciences).
1607:
1174:: I'm generally inclined to cut some slack on unverified information, as it's often verifiable but unsourced due to laziness on the part of the writer. The mention in this article, however, doesn't even include the name of the award being awarded. Without any context whatsoever, the information is of no value. As for the POV allegation, you're welcome to think what you want, but a POV-pusher who votes
73:
516:
whole thing stinks of rotting fish. Add to that the evidence of vote-packing by the article's creator and sole editor and the fact that the same person created a whole bunch of articles in a short period on people who had all managed to escape the world's notice despite the vigortous claims to notability now expressed, all of whom are associated with a single unaccredited university - now
2095:
1706:. I note that there is no version of this article in Korean Knowledge, or at least no interwiki link to it if there is (it's hard to tell for non-roman-alphabet languages). My suggestion is for someone who speaks Korean to provide one, and then assuming that this article stayed on Korean Knowledge for a few weeks without deletion, I would change my vote to an unqualified
264:: Everything above was posted to skew the voting and make people turn against me and bias their viewpoint of the nomination and the entry. It's a pretty sick tactic. It shows they care little about the actual strength of the entry; which should be the only thing considered. Since the "warnings" have been posted, some people have even said that they've voted
635:- in other words, it's an occupational training school which trains NMR techs (something whihc is done on the job over here). These are two-year non-degree courses, and there is no indication of numbers. It is fair to be sceptical of an instution whose principal claims an Ed. D which turns out to come from an
491:(strong) This faction shit is getting out of hand. Deletionists are swarming articles which they haven't even looked into just to stuff ballots. He is the president of a university, that's reason enough for an article. This article needs to be expanded, but it is very worthy of being in wikipedia.
1753:
I noticed that you were listed as a
Christian Wikipedian. I am, too. I wanted to let you know that in the last 24 hours, someone has nominated 12 Christian biography entries for deletion. Not only does this seem like bad faith and an affront to a lot of hard work, but I'd like you to come and vote on
1266:
Your WP policy link is sufficient enough. The page is controversial because the guy who put these pages up for deletion doesn't like the school. Not because the page lacks information. Now we've got two sources, his personal page and another page. We've even got pictures. There's enough proof, if you
1543:
Google's translation service lists them as "Skies minister ticket window" and "Seoul market ticket window market presentation ceremony", respectively, and as a wild guess I think something's getting lost in machine translation. There's also a picture of him receiving a "UN Award", but the res isn't
1366:
Then NPOV tag it Daycd. And if you want to continue this discussion, come up with a good reason for deletion. "Unnotable" is not a valid argument when we are talking about a guy who has recevied awards from the major of seoul. I'm quick to assume bad faith in a situation like this, where people want
515:
read the article and find his claims tenuous. This is a private for-profit technical training school of unknown enrollment numbers, the university of which he is supposedly a board member appears not to exist, his Ed. D comes from an unaccredited university (and is reportedly honorary anyway) - the
1331:
I'm not saying the article is lying. I am saying it is written from a POV perspective and is as yet, not verifiable. Plus he seems relatively unnotable from a religious perspective. These are viable reason to delete. You may disagree, thats fine, and thats why we have AfD. Also it is true i was
1895:
Thats insinuating bullshit. There is nothing wrong with alerting users to the fact that a bunch of delete-wannabies are attacking articles and demanding they get deleted without having any good reasons at all for the delete except the POV rantings of a guy that for some reason got to be an admin.
997:
Why does everyone seem to be picking on the "intellectual" articles? The man seems quite important and has won awards. There seems to be feud going on here about which I am not aware, and I reckon some people are looking to have it deleted solely because of that. - 13:24, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1321:
No, but it does strenghten the POV claim because I don't see you crawling all over those articles. While the articles related to this school all got up for deletion a few moments after they were created. Again, alot of evidence proving that this article is right has been presented yet you can't
1308:
are you this trusting of source material for all the articles you edit? Or is it just the
Christian ones? You accuse those of us that think these are poor sources of POV and yet you seem blind to the fact that many of the claims in the article are not easily verifiable according to wikipedia
847:
Watching
Gastrich complain about personal attacks is always problematic, but then, one would be hard-pressed to find a more flagrant hypocrite than Jason Gastrich. Someone as notable as Steve Levicoff (whose comments Gastrich tried so very hard to ignore) declared LBU to be a diploma mill
1152:. The information on Mr. Kim's website is so vague as to be unusable, and there are no independent online sources for the information. If you have another citation to offer, please provide it; otherwise, we have no choice but to continue to treat this information as unverifiable. -
1203:
Exactly, and he gave evidence with the first edit. If you don't LIKE that evidence, then thats too bad. If you are accusing the dude who made that page of being a liar, you need to prove that he is infact a liar. Otherwise I have no reason to listen to your rants anymore then his.
359:. The awards from Korea catch the eye as possible evidence that someone outside his pocket of reality of people reading each others' books about Jesus has paid attention to him, but then it doesn't say what they were for or even prove that they happened, so I remain unconvinced. --
1404:: The pictures are from the same personal site, so they don't count as an extra reference. They're also suspect because we haven't yet been able to determine exactly what's going on in the photos (since the descriptions are in a foreign language no-one here can read). -
600:
That doesn't do it for me, attribution-wise. Looking beyond the obvious bias problem with using an individual's personal website as a gague for verifiability, the list doesn't even say which specific awards he's won. For all we know, they could be bowling trophies.
1905:"Insinuating" ... this guy is shopping for votes calling those who want to delete the pages as people with "bad faith." Using Christ as a tool to get votes. Targeting those of religion with religion for keep votes. He's trying to influence the vote with his POV.
1420:: It's a valid argument if the awards in question do not meet the encyclopedia's standards for verifiability. His position as the head of ACMT is a much stronger branch to hang a case on, if you're inclined to keep, since it's easily verified and documented.-
1161:
Can you prove it wrong? No. Thousands of wikipedia articles are built using info primarily for personal sites. I don't see you rushing to delete them. Again, I suspect this is purely POV against christianity on your part. The site is a good enough source.
983:. As soon as this started turning into a Christian vs. everyone else debate I lost interest. Unfortunately, many of those voting keep are claiming that everyone else is anti-Christian. This wasn't so, but if it is repeated enough it may become truth. --
639:- and which is, in any case, reportedly honorary. The Seoul University of Theology and Seminary has, thus far, managed to escape the attentions of Google, a feat for which I commend is, as it must aid the necessary peace and tranquility of the place. -
2078:
A president of a non-degree tech school isn't notable, there must be hundreds of these in every state/provence!!! Next we'll have lists of high school principals, which actually are more notable than this guy, but not notable enough to be wikified.
1914:
So who recevied the money then? Noone, its a call to participate in this discussion and given the amount of people coming here ranting about their POV against this article, it was only fair that he gave the christian community a notice.
282:
it is prohibited to use a sockpuppet to create a illusion of a broader support for your side of the argument. Your "campaigning" comes from you and your sockpuppet, and you even admitted that you use sockpuppetry to aid yourself in AfD.
632:
Accrediting
Commission of Career Schools and Colleges of Technology, Occupational Education (NDCS) - Private nondegree-granting institutions that are predominately organized to educate students for trade, occupational, or technical
1728:"Something very funny happened today. I got two identical emails from Jason Gastrich through Knowledge. You can make up your own mind as to whether this qualifies for meat-puppetry or stacking the vote. Here's the email. --
1292::The ACMT site doesn't qualify as an independent source, since the ACMT site is also owned and operate by Mr. Kim. We need something like an official government list of honorees, or a newspaper article covering the ceremony. -
1540:: If anyone in this thread can read Korean, can you please translate the following phrases?: "상공장관 표창" and "서울시장표창장수여식". Those are picture captions to several photos in his web site, which might be Mr. Kim receiving awards.
1353:, to cite one example), I add the citations and confirm it. If it's not (as with this article), I note that fact as well. You seem to be remarkably quick to assume bad faith on the part of people who disagree with you. -
917:
There is a discussion about the validity of the educational institution in question on another page. You're an admin, learn to be one and stick to that discussion instead of making pointless insinuations here.
268:
because of the alleged misconduct. Consequently, they and the people who are engaging in this witchhunt should be ashamed of themselves. They've done irreparable damage to their integrity and to
Knowledge.
1072:
Award from Korea's
Commercial Minister (1977) Award from Seoul, South Korea's Mayor (1976)" <- These awards perhaps? Did you even READ the article before you jumped on the delete bandwagon?
838:
isn't a diploma mill, they gave him an honorary degree (one of his many degrees), and he his notable for a variety of things (e.g. being president of a university, his awards, etc.). --
1023:
And expand aswell. The article is abit small, but the man in question is noteworthy. What have you deletionist ever amounted to? Headed any instutions, won any awards? Didn't think so.
1309:
research standards. The rationale that other articles in wikipedia use similar poor standards of verification is not valid since in those cases they too should not use such sources.
1806:
1725:
852:
in Usenet and once in a published book. Gastrich may whimper and whine about that, because he's sunk so much of his emotional capital into the school, but that's his problem. -
80:
1541:
1514:. I don't know enough about this guy to say one way or the other whether or not he's notable in his own field. But given that the article is truthful, no reason to delete.
1349:: If you look at my contribution history, you'll see that when the verifiability of a fact is questioned, I take steps to verify it. If it's verifiable (as with
940:
Subject is probably not very notable, but the article can still be of use if kept NPOV. For me, limited notability doesn't not automatically warrant deletion. ···
1466:: Not until I can track down which award it is, and why/how often it's given. Knowing that it's from the Ministry of Trade and Industry is a good start, though.-
228:
400:
and expand. Notable person and president of a college. BTW, nominator nominated 10 Christian biographies for deletion, yesterday. Good faith is in question. --
1441:: The pictures might or might not help. I've got a request for translation of the captions up on the RFT page, and I dropped a note on the talk page of
697:
OK, that's about the size of a local primary (elementary) school. Clearly there is some serious inflation of claims to importance going on here! -
1392:
But it is verified. The sites verified it, and the primary source was a personal site. It was backed up with other sites, including pictures.
1283:'s site. There is probably more information in the Korean-speaking world, although I don't know the language. - 17:19, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1710:. While this is happening, IMO we should keep the article, with a tag questioning the subject's notability, and discuss it on its talk page.
1350:
201:
89:
511:
Said the man who has been soliciting keep votes - but of course, it's not "ballot stuffing" is it? For the record, Brokenfrog, I
119:
1429:
With the ACMT, no its not a valid argument. And is pictures not enough to verify those claims. What exactly are the standards?
881:
degrees? He claims on the websote to have a doctorate in education, but doesn't actually go as far as mentioning that it's an
17:
227:
As a result of the serial disruption of AfD and other questionable behaviour, I have raised a user RfC on Jason
Gastrich, see
215:
1754:
the entries. These nominations seem peculiar because some people are even presidents of universities and well known authors.
1807:
http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_Louisiana_Baptist_University_people_%28second_nomination%29
1726:
http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_Louisiana_Baptist_University_people_%28second_nomination%29
2088:
862:
1194:. The very first sentence of that policy states, "The burden of evidence lies with the editor who has made the edit.".-
835:
636:
105:
1563:, is up to challenge. It's just a korean BS way of saying "award, one of those special ones, not those crappy ones".
1178:
about deleting the article he's supposedly persecuting isn't doing a very effective job of pushing his POV, is he? -
2001:. I feel bad for turning my back on my inclusionist ways, but this article is un notable & small. Ahh well....
1217:
1149:
752:
I'd agree if it weren't for the fact that the institution itself has no article (which pretty much says it all). -
78:
If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
2113:
1243:
1098:
899:
762:
707:
649:
530:
422:
364:
241:
36:
2112:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
1817:
195:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
2098:
2070:
2053:
2041:
2025:
2009:
1993:
1975:
1963:
1947:
1934:
1919:
1909:
1900:
1883:
1734:
1714:
1684:
1670:
1658:
1654:
1637:
1625:
1610:
1586:
1570:
1548:
1532:
1518:
1470:
1458:
1449:
1433:
1424:
1408:
1396:
1387:
1371:
1357:
1339:
1326:
1316:
1296:
1271:
1261:
1247:
1233:
1224:
1208:
1198:
1182:
1166:
1156:
1140:
1111:
1088:
Citations requested, not provided. Yes I did. Unnamed awards without citations? I got dozens of them :-) -
1076:
1047:
1027:
1013:
987:
974:
961:
949:
922:
912:
868:
856:
842:
827:
815:
803:
791:
775:
743:
720:
688:
662:
621:
605:
595:
581:
559:
543:
506:
495:
483:
471:
459:
447:
435:
404:
392:
380:
368:
351:
339:
323:
309:
289:
273:
254:
56:
678:
1239:
1229:
No, it does qualify as sufficient evidence. The website is the primary source of information for article.
1216:: The evidence cited does not qualify as sufficient evidence under Knowledge policy, as clearly stated in
360:
151:
1650:
2066:
1839:
1301:
49:
2034:
1872:
1861:
1828:
1850:
62:
984:
971:
945:
456:
135:
109:
2062:
2022:
1545:
1467:
1446:
1421:
1405:
1354:
1293:
1258:
1221:
1195:
1179:
1153:
1044:
1010:
957:
just because this is beginning to look like a vendetta more than an attempt at cleaning the Wiki.
865:
839:
824:
685:
602:
592:
578:
503:
401:
332:
270:
191:
94:
2080:
1776:). If you’d like to join a network of Christians with a purpose on Knowledge, please see our site!
1107:
908:
885:
doctorate (let alone one from an unaccredited institution). Doesn't that raise some questions in
771:
716:
658:
539:
431:
250:
2038:
1515:
853:
788:
389:
320:
209:
141:
72:
2085:
1972:
1602:
1267:
want this deleted you better start trying to prove that all this information is indeed false.
377:
287:
278:
Very untrue. The comments posted above were to question the strength of your argument, as per
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
2050:
1529:
1284:
1190:: Also, in reference to your "Can you prove it wrong?" challenge, you may want to (re)read
1102:
999:
903:
766:
711:
653:
534:
426:
245:
1699:
1634:
1622:
1384:
1336:
1313:
941:
492:
480:
1666:
because article is a part of an article series, but quite short and not too informative.
630:
This isn't a university. It doesn't even claim to be one. ACMT accreditation details:
2019:
2006:
1960:
1567:
1442:
1133:
589:
556:
468:
348:
279:
187:
222:: they consist almost solely of soliciting others to come to these AfDs and vote keep.
219:
1984:
1944:
1931:
1906:
1681:
1040:
823:
as non-notable vanity gastrich-cruft from a holder of a fake pHd from a diploma mill.
800:
674:
444:
205:
1606:
1711:
1667:
1595:
958:
618:
569:. According to the DoE, Kim's institution (ACMT) is nationally accredited (search
443:
per nom with a nod to AJA for doing yeoman's work on eliminating all this cruft .
284:
169:
157:
125:
2012:. BTW, I hope my vote isn't discounted, I count myself as a influencial editor...
1698:
make him notable are Korean, and the external link that might explain them is in
1594:
doesnt pass WP:BIO standards and his awards are only verified by the recipient.
104:
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to
1583:
1191:
812:
331:
Reads like an abbreviated resumé rather than a description of a notable person.
306:
1763:
Below are some of the links that need attention. Thanks for your consideration.
1556:서울 시장 표창장 수여식 = Ceremony Awarding Medal of Honor, awarded by the Mayor of Seoul
1916:
1897:
1619:
1455:
1430:
1393:
1381:
1368:
1333:
1323:
1322:
amount to anything but unvalidated claims that all these sites must be lying.
1310:
1305:
1268:
1230:
1205:
1163:
1137:
1073:
1024:
919:
740:
877:
know who run bona-fide educational instiututions whose major credentials are
1988:
1729:
2094:
1818:
http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/J._Otis_Ledbetter
1089:
890:
753:
698:
640:
521:
413:
232:
1884:
http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Daniel_Dorim_Kim
1553:상공 장관 표창 = Medal of Honor, awarded by the Ministry of Trade and Industry
677:
accused them of deceptive business practices in sworn testimony in 2005.
577:, though the awards section should be cleared if it can't be verified. -
1772:
By the way, I recently started an organization called Wiki4Christ (see
680:
Given that last bit, I'm unsure how I feel, and am changing my vote to
1009::What award has he won? You don't know? Neither does anybody else. -
588:
Although some is written in Korean, his awards are written in
English
376:- cant think of a notability criterion that this person would meet. --
1280:
2035:
http://www.presidentschallenge.org/earn_awards/awards_available.aspx
1840:
http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Mike_Randall
1454:
I was right, and you were wrong. Are we going to see a vote change?
861:
Oh sure. Levicoff admits he hasn't looked at the school in 11 years.
735:
into institution article if he's really worth mentioning, otherwise
671:
1873:
http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Neal_Weaver
1862:
http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/James_Combs
1829:
http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Ron_Moseley
570:
1851:
http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Thomas_Ice
319:. Agreed. Nothing in the article makes this person stand out. -
1136:". Obviously you did not. Try and some research before you post.
2106:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
1218:
Knowledge:Reliable_sources#Personal_websites_as_primary_sources
1150:
Knowledge:Reliable_sources#Personal_websites_as_primary_sources
67:
873:
Leaving aside the badinage for a moment, how many people do
98:(agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments,
186:
This AfD process has been further disrupted by a suspected
388:- unless someone can tell me why this person is notable. -
1773:
1238:
Then the article is not suitable for an encyclopaedia. --
1544:
high enough to read the lettering on the certificate.-
1649:
using AfD discussions to argue with other editors. --
1134:
http://www.dorimkim.com/cgi_bin/main.cgi?board=about
455:
second the nod on listing all this. Good work, AJA.
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
834:This personal attack is unwarranted. Furthermore,
2116:). No further edits should be made to this page.
1702:. But IMO foreign language links and references
1279:Untrue. Another source for this information is
787:Another tool off the diploma mill assemblyline.
739:...not notable enough for a dedicated article.
1582:Notable and should be included on wikipedia.
229:Knowledge:Requests for comment/Jason Gastrich
118:Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected
88:among Knowledge contributors. Knowledge has
8:
1367:articles deleted for no good reason at all.
1528:I see no reason to delete this article. --
889:mind? That was rhetorical, by the way. -
92:regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
2033:. The lead award is for exercising more.
1062:"Award from Korea's Prime Minister (1978)
555:Nothing notable. Awards need citation.
112:on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.
617:university-related topics are notable.
7:
1645:into the institution's article, and
1351:Knowledge:Articles_for_deletion/BEML
1999:Weak Delete with prefernce to merge
520:calls into question good faith. -
1959:have done anything significant. --
24:
1694:. Unfortunately, the awards that
2093:
1605:
1380:". And that is still the case.
1101:
902:
864:Now there's a good source. JK.--
765:
710:
652:
533:
425:
347:and expand. Notable enough.
244:
71:
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
1618:notability is not verifiable.
1:
575:As such, he seems like a keep
108:on the part of others and to
44:The result of the debate was
2099:21:45, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
2071:18:56, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
2054:05:51, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
2042:04:18, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
2026:04:00, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
2010:04:19, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
1994:20:16, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
1976:20:09, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
1964:17:31, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
1948:04:01, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
1935:01:51, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
1920:14:48, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
1910:04:01, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
1901:01:09, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
1735:16:32, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1715:23:27, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1685:02:15, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
1671:23:13, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1659:22:34, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1638:21:19, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1626:19:03, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1611:18:54, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1587:18:09, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1571:06:03, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
1549:18:02, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1533:17:59, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1519:17:41, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1471:02:20, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
1459:14:48, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
1450:20:24, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1434:20:08, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1425:20:03, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1409:21:27, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1397:20:15, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1388:20:11, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1378:notability is not verifiable
1372:19:49, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1358:19:46, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1340:19:29, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1327:19:06, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1317:19:01, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1297:17:37, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1272:18:38, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1262:16:58, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1248:16:51, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1234:16:48, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1225:16:37, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1209:16:31, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1199:16:22, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1192:WP:V#When_adding_information
1183:16:17, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1167:16:08, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1157:16:05, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1141:15:46, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1112:15:40, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1077:15:30, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1048:15:25, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1028:14:59, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1014:14:26, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
988:19:56, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
975:12:48, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
962:10:54, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
950:07:34, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
923:16:33, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
913:15:44, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
869:08:29, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
857:08:01, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
843:07:54, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
836:Louisiana Baptist University
828:02:34, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
816:23:04, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
804:22:55, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
792:22:42, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
776:22:47, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
744:22:37, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
721:00:18, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
689:00:08, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
663:22:26, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
622:21:50, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
606:22:12, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
596:21:47, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
582:21:43, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
560:21:09, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
544:22:46, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
507:21:10, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
496:20:33, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
484:04:46, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
472:03:24, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
460:00:13, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
448:23:43, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
436:22:54, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
405:22:01, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
393:17:33, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
381:11:33, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
369:09:41, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
352:07:40, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
340:07:08, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
324:06:38, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
310:05:43, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
290:05:47, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
274:01:28, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
255:12:02, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
57:00:19, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
2049:with wherever he works. --
2133:
1559:표창, which I translated as
1704:do count as verifiability
2109:Please do not modify it.
412:yet more Gastrichcruft.
32:Please do not modify it.
637:unaccredited university
150:; accounts blocked for
120:single-purpose accounts
90:policies and guidelines
2051:King of All the Franks
1930:Keep notable enough --
1774:http://wiki4christ.com
1376:But my argument was "
799:per Guy's research --
298:Non-notable person.
502:I agree with you. --
1955:he doesn't seem to
102:by counting votes.
81:not a majority vote
970:. Per Rogue 9. --
2069:
1246:
367:
183:
182:
179:
106:assume good faith
2124:
2111:
2097:
2065:
1991:
1732:
1609:
1600:
1285:The Great Gavini
1242:
1105:
1093:
1000:The Great Gavini
906:
894:
769:
757:
714:
702:
656:
644:
537:
525:
429:
417:
363:
337:
248:
236:
177:
165:
149:
133:
114:
84:, but instead a
75:
68:
63:Daniel Dorim Kim
54:
34:
2132:
2131:
2127:
2126:
2125:
2123:
2122:
2121:
2120:
2114:deletion review
2107:
2092:
2020:Walter Siegmund
1989:
1971:non-notable. --
1730:
1680:Useless slop.
1596:
1100:
1091:
985:StuffOfInterest
972:StuffOfInterest
901:
892:
764:
755:
709:
700:
651:
642:
532:
523:
457:KillerChihuahua
424:
415:
335:(aeropagitica)
333:
243:
234:
167:
155:
139:
123:
110:sign your posts
66:
50:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
2130:
2128:
2119:
2118:
2102:
2101:
2083:
2073:
2056:
2044:
2028:
2013:
1996:
1978:
1966:
1950:
1938:
1937:
1928:
1927:
1926:
1925:
1924:
1923:
1922:
1890:
1889:
1888:
1887:
1886:
1878:
1877:
1876:
1875:
1867:
1866:
1865:
1864:
1856:
1855:
1854:
1853:
1845:
1844:
1843:
1842:
1834:
1833:
1832:
1831:
1823:
1822:
1821:
1820:
1812:
1811:
1810:
1809:
1800:
1798:
1797:
1796:
1795:
1794:Jason Gastrich
1789:
1788:
1787:
1786:
1780:
1779:
1778:
1777:
1767:
1766:
1765:
1764:
1758:
1757:
1756:
1755:
1748:
1747:
1746:
1745:
1739:
1723:
1722:
1717:
1688:
1687:
1674:
1673:
1661:
1651:Idont Havaname
1640:
1628:
1613:
1589:
1576:
1575:
1574:
1573:
1564:
1561:Medal of Honor
1557:
1554:
1546:Colin Kimbrell
1535:
1522:
1521:
1504:
1503:
1502:
1501:
1500:
1499:
1498:
1497:
1496:
1495:
1494:
1493:
1492:
1491:
1490:
1489:
1488:
1487:
1486:
1485:
1484:
1483:
1482:
1481:
1480:
1479:
1478:
1477:
1476:
1475:
1474:
1473:
1468:Colin Kimbrell
1461:
1447:Colin Kimbrell
1443:User:Yonghokim
1436:
1422:Colin Kimbrell
1415:
1414:
1413:
1412:
1411:
1406:Colin Kimbrell
1399:
1355:Colin Kimbrell
1344:
1343:
1342:
1294:Colin Kimbrell
1287:
1274:
1259:Colin Kimbrell
1252:
1251:
1250:
1222:Colin Kimbrell
1211:
1196:Colin Kimbrell
1185:
1180:Colin Kimbrell
1169:
1154:Colin Kimbrell
1143:
1121:
1120:
1119:
1118:
1117:
1116:
1115:
1114:
1097:
1070:
1069:
1068:
1067:
1066:
1065:
1064:
1063:
1053:
1052:
1051:
1050:
1045:Colin Kimbrell
1031:
1030:
1017:
1016:
1011:Colin Kimbrell
1003:
1002:
992:
991:
990:
964:
952:
934:
933:
932:
931:
930:
929:
928:
927:
926:
925:
898:
866:Jason Gastrich
840:Jason Gastrich
831:
830:
818:
806:
794:
781:
780:
779:
778:
761:
747:
746:
728:
727:
726:
725:
724:
723:
706:
692:
691:
686:Colin Kimbrell
665:
648:
625:
624:
611:
610:
609:
608:
603:Colin Kimbrell
593:Jason Gastrich
585:
584:
579:Colin Kimbrell
562:
549:
548:
547:
546:
529:
504:Jason Gastrich
499:
498:
486:
474:
462:
450:
438:
421:
407:
402:Jason Gastrich
395:
383:
371:
354:
342:
326:
313:
312:
296:
295:
294:
293:
292:
271:Jason Gastrich
258:
240:
225:
192:Jason Gastrich
181:
180:
76:
65:
60:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
2129:
2117:
2115:
2110:
2104:
2103:
2100:
2096:
2090:
2087:
2082:
2077:
2074:
2072:
2068:
2064:
2060:
2057:
2055:
2052:
2048:
2045:
2043:
2040:
2039:SarekOfVulcan
2036:
2032:
2029:
2027:
2024:
2021:
2017:
2014:
2011:
2008:
2004:
2000:
1997:
1995:
1992:
1986:
1982:
1979:
1977:
1974:
1970:
1967:
1965:
1962:
1958:
1954:
1951:
1949:
1946:
1943:
1940:
1939:
1936:
1933:
1929:
1921:
1918:
1913:
1912:
1911:
1908:
1904:
1903:
1902:
1899:
1894:
1893:
1892:
1891:
1885:
1882:
1881:
1880:
1879:
1874:
1871:
1870:
1869:
1868:
1863:
1860:
1859:
1858:
1857:
1852:
1849:
1848:
1847:
1846:
1841:
1838:
1837:
1836:
1835:
1830:
1827:
1826:
1825:
1824:
1819:
1816:
1815:
1814:
1813:
1808:
1805:
1804:
1803:
1802:
1801:
1793:
1792:
1791:
1790:
1784:
1783:
1782:
1781:
1775:
1771:
1770:
1769:
1768:
1762:
1761:
1760:
1759:
1752:
1751:
1750:
1749:
1743:
1742:
1741:
1740:
1738:
1736:
1733:
1727:
1721:
1718:
1716:
1713:
1709:
1705:
1701:
1697:
1693:
1690:
1689:
1686:
1683:
1679:
1676:
1675:
1672:
1669:
1665:
1662:
1660:
1656:
1652:
1648:
1644:
1641:
1639:
1636:
1632:
1629:
1627:
1624:
1621:
1617:
1614:
1612:
1608:
1604:
1601:
1599:
1593:
1590:
1588:
1585:
1581:
1578:
1577:
1572:
1569:
1565:
1562:
1558:
1555:
1552:
1551:
1550:
1547:
1542:
1539:
1536:
1534:
1531:
1527:
1524:
1523:
1520:
1517:
1513:
1509:
1506:
1505:
1472:
1469:
1465:
1462:
1460:
1457:
1453:
1452:
1451:
1448:
1444:
1440:
1437:
1435:
1432:
1428:
1427:
1426:
1423:
1419:
1416:
1410:
1407:
1403:
1400:
1398:
1395:
1391:
1390:
1389:
1386:
1383:
1379:
1375:
1374:
1373:
1370:
1365:
1364:
1363:
1362:
1361:
1360:
1359:
1356:
1352:
1348:
1345:
1341:
1338:
1335:
1330:
1329:
1328:
1325:
1320:
1319:
1318:
1315:
1312:
1307:
1303:
1300:
1299:
1298:
1295:
1291:
1288:
1286:
1282:
1278:
1275:
1273:
1270:
1265:
1264:
1263:
1260:
1256:
1253:
1249:
1245:
1241:
1237:
1236:
1235:
1232:
1228:
1227:
1226:
1223:
1219:
1215:
1212:
1210:
1207:
1202:
1201:
1200:
1197:
1193:
1189:
1186:
1184:
1181:
1177:
1173:
1170:
1168:
1165:
1160:
1159:
1158:
1155:
1151:
1148:: Please see
1147:
1144:
1142:
1139:
1135:
1131:
1130:
1129:
1128:
1127:
1126:
1125:
1124:
1123:
1122:
1113:
1110:
1109:
1104:
1099:
1095:
1087:
1086:
1085:
1084:
1083:
1082:
1081:
1080:
1079:
1078:
1075:
1061:
1060:
1059:
1058:
1057:
1056:
1055:
1054:
1049:
1046:
1042:
1038:
1035:
1034:
1033:
1032:
1029:
1026:
1022:
1019:
1018:
1015:
1012:
1008:
1005:
1004:
1001:
996:
993:
989:
986:
982:
979:
978:
977:
976:
973:
969:
965:
963:
960:
956:
953:
951:
947:
943:
939:
936:
935:
924:
921:
916:
915:
914:
911:
910:
905:
900:
896:
888:
884:
880:
876:
872:
871:
870:
867:
863:
860:
859:
858:
855:
854:WarriorScribe
851:
846:
845:
844:
841:
837:
833:
832:
829:
826:
822:
819:
817:
814:
810:
807:
805:
802:
798:
795:
793:
790:
789:FeloniousMonk
786:
783:
782:
777:
774:
773:
768:
763:
759:
751:
750:
749:
748:
745:
742:
738:
734:
730:
729:
722:
719:
718:
713:
708:
704:
696:
695:
694:
693:
690:
687:
683:
679:
676:
675:Maxine Waters
673:Also, US Rep
672:
669:
666:
664:
661:
660:
655:
650:
646:
638:
634:
629:
628:
627:
626:
623:
620:
616:
613:
612:
607:
604:
599:
598:
597:
594:
590:
587:
586:
583:
580:
576:
572:
568:
567:
563:
561:
558:
554:
551:
550:
545:
542:
541:
536:
531:
527:
519:
514:
510:
509:
508:
505:
501:
500:
497:
494:
490:
487:
485:
482:
478:
475:
473:
470:
466:
463:
461:
458:
454:
451:
449:
446:
442:
439:
437:
434:
433:
428:
423:
419:
411:
408:
406:
403:
399:
396:
394:
391:
390:Harvestdancer
387:
384:
382:
379:
375:
372:
370:
366:
362:
358:
355:
353:
350:
346:
343:
341:
338:
336:
330:
327:
325:
322:
321:WarriorScribe
318:
315:
314:
311:
308:
304:
301:
300:
299:
291:
288:
286:
281:
277:
276:
275:
272:
267:
263:
260:
259:
257:
256:
253:
252:
247:
242:
238:
230:
224:
223:
221:
220:contributions
217:
214:
211:
207:
203:
200:
197:
193:
189:
175:
171:
163:
159:
153:
147:
143:
137:
131:
127:
121:
117:
113:
111:
107:
101:
97:
96:
91:
87:
83:
82:
77:
74:
70:
69:
64:
61:
59:
58:
55:
53:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
2108:
2105:
2075:
2058:
2046:
2030:
2015:
2003:Further Note
2002:
1998:
1980:
1973:Spondoolicks
1968:
1956:
1952:
1941:
1799:
1724:
1719:
1707:
1703:
1695:
1691:
1677:
1663:
1646:
1642:
1630:
1615:
1597:
1591:
1579:
1560:
1537:
1525:
1511:
1507:
1463:
1438:
1417:
1401:
1377:
1346:
1289:
1276:
1254:
1213:
1187:
1175:
1171:
1145:
1106:
1071:
1036:
1020:
1006:
994:
980:
967:
966:
954:
937:
907:
886:
882:
878:
874:
849:
820:
808:
796:
784:
770:
736:
732:
715:
681:
667:
657:
631:
614:
574:
565:
564:
552:
538:
517:
512:
488:
476:
464:
452:
440:
430:
409:
397:
385:
378:Pierremenard
373:
356:
344:
334:
328:
316:
302:
297:
265:
261:
249:
226:
218:). See his
212:
198:
185:
184:
173:
161:
152:sockpuppetry
145:
134:; suspected
129:
115:
103:
99:
93:
85:
79:
51:
45:
43:
31:
28:
2061:per Sarek.
1631:Strong Keep
1530:Shanedidona
1302:Greatgavini
1021:Strong Keep
995:Strong keep
811:per nom. --
615:Strong Keep
398:Strong keep
52:a.n.o.n.y.m
1785:Sincerely,
1240:Malthusian
493:Brokenfrog
361:Malthusian
188:sockpuppet
86:discussion
2018:per nom.
2007:Spawn Man
1990:Cyde Weys
1961:Yonghokim
1731:Cyde Weys
1720:ATTENTION
1692:Weak keep
1664:weak keep
1568:Yonghokim
1512:weak keep
1094:you know?
1090:Just zis
895:you know?
891:Just zis
758:you know?
754:Just zis
703:you know?
699:Just zis
645:you know?
641:Just zis
557:Jazzscrub
526:you know?
522:Just zis
469:Guettarda
418:you know?
414:Just zis
349:Logophile
237:you know?
233:Just zis
142:canvassed
136:canvassed
95:consensus
2063:Ashibaka
1983:- Fails
1957:actually
1945:Arbustoo
1932:Vizcarra
1907:Arbustoo
1682:Jim62sch
1620:David D.
1382:David D.
1334:David D.
1311:David D.
1281:the ACMT
883:honorary
879:honorary
825:Blnguyen
801:kingboyk
445:Eusebeus
262:Rebuttal
216:contribs
206:Wiggins2
202:contribs
174:username
168:{{subst:
162:username
156:{{subst:
146:username
140:{{subst:
130:username
124:{{subst:
1712:Andrewa
1668:Gubbubu
1598:ALKIVAR
1538:Comment
1510:With a
1508:Comment
1464:Comment
1439:Comment
1418:Comment
1402:Comment
1347:Comment
1290:Comment
1277:Comment
1255:Comment
1214:Comment
1188:Comment
1176:Neutral
1172:Comment
1146:Comment
1037:Comment
1007:Comment
981:Abstain
959:Rogue 9
731:Again,
682:Neutral
668:Comment
633:careers
619:Cynical
285:Sycthos
280:WP:SOCK
138:users:
2076:Delete
2059:Delete
2031:Delete
2023:(talk)
2016:Delete
1985:WP:BIO
1981:Delete
1969:Delete
1953:Delete
1942:Delete
1744:Hello,
1700:Korean
1678:Delete
1635:Hayson
1623:(Talk)
1616:Delete
1592:Delete
1584:Lerner
1516:Wynler
1385:(Talk)
1337:(Talk)
1314:(Talk)
1244:(talk)
1041:WP:NPA
821:Delete
813:Devein
809:Delete
797:Delete
785:Delete
737:delete
553:Delete
477:Delete
465:Delete
453:Delete
441:Delete
410:Delete
386:Delete
374:Delete
365:(talk)
357:Delete
329:Delete
317:Delete
307:A.J.A.
303:Delete
46:Delete
2047:Merge
1917:Itake
1898:Itake
1696:might
1643:Merge
1456:Itake
1431:Itake
1394:Itake
1369:Itake
1324:Itake
1306:Itake
1269:Itake
1231:Itake
1206:Itake
1164:Itake
1138:Itake
1074:Itake
1025:Itake
955:Keep,
920:Itake
850:twice
741:bcatt
733:merge
481:nixie
116:Note:
16:<
2081:Mike
2067:tock
1708:keep
1655:Talk
1647:stop
1580:Keep
1526:Keep
1304:and
1108:AfD?
1092:Guy,
968:Keep
948:···
946:Talk
938:Keep
909:AfD?
893:Guy,
887:your
772:AfD?
756:Guy,
717:AfD?
701:Guy,
659:AfD?
643:Guy,
591:. --
573:).
571:here
566:Keep
540:AfD?
524:Guy,
518:that
513:have
489:Keep
432:AfD?
416:Guy,
345:Keep
266:only
251:AfD?
235:Guy,
231:. -
210:talk
196:talk
1220:. -
942:rWd
875:you
204:),
190:of
170:csp
166:or
158:csm
126:spa
100:not
2037:--
1987:.
1737:"
1657:)
1633:--
1566:--
1039::
944:·
684:.-
479:--
467:-
305:.
269:--
176:}}
164:}}
154::
148:}}
132:}}
122::
48:--
2091:)
2089:C
2086:T
2084:(
1653:(
1603:™
1132:"
1096:/
1043:-
897:/
760:/
705:/
647:/
601:-
528:/
420:/
239:/
213:·
208:(
199:·
194:(
178:.
172:|
160:|
144:|
128:|
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
