1617:
within reason if sourceable and for me decent articles on architectural pieces.roads etc which are not exactly high importance helps broaden this appeal and demonstrates what we could potentially cover. For me projects like
Monmouthedia and Gibraltarpedia do exactly this and seek to bring lesser notable buildings and roads into coverage. I think its exciting to try to cover towns in this way and would like to see every settlement on the planet working towards a detailed coverage of their towns. Should we perhaps focus on getting major world streets up to GA status first? Absolutely. But wikipedia will always be built in a higgledy piggledy fashion with some bizarre choices for articles started at the expense of far more notable content which gets sidelined. But above all it is rather impressive how many sources have been found mentioning the road even if not in extensive detail..♦
385:
YOU!!! type response. I think he knows me well enough to know that I don't mean it in an offensive way but just to prod him that he is again being indifferent to what could be quite productive and that he is excessively citing wikipedia guidelines and that I'd much rather discuss how to productively use the content with him than be at odds. Its absolutely not your place to say anything and I'm baffled as to why you have, I can't possibly think of the positive benefits of your comments, it comes across as haughtiness and brandishing the "civility" stick which as many on here have previously said, the expectations of extreme professionalism and super civility on this website is one of its biggest flaws.♦
1649:
1445:, it is up to the people wanting to keep an article to show that sources exist, and that the sources given in the article are correctly represented. Could you please, for once, explain why the completely incorrect first paragraph of the history section is still present in the article? Why noone who is so interested in this article and does everything to keep it is apparently interested in getting it right, only in getting it kept? If you want to be taken seriously and your arguments given any weight at all, be honest, in discussion technique and in the use of sources.
1132:. I raised some concerns above and on the talk page of the article about the first paragraph of the history section, which is rather important wrt notability of the road, but which, if I am correct, is not about the road at all, but about the Flat Bastion itself instead. Can some people please check this and report their conclusions here? While not every detail of an article needs to be correct for an AfD, such a crucial part should be checked and taken into account before a decision is made, in my opinion.
1337:. In light of Ipigott's first sentence, I have no comment about the state of the article when it was created (I've not checked the history), but its condition at the present time admirably demonstrates notability. Almost every street will get some news coverage, but when your street gets coverage in multiple books published hundreds or thousands of miles away from it and centuries apart from each other, you definitely have a notable street.
1275:). Who was Mr Bourne and what was his significance? Perhaps this information is in some local history not known to Google? By preserving the article with its various tidbits and leads, we are able to gradually expand our coverage. Why should this information be only available to admins like yourself? (deletion really means admin-only as nothing is actually deleted). How would such a restriction assist our purpose?
1518:" Not by a long shot is this anywhere close to accurate, as shown by the lack of adequate sources for the article, and the editors asking for any sources that would show notability. If we were to go by the assertion that discussing the article's sourcing issues is somehow inappropriate at AfD, then perhaps that would have some measure of truth in the most basic sense of what you said. However,
737:@Fram, I don't have your access to sources on 13th century fortifications in Europe. (I'm in Australia and not a military historian.) Can you provide me some more information regarding the importance of the road to the city's 13th fortifications and the later siege of the area? As you've said it isn't important, I'd like to know more about this role to be convinced to change my mind. --
31:
225:
has some buildings, including at one time a school; has had work being done to it over the years, and that there live people, are located clubs, touristic companies, 2 parking spaces for disabled people, and that there was a minor dispute about the removal of parking spaces. Basically, this reads like virtually any other city or town street in the world. Fails
1410:
change my mind. I've yet to see any additional compelling evidence that Fram has done additional research on the history of the road, examined texts at libraries, etc. to suggest a lack of potential available sources that would support this. Multiple languages. Hundreds of years of history. Just not impressed enough to ignore it to change to delete. --
360:)Fram's comments are not very creative, Dr. Blofeld, but please realize that this is a public discussion about a road in Gibraltar that will be preserved in our archives. You should comment as a professional (I know you are one), not as a furious kid, and above all, you should focus on the topic of this article. Nobody is interested in your outbursts.
1509:" I'm somewhat shocked by that, I had to read it a few times to make sure I understood you correctly. Discussing the issues with the article's sources...is inappropriate at AfD? I don't know if you meant something else and got confused while writing it, but if the article's sources do not in any way show even the slightest bit of notability, AfD is
1221:
1748:
My statement above still stands. On the inclusionist/deletionist spectrum, I would consider myself to be more inclusionist, that's why my comment suggested an outcome where the information was retained. I feel like the article is coming along nicely and I hope that it is kept even though I disagree
1559:
road, that doesn't make a road notable in any way. There are many references about a school that happens to be on Flat
Bastion Road, but not a single one of these sources goes into any detail about the road at all, the only time the road is ever mentioned is through describing the school's address.
1440:
Bullshit. Sorry to be so blunt, but this is utter bullshit. There are no "hundreds of years of history", the oldest source about the road is from 1830. All the older sources do not mention the road at all. You based your keep on this misconception, I showed where this was false, and you simply ignore
1042:
and it is non notable. I'm accepting of articles on any district or road providing it has coverage in multiple sources. Give that we aren't paper I think we can cover towns in as much detail as can be imagined providing the content is sourceable. My feeling is that wikipedia is a much more impressive
1003:
Close to never; however, I still haven't seen the case made. This road doesn't seem to meet our requirements. The articles that are about the road specifically reference construction. That is a trivial mention that doesn't affect notability. There are newspaper articles about construction on most
384:
Vejvančický. Fram and I have a long history in which he has often been unfavorable to my suggestions to merge articles, and I'm not "angry" in any manner or form. You can see this by the fact I approached this AFD with a comment and a constructive suggestions rather than an angry STRONG KEEP HOW DARE
1796:
a version of the article how it should really look like, with all incorrect sources, unreliable sources, or sources not about the road or anything on the road removed. It drops to 13 sources instead of 32. Most of those are rather trivial or in passing as well. Where is the notability? Where are the
1701:
and I don't believe that anyone here can state with certainty that this won't develop into a very interesting article (even if it only ends up being one pearl on a lovely strand). Is it possible to add some sort of "let's revisit it in six months and discuss deleting it then" tag (mainly because I'm
1616:
somewhere might want to read about it and get the same pleasure that wikipedia has a half decent article on something rather obscure. I don't know about other wikipedia but for me that's one of the most enjoyable aspects of the project that we are not paper and can explore a gigantic range of topics
1490:
about the road. Ignoring that because it doesn't fit your "keep" opinion is just hoping that the closing admin will look at the votecount only, and ignore the actual merit (or, in many cases here, lack thereof) of the expressed opinions. I note that you haven't replied above to your claim about what
1590:
It does mildly amuse me that nobody, with the exception of perhaps one or two
Gibraltar fellows perhaps, could have given a monkey's testicle about this article but for the Gibraltarpedia scandal. It would be the sort of article that would grow mould and need a jolly good dusting when somebody new
1467:
This is not the article's talk page and we're not here to work upon the article. The purpose and scope of this discussion is purely to decide whether an admin should be empowered to use the delete function to change the status of this material and all its edit history so that only admins may read
224:
Contested prod (with as reason "I don't do prods", for what it's worth). Nominated because "No indication of why this is supposed to be a notable road. No sources about the road are provided, only very passing mentions." Looking at the article and looking for further sources reveals that this road
779:
Note that I was writing the above while you were expanding the article, so my comments don't relate to the latest version of the article. Anyway, you have now added that the road was called "Baluarte de
Santiago", but as far as I can tell, that's the name of the Bastion, not of the Road (see also
725:
which you could probably define as more notable. But I'm pretty sure historically Flat
Bastion Road has been very familiar to Gibraltarians and the military as it was the residence of many esteemed folk living on the Rock and some institutions. So that's why I define it as a road of note, and not
1776:
and other similar bureaucratic stuff, this absolutely non-controversial, totally "neutral", non-Advertisement article (with plenty of independent verifiable sources mentioning the subject of the article) was interesting and educational "waste of time" for me as an "average WikiPedia reader". Of
1409:
I've evaluated Fram's comment. I do not find it very compelling. I've not changed my mind as a result. The history, the sources, etc. for me demonstrate notability, historical relevance, etc. A stronger argument needs to be made that these factors identified by me should be ignored for me to
704:
But that's a different argument. At least three people (Dr. Blofeld, Colonel Warden and Thine
Antique Pen), and a "per Warden" from Prioryman, argued that the article was about a major road. No evidence to support this has been presented (yes, Google Maps, but that's hardly convincing). I also
1522:
requires adequate sources, and this article comes nowhere close to meeting that very basic requirement. Editors ignoring the sourcing issue to proclaim that the article is "a major road in a historic city" means nothing towards showing notability if there isn't a single source to show that
1043:
resource for having such articles than not. And no, you won't find this amount of coverage in sources for every street or every town. The vast majority you won't, that's how notability should be decided. When I look at articles for deletion I always ask myself first, does this article
705:
disagree with e.g. LauraHale's opinion, but that's a disagreement based on the value one gives to some sources and whether they convey notability or not. But this, that it's a major road, is just completely unsupported (see the statement below by Ryan Vesey for some thoughts on this).
464:"Major road in a historic city" doesn't have anything to do with notability, and is too vague to be any sort of criteria; I think all cities would claim "historic" merit in some form or fashion. More importantly, where are the sources in the article that show notability? There are
1069:
for now. Gibraltar is not a big place and its geography measn that the north-south roads run horizontally, while the east-west ones tend to be steep. The article has a reasonable amount of content, and until that content is relocated elsewhere, we need to keep the article.
1716:
Pidgey appeared in the first television episode, Pokémon, I Choose You!, when the main character, Ash
Ketchum, attempts to catch one. He fails when it uses its Gust attack to blow him away and escapes. Afterwards, it uses its Sand Attack to blind Ash, allowing it to get
912:
There are a number of sources from newspapers in
English and Spanish about the road specifically, including construction on it, references to the history of the road dating back to 1828, and a number of book references. While it was not adopted, it would have passed
1427:
sources? I've looked through a whole lot of sources in the article, and not one seems to show even the slightest bit of notability, although it's possible I'm just missing the ones that give notability. Please see my reply to
Nyttend directly above your comment. -
441:
This is a major road in a historic city. Its name is distinctive and evocative and should remain a blue link to assist our readership. Whether the content pertaining to the road is substantial or not is of little importance in satisfying
Wikipiedia's role as a
326:
I see you're still an asshole then and haven't changed your belligerent ways. The idea is to turn it into a decent article on the major roads of Gibraltar. The article would equally cover each road so UNDUE would hardly be the case. Have some common sense Fram.♦
1777:
course, I'm merely speaking from a personal "Knowledge (XXG)'s purpose is to benefit readers" point-of-view so some people (who might believe that "Knowledge (XXG) exists to satisfy the strict rules that govern it") might still disagree with my suggestion ;-)
396:
This is a public discussion about the encyclopedic notability of a road in Gibraltar, my place to comment as well as yours. I know nothing about the history of your disputes with Fram and I'm not interested. I don't play WP civility games, I just wonder
1468:
it. Argumentation about the fine details of the article and its sources are therefore inappropriate. It is sufficient for this debate that editors have determined that there's enough here that we may reasonably retain the material for further work.
1702:
fairly certain that sources will continue to appear as people dig and discover)? As an aside, it really is a wonderful feeling to dive into the sources to research, and then add to an article such as this—all with the thought that you are helping to
1270:
That depends what game you're playing. Some of us are here to build the encyclopedia and take pleasure in the accumulation of historical information for its own sake. I'm now quite interested to know why the road is also called Mr Bourne's ramp
1150:
It seems that the road was originally constructed to service the bastion, which was comparatively remote. We don't seem to have a separate article about the bastion and so it makes sense to accumulate the material under this heading. Per
1568:
just because it happens to be on the road. Another reference was a census; that people live on the road does not make it notable. It's possible that I've overlooked some references that everyone else is seeing, and if that's the case
1038:, I was thinking of the main road and the wall and the apes which is Europa I think. But our duty here is to assess notability based on coverage in reliable sources. A fellow wikipedian, an experienced one at that told me he grew up in
1550:
show notability other than local construction notifications. The fact that local newspapers have reported construction on the road is as routine as a newspaper gets; you would be hard pressed to find a single newspaper that
1513:
place to discuss it, and practice has shown that when sourcing issues are brought up at AfD, the editors that choose to ignore those issues find that their comments are not given as much weight in determining the consensus.
262:
Looking at that map, the main roads seem to be Europa Road, Main Street, perhaps Queensway Street, ... This one doesn't seem to be at the same level of importance though (as far as such a thing can be seen from Google Maps,
1749:
with any argument offered so far for keeping the article. My comment earlier and now isn't based on my desire for this to be an article, but is based on my interpretation of policy which I feel doesn't allow this article.
1603:
and this has 32 sources LOL!! But it is a fact that the vast majority of the world could not give a barbary ape's right nostril about this road.. But that's the case with villages in rural Turkey and the Solomon Islands...
829:
Aside from the apes issue, nothing has been used that specifically talks about the road. The article currently lists a number of interesting things related to the road, but nothing that shows notability for the road.
193:
1387:
gives any indepth coverage, and that's not even a reliable source. I've looked through quite a few of the sources, and the only ones that even begin to address the article's subject are local primary sources.
472:
notability to the article. They are local newspapers talking about construction, or books that are not about the road, and only mention it in passing, if that, which is trivial coverage. The article fails
1629:"But above all it is rather impressive how many sources have been found mentioning the road even if not in extensive detail.." No, it is even more impressive how many sources have been found that do
1248:
And by the way, inserting incorrect information in an article already up for AfD, and then claiming that the article can't be deleted per PRESERVE of that information, is gaming the system big time.
754:(neither "flat bastion" nor the supposed older Spanish name "Senda del Moro"), but I may be missing it. I can tell you though that the 64 page book "The Fortifications of Gibraltar 1068-1945" by
951:
The difference being discussion construction as it happens (routine "traffic disrupted because of construction work ect") vs an article discussing the history of a road which is not routine.
965:
Which article discusses the history of this road? I haven't seen it, but I may of course have missed it. Such an article would halp greatly to finally establish the notability of the road.
1318:. The article already presents interesting historical facts and is still being expanded. In properly documenting the assets of a city, principal or historic roads also require coverage. --
1793:
1486:
Discussions about the sources of articles are inappropriate at an AfD? Editors have determined that many of the sources used in the article (and all the significant non-trivial ones) are
1731:
Can you point out a single reference that contributes towards the notability of the article? "Historical interest" doesn't appear to be supported by a single source in the article. -
625:
605:
148:
1004:
of the roads in my town; however, none of them are notable. Roads that are notable for the locations that exist on them should be referenced in a way that shows that. This is not a
1595:
notable it would probably have got more edits and expanded at some point... But that's the case with most wikipedia articles. Even some of the worlds most famous rockin streets like
1706:
an encyclopaedia. As a second aside, whenever I want to reassure myself that all is wrong with the Wiki-world (e.g. after watching delete discussions such as this), I simply go to
1670:
802:
was thus known. There is no source given about the road prior to 1830 or thereabouts, and no evidence that the road played any important role in the sige or fortifications.
187:
1546:- I've looked through the sources in the article, and read every keep !vote in the AfD, but despite assertions that the article is notable, I don't see anybody explaining
918:
544:
road that has construction. That verifies that the road does in fact exist, but that does not make a road notable in any way. I would find it odd if a newspaper
40:
1698:
763:
765:). I can't prove a negative of course, but I haven't found any evidence that this road played any role of importance in the fortifications or the siege.
153:
1608:
however has had over 19,000 hits already within a few weeks of me creating it.. "take pleasure in the accumulation of information for its own sake" is
1516:
It is sufficient for this debate that editors have determined that there's enough here that we may reasonably retain the material for further work.
1224:
doesn't mention Flat Bastion Road, never mind the fact that it would indicate that the road "was originally constructed to service the bastion".
531:
410:
369:
121:
116:
1380:
784:; not a reliable source, but it happens to state the same). The given book source even states "The Baluarte de Santiago is a flat bastion".
1293:
Hiding original research and badly interpreted sources from our readers and search engines? Now how could that possible be a good thing...
125:
247:
250:. I'd imagine there would be plenty of resources in Gibraltar library or government documents which could be used to expand this fully.♦
1376:
1103:
781:
108:
517:
17:
1842:
1383:
that just happened to have the address of Flat Bastion Road, and literally nothing else was mentioned about the road. Not even the
721:
Well defining it as a "major" road is subjective of course. It isn't the Main Street of Gibraltar and is of lesser notability than
447:
540:
The sources you listed are local newspaper articles about construction happening on the road; every local newspaper informs about
308:
and doesn't discuss individual roads. To include a minor road there, only because we had an article for it, seems to be a case of
592:
208:
1392:
requires significant coverage by independent reliable sources, maybe I'm missing these sources but I don't see a single one. -
874:
664:
Everyone's repeating the "it's a major road", but where are the sources that indicate this? It's a road, but that's about it.
175:
1797:
centuries of history? Where is the role this road has played in Gibraltar's past or present? What makes this a major road?
1605:
1491:
is said in the "Lancet" article either, one of many claims about sources for this article which turn out to be incorrect.
751:
The article claims that the road was constructed in the 13th century. I can't find any mention of the road in the source
1824:
69:
46:
653:
1599:
are in dire condition and poorly edited though.. Probably more amusing or downright worrying is that Sunset Strip is
527:
478:
406:
365:
169:
498:
357:
1806:
1786:
1764:
1738:
1726:
1682:
1662:
1642:
1623:
1584:
1530:
1500:
1477:
1473:
1454:
1435:
1419:
1399:
1364:
1346:
1327:
1302:
1284:
1280:
1257:
1233:
1208:
1204:
1178:
1164:
1160:
1141:
1124:
1107:
1079:
1057:
1027:
994:
974:
960:
946:
930:
898:
881:
853:
811:
793:
774:
746:
732:
714:
695:
673:
657:
637:
617:
596:
576:
555:
535:
488:
459:
455:
425:
414:
391:
373:
349:
345:
333:
321:
299:
280:
256:
238:
90:
165:
520:
1099:
1075:
752:
267:
comes into play here). As for your choice of sources, they are primary ones and don't help in establishing
1573:
point them out to be, because the sources I've reviewed come nowhere close to establishing notability per
649:
305:
112:
1415:
926:
742:
523:
402:
361:
215:
1820:
1657:
1618:
1359:
1052:
989:
893:
835:
727:
420:
386:
328:
294:
251:
86:
65:
1152:
798:
And the same applies to " In 1704, the road was known as Santa Cruz y plataforma de Santiago." No, the
1757:
1678:
1020:
1009:
956:
939:
be mentioned in a newspaper, that's pretty routine local news and doesn't show any notability IMO. -
846:
589:
1565:
1411:
922:
914:
738:
1782:
1735:
1581:
1527:
1469:
1432:
1396:
1276:
1200:
1156:
943:
869:
691:
572:
552:
513:) (I believe the redirect is not set in stone, Fram). This is verifiable geographical information (
485:
451:
341:
201:
1442:
1723:
1090:
1071:
831:
510:
290:
1707:
1507:
Argumentation about the fine details of the article and its sources are therefore inappropriate.
917:. It appears to pass the notability for roads specified on that page. It also appears to pass
309:
181:
1772:
per Ipigott, GFHandel and others. Regardless of highly subjective personal interpretations of
1342:
1323:
1120:
633:
613:
514:
104:
96:
58:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
1819:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
1384:
465:
64:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
1693:. A non-controversial topic that contains areas of historical interest which are well worth
82:
1574:
1561:
1389:
474:
419:
Answering on Vejvansicky's and Fram's talk page before anybody else gets all civil on me.♦
1750:
1674:
1196:
1013:
952:
839:
755:
586:
1217:
264:
1802:
1778:
1732:
1638:
1578:
1524:
1496:
1450:
1429:
1393:
1298:
1253:
1229:
1174:
1137:
970:
940:
864:
807:
789:
770:
710:
687:
669:
568:
549:
482:
317:
276:
234:
1773:
1519:
268:
226:
1836:
1720:
1566:
even if the school were notable, that notability does not get passed down to the road
1441:
this. You are now asking me to prove a negative, which is a nonsensical request. Per
522:) and I don't see any benefits in deleting this kind of content. Just my opinion. --
1596:
1338:
1319:
1116:
1005:
935:
I think you would be hard-pressed to find an instance where construction on a road
629:
609:
142:
1653:
1035:
722:
762:
mention Flat Bastion Road (the Flat Bastion is mentioned, but the road isn't:
246:
A google map view actually shows it to be one of the major roads of Gibraltar
834:
should be created and content related to the road should be included there.
450:
about the trouble that residents of this location have with marauding apes.
1798:
1634:
1492:
1446:
1294:
1249:
1225:
1170:
1133:
966:
803:
785:
766:
706:
665:
313:
272:
230:
1652:
Fram? Looks just like the cellhouse doors of Alcatraz funnily enough. Well
861:- Doesn't appear like a notable road even though it passes notable sites.
1039:
443:
1612:
why we accumulate articles such as this and villages for the sake that
838:
should also be created from content in the notable buildings section.
1711:
686:
road? As long as it's notable the criteria for retention are met.
1199:
at the Flat Bastion guardhouse, which was serviced by this road.
1813:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
1633:
mention the road at all but are included as if they do anyway.
988:
Per Laura. How often do I create a non notable article Ryan? ♦
25:
1794:
Knowledge (XXG) talk:Articles for deletion/Flat Bastion Road
919:
Knowledge (XXG):Notability_(geographical_features)#Roadways
289:
If it can't be expanded further I think a merger into a
1356:
1034:
I must admit when I started it I was confusing it with
567:
per Warden; clearly satisfies notability requirements.
138:
134:
130:
1710:
characters, pick one at random, and read. Today, it's
921:. Given this, I think keep is the correct response. --
200:
1591:
bothered to edit it in like 2019. So yeah, if it was
399:
what does this have to do with the Flat Bastion Road?
626:
list of Transportation-related deletion discussions
606:
list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions
548:report on such a thing, it's completely routine. -
214:
81:. No prejudice towards a future merge discussion.
1560:That is about as trivial as a source can get, and
1671:list of Architecture-related deletion discussions
782:User:Ecemaml/Nursery/List of Gibraltar placenames
584:, waiting to see whether sources can be found. --
72:). No further edits should be made to this page.
1827:). No further edits should be made to this page.
304:Apart from the fact that that is a redirect to
8:
1669:Note: This debate has been included in the
1195:in 1830 which comments on the prevalence of
624:Note: This debate has been included in the
604:Note: This debate has been included in the
468:in the article, but not a single one gives
1668:
1654:I've been guilty of the same sort of thing
623:
603:
1577:, the most basic notability guideline. -
1087:for the many good reasons given above.
758:(also used as a source in the article)
45:For an explanation of the process, see
1699:Knowledge (XXG) is a work in progress
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
1155:, this is not a reason to delete.
892:And Delaware Dirt Track 45570 is?♦
726:just any old street of any town.♦
24:
1379:, not Flat Bastion Road, another
479:However distinctive and evocative
293:would be the perfect solution. ♦
41:deletion review on 2012 October 2
1375:I looked at a few of the books,
29:
1564:requires significant coverage,
648:major road in a historic city.
47:Knowledge (XXG):Deletion review
1807:07:52, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
1787:01:44, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
1765:22:01, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
1739:02:22, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
1727:21:45, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
1683:10:03, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
1663:15:34, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
1643:13:14, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
1624:09:55, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
1585:08:05, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
1531:20:55, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
1501:13:11, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
1478:12:17, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
1455:07:46, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
1436:07:40, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
1420:07:36, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
1400:04:45, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
1365:09:51, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
1347:22:45, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
1328:14:52, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
1303:18:22, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
1285:15:00, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
1258:09:29, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
1234:18:22, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
1209:15:00, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
1179:09:27, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
1169:"it seems" from what exactly?
1165:09:24, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
1142:07:04, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
1125:23:48, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
1108:22:50, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
1080:16:12, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
1058:10:28, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
1028:23:02, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
995:07:46, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
975:07:21, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
961:06:49, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
947:04:52, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
931:03:24, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
899:07:46, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
882:22:59, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
854:21:46, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
812:09:36, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
794:09:32, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
775:09:27, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
747:09:00, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
733:08:37, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
715:08:13, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
696:21:35, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
674:13:50, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
658:13:01, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
638:03:10, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
618:03:10, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
597:02:46, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
577:00:59, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
556:07:55, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
536:15:44, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
489:21:02, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
460:15:36, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
426:17:11, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
415:16:50, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
392:16:11, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
374:15:44, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
350:15:36, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
334:14:35, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
322:14:25, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
300:14:14, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
281:14:13, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
257:14:07, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
239:13:51, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
91:13:34, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
1:
1714:. Did you guys realise that "
1606:Alcatraz Federal Penitentiary
1377:one is about "a flat bastion"
1051:wikipedia as a resource..♦
1859:
827:Delete/Create new articles
509:and improve the redirect
1843:Pages at deletion review
1816:Please do not modify it.
682:Who says it has to be a
61:Please do not modify it.
1555:report construction on
1273:La Cuesta de Mr. Bourne
466:a whole lot of sources
306:Transport in Gibraltar
836:Flat Bastion Magazine
1381:was about a school
832:Roads in Gibraltar
511:Roads in Gibraltar
291:Roads in Gibraltar
77:The result was
1685:
650:Thine Antique Pen
640:
620:
105:Flat Bastion Road
97:Flat Bastion Road
53:
52:
39:was subject to a
1850:
1818:
1792:I have saved at
1660:
1621:
1548:which references
1362:
1115:. Notable road.
1106:
1097:
1093:
1055:
992:
896:
880:
877:
872:
867:
730:
477:by a long shot,
423:
389:
331:
297:
254:
219:
218:
204:
156:
146:
128:
63:
33:
32:
26:
1858:
1857:
1853:
1852:
1851:
1849:
1848:
1847:
1833:
1832:
1831:
1825:deletion review
1814:
1708:List of Pokémon
1658:
1650:Birdseye Waffle
1619:
1360:
1197:Gibraltar fever
1095:
1089:
1088:
1053:
990:
894:
875:
870:
865:
862:
756:Clive Finlayson
728:
448:an amusing item
421:
387:
329:
295:
252:
161:
152:
119:
103:
100:
70:deletion review
59:
37:This discussion
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
1856:
1854:
1846:
1845:
1835:
1834:
1830:
1829:
1790:
1789:
1767:
1743:
1742:
1741:
1687:
1686:
1646:
1645:
1588:
1587:
1540:
1539:
1538:
1537:
1536:
1535:
1534:
1533:
1523:notability. -
1503:
1481:
1480:
1460:
1459:
1458:
1457:
1438:
1404:
1403:
1402:
1370:
1369:
1368:
1367:
1350:
1349:
1331:
1330:
1313:
1312:
1311:
1310:
1309:
1308:
1307:
1306:
1305:
1288:
1287:
1263:
1262:
1261:
1260:
1243:
1242:
1241:
1240:
1239:
1238:
1237:
1236:
1212:
1211:
1184:
1183:
1182:
1181:
1145:
1144:
1127:
1110:
1082:
1063:
1062:
1061:
1060:
1031:
1030:
1010:Champs-Élysées
998:
997:
983:
982:
981:
980:
979:
978:
977:
906:
905:
904:
903:
902:
901:
885:
884:
856:
823:
822:
821:
820:
819:
818:
817:
816:
815:
814:
796:
777:
718:
717:
699:
698:
677:
676:
661:
660:
642:
641:
621:
600:
599:
579:
561:
560:
559:
558:
494:
493:
492:
491:
435:
434:
433:
432:
431:
430:
429:
428:
382:
381:
380:
379:
378:
377:
376:
354:
353:
352:
284:
283:
222:
221:
158:
99:
94:
75:
74:
54:
51:
50:
44:
34:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1855:
1844:
1841:
1840:
1838:
1828:
1826:
1822:
1817:
1811:
1810:
1809:
1808:
1804:
1800:
1795:
1788:
1784:
1780:
1775:
1771:
1768:
1766:
1763:
1762:
1761:
1756:
1755:
1754:
1747:
1744:
1740:
1737:
1734:
1730:
1729:
1728:
1725:
1722:
1718:
1713:
1709:
1705:
1700:
1696:
1692:
1689:
1688:
1684:
1680:
1676:
1672:
1667:
1666:
1665:
1664:
1661:
1655:
1651:
1644:
1640:
1636:
1632:
1628:
1627:
1626:
1625:
1622:
1615:
1611:
1607:
1602:
1598:
1594:
1586:
1583:
1580:
1576:
1572:
1567:
1563:
1558:
1554:
1549:
1545:
1542:
1541:
1532:
1529:
1526:
1521:
1517:
1512:
1508:
1504:
1502:
1498:
1494:
1489:
1485:
1484:
1483:
1482:
1479:
1475:
1471:
1466:
1465:
1464:
1463:
1462:
1461:
1456:
1452:
1448:
1444:
1439:
1437:
1434:
1431:
1426:
1423:
1422:
1421:
1417:
1413:
1408:
1405:
1401:
1398:
1395:
1391:
1386:
1385:blogspot blog
1382:
1378:
1374:
1373:
1372:
1371:
1366:
1363:
1357:
1354:
1353:
1352:
1351:
1348:
1344:
1340:
1336:
1333:
1332:
1329:
1325:
1321:
1317:
1314:
1304:
1300:
1296:
1292:
1291:
1290:
1289:
1286:
1282:
1278:
1274:
1269:
1268:
1267:
1266:
1265:
1264:
1259:
1255:
1251:
1247:
1246:
1245:
1244:
1235:
1231:
1227:
1223:
1219:
1216:
1215:
1214:
1213:
1210:
1206:
1202:
1198:
1194:
1190:
1189:
1188:
1187:
1186:
1185:
1180:
1176:
1172:
1168:
1167:
1166:
1162:
1158:
1154:
1149:
1148:
1147:
1146:
1143:
1139:
1135:
1131:
1128:
1126:
1122:
1118:
1114:
1111:
1109:
1105:
1101:
1096:Pigsonthewing
1092:
1086:
1083:
1081:
1077:
1073:
1072:Peterkingiron
1068:
1065:
1064:
1059:
1056:
1050:
1046:
1041:
1037:
1033:
1032:
1029:
1026:
1025:
1024:
1019:
1018:
1017:
1011:
1007:
1002:
1001:
1000:
999:
996:
993:
987:
984:
976:
972:
968:
964:
963:
962:
958:
954:
950:
949:
948:
945:
942:
938:
934:
933:
932:
928:
924:
920:
916:
911:
908:
907:
900:
897:
891:
890:
889:
888:
887:
886:
883:
879:
878:
873:
868:
860:
857:
855:
852:
851:
850:
845:
844:
843:
837:
833:
828:
825:
824:
813:
809:
805:
801:
797:
795:
791:
787:
783:
778:
776:
772:
768:
764:
761:
757:
753:
750:
749:
748:
744:
740:
736:
735:
734:
731:
724:
720:
719:
716:
712:
708:
703:
702:
701:
700:
697:
693:
689:
685:
681:
680:
679:
678:
675:
671:
667:
663:
662:
659:
655:
651:
647:
644:
643:
639:
635:
631:
627:
622:
619:
615:
611:
607:
602:
601:
598:
595:
594:
591:
588:
583:
580:
578:
574:
570:
566:
563:
562:
557:
554:
551:
547:
543:
539:
538:
537:
533:
529:
525:
521:
518:
515:
512:
508:
504:
500:
496:
495:
490:
487:
484:
481:it may be. -
480:
476:
471:
467:
463:
462:
461:
457:
453:
449:
445:
440:
437:
436:
427:
424:
418:
417:
416:
412:
408:
404:
400:
395:
394:
393:
390:
383:
375:
371:
367:
363:
359:
355:
351:
347:
343:
339:
338:
337:
336:
335:
332:
325:
324:
323:
319:
315:
311:
307:
303:
302:
301:
298:
292:
288:
287:
286:
285:
282:
278:
274:
270:
266:
261:
260:
259:
258:
255:
249:
245:
241:
240:
236:
232:
228:
217:
213:
210:
207:
203:
199:
195:
192:
189:
186:
183:
180:
177:
174:
171:
167:
164:
163:Find sources:
159:
155:
150:
144:
140:
136:
132:
127:
123:
118:
114:
110:
106:
102:
101:
98:
95:
93:
92:
88:
84:
80:
73:
71:
67:
62:
56:
55:
48:
42:
38:
35:
28:
27:
19:
1815:
1812:
1791:
1769:
1759:
1758:
1752:
1751:
1745:
1715:
1703:
1694:
1690:
1647:
1630:
1613:
1609:
1600:
1597:Sunset Strip
1592:
1589:
1570:
1556:
1552:
1547:
1543:
1515:
1510:
1506:
1487:
1424:
1406:
1334:
1315:
1272:
1222:this article
1192:
1129:
1112:
1104:Andy's edits
1100:Talk to Andy
1091:Andy Mabbett
1084:
1066:
1048:
1044:
1022:
1021:
1015:
1014:
1006:Fifth Avenue
985:
936:
909:
863:
858:
848:
847:
841:
840:
826:
799:
759:
683:
645:
585:
581:
564:
545:
541:
506:
502:
469:
438:
398:
340:Hear, hear.
243:
242:
223:
211:
205:
197:
190:
184:
178:
172:
162:
78:
76:
60:
57:
36:
1659:Dr. Blofeld
1648:Ever ate a
1620:Dr. Blofeld
1361:Dr. Blofeld
1153:WP:PRESERVE
1054:Dr. Blofeld
1036:Europa Road
991:Dr. Blofeld
895:Dr. Blofeld
729:Dr. Blofeld
723:Europa Road
524:Vejvančický
422:Dr. Blofeld
403:Vejvančický
388:Dr. Blofeld
362:Vejvančický
330:Dr. Blofeld
296:Dr. Blofeld
253:Dr. Blofeld
188:free images
83:Mark Arsten
1719:"? Golly.
1695:developing
1675:Necrothesp
1193:The Lancet
953:Agathoclea
915:WP:STREETS
582:Keep/merge
446:. Here's
439:Keep/merge
269:notability
1821:talk page
1779:Rndomuser
1601:unsourced
1443:WP:BURDEN
1412:LauraHale
923:LauraHale
739:LauraHale
688:Prioryman
630:• Gene93k
610:• Gene93k
569:Prioryman
66:talk page
1837:Category
1823:or in a
1721:GFHandel
1614:somebody
1553:wouldn't
1407:Comment:
1040:Kentrigg
937:wouldn't
760:does not
532:contribs
444:gazeteer
411:contribs
370:contribs
310:WP:UNDUE
248:see here
149:View log
68:or in a
1746:Comment
1610:exactly
1339:Nyttend
1320:Ipigott
1130:Comment
800:bastion
244:Comment
194:WP refs
182:scholar
122:protect
117:history
1712:Pidgey
1656:... ♦
1575:WP:GNG
1571:please
1562:WP:GNG
1544:Delete
1470:Warden
1390:WP:GNG
1277:Warden
1220:much:
1201:Warden
1157:Warden
1049:worsen
1045:damage
859:Delete
546:didn't
475:WP:GNG
452:Warden
342:Warden
166:Google
126:delete
1760:Vesey
1736:Ghost
1704:build
1593:truly
1582:Ghost
1528:Ghost
1433:Ghost
1425:Which
1397:Ghost
1218:WP:OR
1191:From
1023:Vesey
1008:or a
944:Ghost
910:Keep:
866:Dough
849:Vesey
684:major
553:Ghost
507:merge
486:Ghost
265:WP:OR
209:JSTOR
170:books
154:Stats
143:views
135:watch
131:links
16:<
1803:talk
1799:Fram
1783:talk
1774:WP:N
1770:Keep
1753:Ryan
1733:Sudo
1717:away
1691:Keep
1679:talk
1639:talk
1635:Fram
1579:Sudo
1525:Sudo
1520:WP:N
1497:talk
1493:Fram
1474:talk
1451:talk
1447:Fram
1430:Sudo
1416:talk
1394:Sudo
1355:See
1343:talk
1335:Keep
1324:talk
1316:Keep
1299:talk
1295:Fram
1281:talk
1254:talk
1250:Fram
1230:talk
1226:Fram
1205:talk
1175:talk
1171:Fram
1161:talk
1138:talk
1134:Fram
1121:talk
1117:Anne
1113:Keep
1085:Keep
1076:talk
1067:Keep
1016:Ryan
986:Keep
971:talk
967:Fram
957:talk
941:Sudo
927:talk
842:Ryan
808:talk
804:Fram
790:talk
786:Fram
771:talk
767:Fram
743:talk
711:talk
707:Fram
692:talk
670:talk
666:Fram
654:talk
646:Keep
634:talk
614:talk
593:7754
590:chen
573:talk
565:Keep
550:Sudo
528:talk
505:(or
503:Keep
483:Sudo
456:talk
407:talk
366:talk
346:talk
318:talk
314:Fram
277:talk
273:Fram
235:talk
231:Fram
227:WP:N
202:FENS
176:news
139:logs
113:talk
109:edit
87:talk
79:keep
1631:not
1557:any
1511:the
1488:not
1098:);
1047:or
542:any
470:any
216:TWL
151:•
147:– (
1839::
1805:)
1785:)
1697:.
1681:)
1673:.
1641:)
1499:)
1476:)
1453:)
1418:)
1358:♦
1345:)
1326:)
1301:)
1283:)
1256:)
1232:)
1207:)
1177:)
1163:)
1140:)
1123:)
1102:;
1078:)
1012:.
973:)
959:)
929:)
876:72
871:48
810:)
792:)
773:)
745:)
713:)
694:)
672:)
656:)
636:)
628:.
616:)
608:.
587:Rs
575:)
534:)
530:|
519:,
516:,
499:ec
458:)
413:)
409:|
401:--
372:)
368:|
358:ec
348:)
320:)
312:.
279:)
271:.
237:)
229:.
196:)
141:|
137:|
133:|
129:|
124:|
120:|
115:|
111:|
89:)
43:.
1801:(
1781:(
1724:♬
1677:(
1637:(
1514:"
1505:"
1495:(
1472:(
1449:(
1414:(
1341:(
1322:(
1297:(
1279:(
1271:(
1252:(
1228:(
1203:(
1173:(
1159:(
1136:(
1119:(
1094:(
1074:(
969:(
955:(
925:(
806:(
788:(
769:(
741:(
709:(
690:(
668:(
652:(
632:(
612:(
571:(
526:(
501:)
497:(
454:(
405:(
364:(
356:(
344:(
316:(
275:(
233:(
220:)
212:·
206:·
198:·
191:·
185:·
179:·
173:·
168:(
160:(
157:)
145:)
107:(
85:(
49:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.