732:- This isn't an article about a toy. Anyone who says so didn't read it. It's an article about a fictional character who has appeared in a half dozen different comic book series by 4 different companies, and in 2 different Anime series. He's a character who has had a toy yes, but that's like calling Donald Duck a toy. As for real world notability, there is a link to a news story about a rare variant of the toy selling for $ 2000 to collectors. I might also point out that the person who nominated this article for deletion also nominated the similar article
31:
1150:
My choice is not set in stone, I have been sitting here and looking at both sides of the issue, you brought up the point that this is a minor character in the series, usually if that is true I have seen just redirects or a short summary of the character on the main character page if that is true. The
608:
And how is this argument different for this article compared to speedy deleted band articles and so on? Every good faith article was of interest to at least the creator, but that doesn't and shouldn't stop us from deleting many of them. We are here in the first place to create an encyclopedia, and in
530:
There's no such thing as a "general vote" on
Knowledge since only a fraction of a fraction of WP's userbase have the drive and time to care about a fake internet government. It's a depressing state of affairs. I suggest taking the route of apathy and using Wikias for detailed content while the people
1135:
It's not the articles that annoy me; it's the editors who feel the need to try to keep every single character by using annoying and often underhanded tactics. Tags are for when an article can actually improve. Very minor character articles that have been in existence for years are far past the point
1101:
Yeah, but it really doesn't do any harm with these guys. Even after a proper discussion with people willing to help source the articles in need of their "rescuing", DF still insisted that the video game project was an evil group of people attempting to wipe out articles because they don't like them.
691:
I see don't see the arguement that a fictional character has a name that can be confused with a common noun that also has an article is reason why he's not notable. It just means they are both notable. The
Tasmanian Devil from Loony Tunes isn't less notable because his article might be confused with
1166:
Actually, in many cases there is *no* discussion even when encouraged until an AfD has been started or the article has already been merged. I can rattle off quite a few instances where other editors have chosen to say nothing on an article's talk page even with a merge tag in place, but when action
1057:
Yes, I'm obviously an evil deletionist who dislikes all character articles. I'm trying to slowly remove everything related to fiction on this site, and my current goal is to have just a single paragraph called "Fiction" by 2011. It's certainly not like I just have certain standards as to what needs
865:
But there are no news sites cited on the page, just fansites and Hasbro's catalogs. The results of an ebay auction has no barring on notability either. You've already stated above that this article isn't about the toy. However, every source dealing directly with the subject have been about the toy,
501:
The community means a handful of people who were around to notice and participate in the discussion? IAR is a policy. You don't get around that by having a dozen or less people discussing something somewhere most won't notice it. Without a general vote, the guidelines can not be taken seriously.
1001:
requires secondary sources to provide significant coverage for all articles. If the content is all about the character within the fictional universe, that means that only primary sources are being used and without the content I mentioned, the criteria of "significant coverage" is also not met. You
441:
No. There are many toy franchises for popular games, movies, comics, ... This is a good indication for the notability of the franchise, but not for the individual elements that become a toy. The Snorks are notable, an individual Snork isn't. The Smurfs are notable. The farmhouse isn't, the village
1404:
The bottom line is any source regardless its origin should assessed in term of
Reliability, Credibility & Relevance to the subject in others words editors must exert their sense of criticism and given weight accordingly. No systematic, systemic and bureaucratic handling of the sources. Thanks
1151:
thing that annoys me actully is when editors dont discuss possible changes and their findings in the talk pages of the articles, I have seen more than one article go to straight delete with a huge debate on the delete page like this one here. Deletion shoule be a last step thing in my opinion. -
633:
If you don't want this article lumped together with those on local bands and so on, then you shouldn't start with an argument that is equally valid for those local bands and companies as it is for this article. Use arguments which are either specific for this article, or which are applicable to
583:
There is no pressing need to maintain content which is not used and will not be used because it is not the content we want in an encyclopedia. Content which is not libelous or copyvio is deleted constantly, this would be no exception. Bios of 14 year old schoolkids, myspace bands, insignificant
1024:
The notability guideline is often used as an excuse to destroy every character article out there, simply because people don't like it. It was not voted on by any significant number of people. Sometimes character articles are saved(usually if enough people notice them and decide to comment),
476:
has recently be reaffirmed as a guideline by a very strong consensus at an RFC. As far as I can tell, most members of the community agree that it is a quite necessary threshold. Most people also agree that ignoring WP:N is in general not improving the encyclopedia, so IAR does not apply.
886:
I don't think you can discount sites like seibertron.com. They make money, have official ties to companies, do interviews, get press releases mailed directly to them. They are not just some fan blog, they are a site limited to a small group of interests sure, but they are a news site.
1436:
I just requested several books from my local library system which are guides to japanese anime and
Transformers, etc. I plan on going over them and citing references etc. If anyone can help me with a guide to writing a fully detailed citation of a book, please point me to it.
389:
This one already is notable enough that we do not need to trouble an admin to delete the edit history. A redirect, which is a reasonable argument in this instance, could have been discussed on the talk page instead. AfD need not be troubled with redirectable ones. Best,
598:
It is not content you want, but obviously it is content that the article writers and readers do want and as such it used by other editors and we should be considerate of their interests just as we would want them to be respectful of ours. Sincerely,
1116:
If you can't keep from becoming emotionally involved from some articles, maybe you should avoid trying to delete them? Simply posting tags that an article needs improvement sometimes motivates people to better articles. You should try it more often.
491:
Not in practice. Most editors are focused on building content than commenting in any snapshot in time RfC. We have far more edits from unique accounts and IPs to articles as well as page views than we'll ever have in AfD, RfC, etc. Sincerely,
710:
it can be confused with a dragstrip? The toy is not notable and its article can be deleted, full stop. The term is also in use for a dragstrip, so it is a plausible redirect to that article. There is no connection between the two arguments.
1058:
an article and what needs a list entry. It's not like I live and breath fiction, and I just wish to have properly organized articles that give proper weight to the fictional elements. Nope, I'm just someone who hates fiction completely.
850:
I don't think you can discount news web sites because they are toy-oriented, after all this article covers something that is toy-oriented. Reports of a rare toy selling for thousands on ebay, for instance, do point to it being notable.
650:
I do not see any logical reason to delete here. If the article is redirectable and there is nothing in the edit history we must protect the public from, we do not need to bother administrators to delete it. Editors can be
531:
here put all their effort and free time into molding this place into some sort of superior and scholarly(ha) information resource by removing information and posting gigs worth of idiotic arguments no one'll ever see. -
810:. The one that does pass the bar is a product catalog from Hasbro, which cannot be used when determining notability. Fansitse, wikis, and most other self-published sites can not be used as sources, much else establish
655:
and redirect and if contested, discuss on the article's talk page instead. And no, bands and companies are not fair comparisons, because a random local band with an arbitrary name (let's say hypothetically the
623:
This is not a band with a small local following, but a toy from a mainstream franchise familiar to thousands if not millions of people across the nation and potentially beyond. Apples and oranges. Sincerely,
1470:
No, citing offline works (providing it's done properly and in good faith) is not original research, and there is no requirement to "cite the book references online". See a few of this week's featured articles
1076:
TTN, it does no good for you to use provocative sarcasm. However, DF, if the notability guidelines did not have wide support among most
Knowledge editors, then they would not be guidelines in the first place.
187:
927:
Real world notability means that the article has references detailing the development of the character and how the character has been received by the media. Without that, the article cannot meet
609:
the second place to be a considerate environment. Reversing the order will diminish the value of the encyclopedia by making it more and more indiscriminate, turning us into a free webhost.
238:
81:. Clearly no consensus to keep, and while Stunticons isn't suggested below as a target, it seems to me to the be correct place, and I don't think there's anything notable here to merge.--
912:
I think that this is a notable enough character. I do not know what you mean when you say "Real world notability", does that mean find information that is more out of universe style? -
772:
1360:- blogs and pages selling products are not reliable sources. Try some peer-reviewed content published by academic sources through a professional editorial process, for a change. -
964:
The in-universe content is fine, though not very well written or managed. Without any real world information to balance it, the information has no place being in its own article.
148:
1324:
there is already very brief information about dragstrip, all it needs is some extending really. The title also does not need to be changed either, there is an article called
1167:
is taken then you get complaints. So it's understandable to see an obscure character meet an AfD when the article's had no work done on it for a significant length of time.--
432:
The current subject is notable by any reasonable definition of the term: a toy from a major franchise that includes cartoons, etc. as verifiable online. Sincerely, --
1102:
The whole process of attempting to keep every single article while pretending to improve them just so they can sit and rot for years on end really gets on my nerves.
366:
Not really, because given that the franchise it is associated with is an active one, a case for further improvement or merging is a realistic potentiality. Best, --
181:
40:
311:
1321:
1240:
332:
982:
They are fictional characters, I dont think any real world media has covered a whole bunch of anime characters, but they are notable when it comes to fiction.
1271:
Fixed to keep people happy. My reason for not redirecting to drag strip is that the character and the actual thing have little in common in the real world. -
460:
The definition presented there is as subjective as can be, which is why few editors outside of AfDs ever stick to it and why most of the community goes with
736:
for deletion a few months ago and it was kept. He seems to be just repeating the same challanges over and over, but we have presidence to keep the article.
634:
comparable articles, but don't use strawmans or illogical constructions like you did in your "there is no pressing need" at the start of this tree.
584:
companies, ... don't even get a seven day discussion. You have to argue why the content has to be kept, not that it isn't a copyvio or libel.
303:
1532:
1590:
418:. The current subject of the article is not notable, but the title of the article is a plausible search term for unrelated content.
446:
is a reasonable definition. It is not the only possible one, but to claim that it is not a reasonable definition is incorrect.
17:
668:
and someone could make a case for using the basis of this article's content for the purpose of a toy/character list. Best, --
334:
1544:
or merge a sentence or two. This character deserves a mention but not enough for an article of it's own, and again (like in
1088:
877:
841:
789:
121:
116:
343:
I believe A Nobody's point is that deleting the page (producing a redlink) is unnecessary since a redirect will be needed.
314:
pictures of online, i.e. no reason why we would redlink, maybe merge and redirect, maybe improve, but not redlink. Best, --
336:. I have no idea what you mean with "assertion of non-notability", of course the article will not say that the subject is
125:
202:
307:
169:
108:
1208:
The character has appeared in numerous cartoons and comics, from various companies, as well as being a popular toy.
660:, which hopefully will be a red link...) do not necessarily have redirect locations. Here, even if we did not have
657:
1572:
1299:
536:
65:
46:
1571:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
1480:
1476:
1472:
1460:
1337:
1276:
1252:
1156:
987:
954:
917:
64:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
1526:
1424:
340:
notable, but that is so utterly not the point of the JNN essay that I feel to see why you bring it up here.
163:
86:
1442:
1307:
1122:
892:
866:
namely in the form of toy catalogs. There has been no evidences presented that the character is notable. —
856:
741:
697:
253:
1508:
286:
1172:
1025:
sometimes deleted. It all depends who is around at the time to comment, and who the closing editor is.
565:
1520:
1484:
159:
1557:
1536:
1493:
1446:
1428:
1409:
1366:
1311:
1266:
1231:
1176:
1145:
1126:
1111:
1092:
1067:
1048:
1015:
973:
940:
896:
881:
860:
845:
793:
762:
745:
720:
701:
672:
643:
628:
618:
603:
593:
578:
569:
540:
525:
496:
486:
468:
455:
436:
427:
394:
384:
370:
361:
347:
318:
293:
273:
255:
227:
90:
1391:
532:
574:
There is no pressing need to delete content first that is not libelous or a copy vio. Sincerely, --
1456:
1333:
1272:
1248:
1152:
983:
950:
913:
195:
209:
1420:
1399:
1259:
1084:
873:
837:
785:
269:
82:
375:
Just like it is for every speedy deleted bio, band or company: they may one day become notable.
1375:
1553:
1438:
1303:
1118:
888:
852:
737:
693:
246:
58:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
1511:. No real-world notability. Few RS offer no significant coverage, only minor mentions. Fails
1455:
That would be WP:OR though, if you can cite the book references online it would be useful. -
1209:
1168:
1026:
758:
561:
503:
1488:
1361:
827:
112:
327:), not capitalized Drag Strip. The sources you find in Google News and Google Books are
175:
1406:
1374:
To be really accurate blogs are usually not RS however RS blogs do exist some examples
823:
819:
716:
652:
639:
614:
589:
482:
451:
423:
380:
357:
664:
to redirect to, unlike the hypothetical band, we could still legitimately redirect to
1584:
1516:
1402:
along with comics related books. All examples are just for comics & manga field.
1357:
1263:
1141:
1107:
1079:
1063:
1011:
1003:
969:
936:
868:
832:
780:
669:
625:
600:
575:
493:
465:
461:
433:
391:
367:
352:
Keeping the history when it has nothing to do with the actual redirect is pointless.
344:
315:
299:
290:
265:
223:
818:
either, at least until additional criteria are established at the currently defunct
1549:
1379:
1262:. Only hoaxes, copy vios, and libel need be deleted prior to a redirect. Best, --
807:
665:
1519:. Appropriate merge to the character list seems the most appropriate solution. --
560:
and redirect to dragstrip, Fram's thoughts on the matter are the same as my own.--
142:
302:
as the term is at least worthy of an article in the racing sense as confirmed by
1512:
998:
928:
815:
811:
754:
733:
706:
I don't see that argument either. Who has indicated that the toy is not notable
473:
443:
1302:
will fix that? That way no one confuses this page with a page about a raceway.
1329:
1325:
1244:
104:
96:
78:
1295:
712:
661:
635:
610:
585:
478:
447:
419:
415:
376:
353:
324:
282:
1137:
1103:
1059:
1007:
965:
932:
219:
1395:
753:
due to lack of real-world notability. Google searches are not sources.
814:. And fictional elements, such as characters, are not immune from the
1545:
1487:) and what they do for citation before making such pronouncements. -
803:
442:
well isn't, Puppy isn't. The definition of "notable" as presented in
1383:
1294:
If there is a legitimate concern that this page is confused with
949:
So youre saying the article has too much in-universe style info?
310:. The character is also a toy from a notable show that you even
1565:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
1258:
There is no reason/need to delete first per the above, i.e. per
464:
with regards to the needlessly restrictive mubo jumbo. Best, --
25:
1387:
1332:
that redirects to lunar phase, a moon related article. -
692:
the one for the animal species called
Tasmanian devil.
239:
list of
Fictional elements-related deletion discussions
218:
This character does not assert independent notability.
138:
134:
130:
194:
826:
for being part of a notable franchise. The number of
773:
list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions
68:). No further edits should be made to this page.
1575:). No further edits should be made to this page.
323:The term you get results for is drag strip (or
1322:The Transformers (animated series) characters
1241:The Transformers (animated series) characters
208:
8:
830:is irrelevant to the issue of notability. —
767:
233:
1419:No evidence of independent notability. --
771:: This debate has been included in the
237:: This debate has been included in the
264:No evidence of independent notability.
45:For an explanation of the process, see
1548:) the references are unacceptable. -
806:, all but one of the sources are not
7:
41:deletion review on 2009 September 22
1247:will be a mistake in my opinion. -
24:
997:That's not how notability works.
1328:that redirects to the anime and
1320:Well I was thinking too that in
1255:) 13:04, 11 September 2009 (AT)
29:
1463:) 14:27, 12 September 2009 (AT)
1340:) 20:16, 11 September 2009 (AT)
1279:) 16:55, 11 September 2009 (AT)
1159:) 22:12, 10 September 2009 (AT)
990:) 16:03, 10 September 2009 (AT)
957:) 15:55, 10 September 2009 (AT)
920:) 14:11, 10 September 2009 (AT)
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
1558:00:06, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
1537:04:20, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
1494:02:27, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
1447:14:22, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
1429:09:46, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
1410:08:53, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
1367:01:09, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
1312:22:08, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
1298:then perhaps a simple move to
1267:18:40, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
1232:18:58, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
1177:16:59, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
1146:23:45, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
1127:23:36, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
1112:21:40, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
1093:21:29, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
1068:20:46, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
1049:20:34, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
1016:20:07, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
974:20:01, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
941:19:49, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
897:23:32, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
882:14:05, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
861:13:32, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
846:11:23, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
794:11:09, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
763:08:16, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
721:06:52, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
702:00:28, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
658:One Armed Paper Cutter Bandits
541:02:28, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
526:20:29, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
91:17:04, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
1:
746:23:25, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
673:20:35, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
644:20:26, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
629:20:09, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
619:20:05, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
604:19:42, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
594:19:04, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
579:18:20, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
570:16:53, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
497:20:09, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
487:20:05, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
469:19:42, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
456:19:04, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
437:18:20, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
428:14:08, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
395:20:09, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
385:20:05, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
371:19:42, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
362:19:04, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
348:18:11, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
319:13:43, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
294:13:02, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
274:04:00, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
256:03:28, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
228:18:11, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
298:No evidence or assertion of
1607:
1356:- I refer participants to
822:. A toy or character does
1300:Drag Strip (Transformers)
47:Knowledge:Deletion review
1591:Pages at deletion review
1568:Please do not modify it.
1481:Virginia Eliza Clemm Poe
1477:Diocletianic Persecution
61:Please do not modify it.
1473:Battle of Edson's Ridge
1006:for more information.
331:about the Transformers
1394:and Matthias Wivel's
1390:, who writes for the
816:notability guidelines
1386:, Brigid Alverson's
1515:, and goes against
1509:List of Decepticons
1136:of being improved.
824:not gain notability
287:List of Decepticons
1485:Cædwalla of Wessex
1400:The Comics Journal
1492:
1392:Publishers Weekly
1365:
1002:should read over
796:
776:
258:
242:
53:
52:
39:was subject to a
1598:
1570:
1523:
1491:
1364:
1228:
1225:
1222:
1219:
1216:
1213:
1045:
1042:
1039:
1036:
1033:
1030:
777:
522:
519:
516:
513:
510:
507:
414:and redirect to
249:
243:
213:
212:
198:
146:
128:
73:The result was
63:
33:
32:
26:
1606:
1605:
1601:
1600:
1599:
1597:
1596:
1595:
1581:
1580:
1579:
1573:deletion review
1566:
1521:
1384:Comics Reporter
1378:a columnist in
1243:Redirecting to
1226:
1223:
1220:
1217:
1214:
1211:
1043:
1040:
1037:
1034:
1031:
1028:
533:Norse Am Legend
520:
517:
514:
511:
508:
505:
247:
155:
119:
103:
100:
66:deletion review
59:
37:This discussion
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
1604:
1602:
1594:
1593:
1583:
1582:
1578:
1577:
1561:
1560:
1539:
1501:
1500:
1499:
1498:
1497:
1496:
1465:
1464:
1457:Knowledgekid87
1450:
1449:
1431:
1414:
1413:
1412:
1403:
1398:who wrote for
1350:
1349:
1348:
1347:
1346:
1345:
1344:
1343:
1342:
1341:
1334:Knowledgekid87
1315:
1314:
1285:
1284:
1283:
1282:
1281:
1280:
1273:Knowledgekid87
1249:Knowledgekid87
1234:
1202:
1201:
1200:
1199:
1198:
1197:
1196:
1195:
1194:
1193:
1192:
1191:
1190:
1189:
1188:
1187:
1186:
1185:
1184:
1183:
1182:
1181:
1180:
1179:
1161:
1160:
1153:Knowledgekid87
1148:
1130:
1129:
1114:
1096:
1095:
1071:
1070:
1052:
1051:
1019:
1018:
992:
991:
984:Knowledgekid87
977:
976:
959:
958:
951:Knowledgekid87
944:
943:
922:
921:
914:Knowledgekid87
906:
905:
904:
903:
902:
901:
900:
899:
797:
765:
748:
727:
726:
725:
724:
723:
689:
688:
687:
686:
685:
684:
683:
682:
681:
680:
679:
678:
677:
676:
675:
555:
554:
553:
552:
551:
550:
549:
548:
547:
546:
545:
544:
543:
499:
409:
408:
407:
406:
405:
404:
403:
402:
401:
400:
399:
398:
397:
300:non-notability
296:
276:
259:
216:
215:
152:
99:
94:
71:
70:
54:
51:
50:
44:
34:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1603:
1592:
1589:
1588:
1586:
1576:
1574:
1569:
1563:
1562:
1559:
1555:
1551:
1547:
1543:
1540:
1538:
1534:
1531:
1528:
1524:
1518:
1514:
1510:
1506:
1503:
1502:
1495:
1490:
1486:
1482:
1478:
1474:
1469:
1468:
1467:
1466:
1462:
1458:
1454:
1453:
1452:
1451:
1448:
1444:
1440:
1435:
1432:
1430:
1426:
1422:
1421:Cameron Scott
1418:
1415:
1411:
1408:
1401:
1397:
1393:
1389:
1385:
1381:
1377:
1373:
1370:
1369:
1368:
1363:
1359:
1355:
1352:
1351:
1339:
1335:
1331:
1327:
1323:
1319:
1318:
1317:
1316:
1313:
1309:
1305:
1301:
1297:
1293:
1292:
1291:
1290:
1289:
1288:
1287:
1286:
1278:
1274:
1270:
1269:
1268:
1265:
1261:
1257:
1256:
1254:
1250:
1246:
1242:
1238:
1235:
1233:
1230:
1229:
1207:
1204:
1203:
1178:
1174:
1170:
1165:
1164:
1163:
1162:
1158:
1154:
1149:
1147:
1143:
1139:
1134:
1133:
1132:
1131:
1128:
1124:
1120:
1115:
1113:
1109:
1105:
1100:
1099:
1098:
1097:
1094:
1090:
1086:
1082:
1081:
1075:
1074:
1073:
1072:
1069:
1065:
1061:
1056:
1055:
1054:
1053:
1050:
1047:
1046:
1023:
1022:
1021:
1020:
1017:
1013:
1009:
1005:
1000:
996:
995:
994:
993:
989:
985:
981:
980:
979:
978:
975:
971:
967:
963:
962:
961:
960:
956:
952:
948:
947:
946:
945:
942:
938:
934:
930:
926:
925:
924:
923:
919:
915:
911:
908:
907:
898:
894:
890:
885:
884:
883:
879:
875:
871:
870:
864:
863:
862:
858:
854:
849:
848:
847:
843:
839:
835:
834:
829:
825:
821:
817:
813:
809:
805:
801:
798:
795:
791:
787:
783:
782:
774:
770:
766:
764:
760:
756:
752:
749:
747:
743:
739:
735:
731:
728:
722:
718:
714:
709:
705:
704:
703:
699:
695:
690:
674:
671:
667:
663:
659:
654:
649:
648:
647:
646:
645:
641:
637:
632:
631:
630:
627:
622:
621:
620:
616:
612:
607:
606:
605:
602:
597:
596:
595:
591:
587:
582:
581:
580:
577:
573:
572:
571:
567:
563:
559:
556:
542:
538:
534:
529:
528:
527:
524:
523:
500:
498:
495:
490:
489:
488:
484:
480:
475:
472:
471:
470:
467:
463:
459:
458:
457:
453:
449:
445:
440:
439:
438:
435:
431:
430:
429:
425:
421:
417:
413:
410:
396:
393:
388:
387:
386:
382:
378:
374:
373:
372:
369:
365:
364:
363:
359:
355:
351:
350:
349:
346:
342:
341:
339:
335:
333:
330:
326:
322:
321:
320:
317:
313:
309:
305:
301:
297:
295:
292:
288:
284:
280:
277:
275:
271:
267:
263:
260:
257:
254:
251:
250:
240:
236:
232:
231:
230:
229:
225:
221:
211:
207:
204:
201:
197:
193:
189:
186:
183:
180:
177:
174:
171:
168:
165:
161:
158:
157:Find sources:
153:
150:
144:
140:
136:
132:
127:
123:
118:
114:
110:
106:
102:
101:
98:
95:
93:
92:
88:
84:
83:SarekOfVulcan
80:
76:
69:
67:
62:
56:
55:
48:
42:
38:
35:
28:
27:
19:
1567:
1564:
1541:
1529:
1522:Collectonian
1504:
1439:Mathewignash
1433:
1416:
1380:Tom Spurgeon
1371:
1353:
1304:Mathewignash
1236:
1210:
1205:
1119:Mathewignash
1078:
1027:
909:
889:Mathewignash
867:
853:Mathewignash
831:
799:
779:
768:
750:
738:Mathewignash
729:
707:
694:Mathewignash
666:Transformers
557:
504:
411:
337:
328:
308:Google books
281:, either to
278:
261:
248:Juliancolton
245:
234:
217:
205:
199:
191:
184:
178:
172:
166:
156:
74:
72:
60:
57:
36:
1376:David Welsh
1260:WP:PRESERVE
1169:Kung Fu Man
734:Motormaster
562:Kung Fu Man
304:Google News
182:free images
1489:Biruitorul
1396:Metabunker
1388:Manga blog
1362:Biruitorul
1330:Moon phase
1326:Moon Phase
1245:Drag strip
812:notability
105:Drag Strip
97:Drag Strip
79:Stunticons
1407:KrebMarkt
1296:dragstrip
662:Dragstrip
416:dragstrip
325:dragstrip
283:Dragstrip
1585:Category
1533:contribs
1264:A Nobody
1237:Redirect
808:reliable
670:A Nobody
626:A Nobody
601:A Nobody
576:A Nobody
494:A Nobody
466:A Nobody
434:A Nobody
392:A Nobody
368:A Nobody
316:A Nobody
279:Redirect
266:Eusebeus
149:View log
75:redirect
1550:Josette
1434:Comment
1372:Comment
910:Comment
820:WP:FICT
800:Comment
708:because
653:WP:BOLD
312:look at
188:WP refs
176:scholar
122:protect
117:history
1546:Dauros
1542:Delete
1517:WP:WAF
1417:Delete
1358:WP:SPS
1354:Delete
1004:WP:WAF
804:Dauros
755:Stifle
751:Delete
558:Delete
462:WP:IAR
412:Delete
345:Powers
291:Powers
262:Delete
160:Google
126:delete
1505:Merge
1227:Focus
1080:Farix
1044:Focus
869:Farix
833:Farix
828:GHits
802:Like
781:Farix
521:Focus
203:JSTOR
164:books
143:views
135:watch
131:links
16:<
1554:talk
1527:talk
1513:WP:N
1461:talk
1443:talk
1425:talk
1338:talk
1308:talk
1277:talk
1253:talk
1206:Keep
1173:talk
1157:talk
1142:talk
1123:talk
1108:talk
1064:talk
1012:talk
999:WP:N
988:talk
970:talk
955:talk
937:talk
929:WP:N
918:talk
893:talk
857:talk
778:-- —
769:Note
759:talk
742:talk
730:KEEP
717:talk
713:Fram
698:talk
640:talk
636:Fram
615:talk
611:Fram
590:talk
586:Fram
566:talk
537:talk
483:talk
479:Fram
474:WP:N
452:talk
448:Fram
444:WP:N
424:talk
420:Fram
381:talk
377:Fram
358:talk
354:Fram
306:and
270:talk
244:-- –
235:Note
224:talk
196:FENS
170:news
139:logs
113:talk
109:edit
87:talk
1507:to
1382:'s
1239:to
1138:TTN
1104:TTN
1060:TTN
1008:TTN
966:TTN
933:TTN
338:not
329:not
289:.
285:or
220:TTN
210:TWL
147:– (
77:to
1587::
1556:)
1535:)
1483:,
1479:,
1475:,
1445:)
1427:)
1405:--
1310:)
1175:)
1144:)
1125:)
1110:)
1091:)
1087:|
1066:)
1014:)
972:)
939:)
931:.
895:)
880:)
876:|
859:)
844:)
840:|
792:)
788:|
775:.
761:)
744:)
719:)
700:)
642:)
624:--
617:)
599:--
592:)
568:)
539:)
492:--
485:)
454:)
426:)
390:--
383:)
360:)
272:)
252:|
241:.
226:)
190:)
141:|
137:|
133:|
129:|
124:|
120:|
115:|
111:|
89:)
43:.
1552:(
1530:·
1525:(
1471:(
1459:(
1441:(
1423:(
1336:(
1306:(
1275:(
1251:(
1224:m
1221:a
1218:e
1215:r
1212:D
1171:(
1155:(
1140:(
1121:(
1106:(
1089:c
1085:t
1083:(
1077:—
1062:(
1041:m
1038:a
1035:e
1032:r
1029:D
1010:(
986:(
968:(
953:(
935:(
916:(
891:(
878:c
874:t
872:(
855:(
842:c
838:t
836:(
790:c
786:t
784:(
757:(
740:(
715:(
696:(
638:(
613:(
588:(
564:(
535:(
518:m
515:a
512:e
509:r
506:D
481:(
450:(
422:(
379:(
356:(
268:(
222:(
214:)
206:·
200:·
192:·
185:·
179:·
173:·
167:·
162:(
154:(
151:)
145:)
107:(
85:(
49:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.