1628:: 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....
1567:: I don't know what's going on here exactly, and it sounds like a personal feud between two people started this whole thing, but the fact that this man is a published author of multiple books and has worked with Focus on the Family makes him at least somewhat notable. Someone's degree status can't be made into a criteria of notability, as was stated above. In any case, Knowledge has all kinds of articles on fictional characters , Internet trends, etc. It would seem hypocritical to keep them and yet delete biographies of peole who couldn't prove their academic credentials valid.
298:, prolific creator of articles on alumni of that university all of whom have, despite vital importance to the world of education, managed to escape the notice of other editors. Oh, that's not quite true: one or two were apparently created by a sockpuppet of Gastrich's. Anyway, this article is about a pastor. And, er, that's about it. On the plus side, we do now know that he has eight grandchildren, so the bytes consumed were not entirely wasted.
1662:
1415:
633:
548:
358:
313:
242:
1061:
69:
1475:. He seems to meet the notable author criteria. His affiliation with Focus on the Family is also somewhat notable. Whether or not we agree with his religious stand or tactics should be irrelevant, as should his Ph.D. from an unaccredited university. I don't think we're evaluating this on the quality of his education, but rather on his publishing and preaching which appears to pass the test.
1624:. If he's writen stuff then he should at least have a little slice of wikipedia? I mean, Knowledge is huge, everyone can have a share can't they? Everyone thinks that because he isn't in the news, that he shouldn't be included in wikipedia, the so called "sum of all human knowledge". But how do we know he isn't influencial? He effects hundreds with his words.....
260:: 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
1647:
people whose articles rely on padding like the number of grandchildren is very limited. I checked out the books, they have Amazon sales ranks in the hundreds of thousands or, in some cases millions, none of them are by major imprints. This is just another pastor, just like all the rest, I see nothing special about him at all. -
1646:
a
Christian. Much as you might have been told that this is a vendetta against articles on Christians, that is the POV of one man - which brings me to my second point: Wiggins2 is a probable sockpuppet of Jason Gastrich (and has been blocked as such). In my experience the number of genuinely notable
1587:
a serious issue about how, in such a highly polarized environment, to distinguish POV pushing and linkspam from honest, good-faith efforts to create encyclopedic articles. Vote-stacking, throwing around accusations of feuds and vendettas, and jibes about people's motives just serve to polarize things
1552:
easier by following the procedures and policies, and by not being drawn into irrelevant debates on AfD pages, and a (significant) little easier by doing some of the work (e.g. flagging suspect sock puppet votes with links to their contribution histories is something anyone can do, not just an admin).
1236:
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
584:
I agree. And I also don't see that he really claims to be an educator. The article says he has a Ph.D. in education but the claim is that he is an author and "pastor." It doesn't seem to depend on the Ph.D. for that. More importantly, I don't think it's our role to delete an article because we feel
1378:
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.
849:
This is a perfectly viable encyclopedia article on a public figure that could very well be the subject of someone's research in the future. In such an event, wikipedia would come in handy. That is what wikipedia is for. I haven't heard a single good argument to why this should be deleted.
1600:. He's notable enough for me. By the way, this sort of POV pushing, especially e-mailing people to "rally to your cause", is unacceptable. The idea here is that people can make rational, non-POV decisions on whether this guy is notable enough or not. Rodii has absolutely the right idea.
520:. I really don't understand the "diploma mill" criterion. Are we to delete articles on all people who do not have degrees from accredited universtities? Think of the many notable people that would include. This person seems notable enough, despite the POV against his schooling.
701:. 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. --
1496:
Based on his contributions to Focus on the Family which is a very notable organization, like them or not. Cumulativel, the circ figures of books may squeek by, but it's his affiliation with Focus on the Family that put me over the edge on this guy.
1397:
1698:
Unnotable being promoted for people to buy books. Does not meet Wiki standards of notability, no sources, and as demonstrated with the vote stuffing, this is solely an article to promote a certain religious and a certain unaccredited diploma mill
278:
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.
1211:"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. --
674:
Not the most notable guy in the world, but this isn't a paper encyclopedia. If you have a problem with the claims of his being an educator, that's grounds to remove them from the article, not delete the whole thing.
264:
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.
836:
We can't delete people because books aren't that popular on amazon (this is just not relevant as a criteria) or the publishers aren't well known. bio can be verified and individual is arguably notable.
330:: There is no need to pepper your nomination with personal attacks and sarcasm. Furthermore, I didn't create all of the LBU alumni entries. Many were created long before I even came to Knowledge. --
898:, if the article in its current state is fairly accurate, then he's got enough to warrant inclusion. The issues about his quality of education can be addressed in an NPOV manner in the article.
1588:
more. I think it's obvious that this many-headed hydra of an argument is not going to lead to an overall consensus here and now, but there's no reason to poison the well for future discussions.
743:
had books published?). It has an image, which is good. Where is this image going to slot in if this is deleted? This could well be a featured article someday. - 13:18, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1703:). The vote stuffing is very serious and something should be done to protect this type of action. The stuffing throws the whole communal mechanism at Knowledge into serious jeopardy.
1289:
1208:
487:
76:
936:
So he's a pastor of a church. Who cares? He's not notable. Also, someone should go through all these keep votes and see which ones were made by new users... --
886:
Just because you don't like the guy doesn't mean he's not notable, and the sarcasm in the nom comes across as POV; his books make him notable, as Google shows.
224:
618:
For some values of author. One or two of his books make it into the top half million in Amazon's sales rank, but others fail to break the million mark. -
197:
1463:
I don't see anything in the article that implies notability. He is a pastor...he appeared as a guest on some radio shows...so what? --
910:
this is a compact, well-written article with sources and links, and a man with enough books, whether one thinks it is notable or not.
85:
1048:
guy just barely passes my notability bar, he's clearly published multiple books, he's been on television... just squeeks by imo.
115:
946:
17:
1490:
hits in google. I don't see any circulation numbers for the books, so I don't see how you can say that he passes the test. --
223:
As a result of the serial disruption of AfD and other questionable behaviour, I have raised a user RfC on Jason
Gastrich, see
211:
1579:. This is not a personal feud, and it's also not a vendetta against Christians, as some people would like to portray it. It
1237:
the entries. These nominations seem peculiar because some people are even presidents of universities and well known authors.
1290:
http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_Louisiana_Baptist_University_people_%28second_nomination%29
1209:
http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_Louisiana_Baptist_University_people_%28second_nomination%29
1112:
per Guy. I am uncomfortable with the way this discussion is going, though. Also, Greatgavini, your signature is OBNOXIOUS.
1080:
website (so some international coverage). Google hits are predominantly
Christian sites, hey we don't discount articles on
778:
for criteria to decide whether someone living merits a wikipedia article. Note that "being a real person" is not there. --
862:, his books aren't self-published from the looks of it, including one book published by the seminary press Multnomah. --
1700:
820:
1487:
101:
585:
that his education is inferior for the position he claims to hold. Can't that be addressed by the article editors?
74:
If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
1781:
1657:
1410:
628:
543:
353:
339:
There are no personal attacks in that sentence. The word "many" is also misleading: most were created by you or
308:
237:
36:
1780:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
1763:
1746:
1732:
1721:
1707:
1689:
1670:
1632:
1616:
1604:
1592:
1571:
1557:
1528:
1510:
1501:
1479:
1467:
1453:
1441:
1423:
1383:
1300:
1217:
1197:
1185:
1168:
1156:
1144:
1128:
1116:
1104:
1092:
1064:
1040:
1028:
1016:
1004:
992:
979:
965:
951:
928:
914:
902:
890:
878:
866:
854:
841:
796:
782:
769:
756:
731:
719:
705:
692:
679:
666:
641:
609:
589:
575:
556:
524:
512:
500:
478:
466:
454:
436:
424:
412:
375:
366:
334:
321:
285:
269:
250:
191:
52:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
1366:
1181:
961:
Actually all the ones I checked seem to be established users. Couldn't find a sockpuppet in the lot of 'em. --
739:
For all the reasons above. Also because he's a real person, who has done many notable things (have any of
571:
496:
147:
1177:
863:
1759:
1322:
1037:
45:
1355:
1344:
1311:
58:
1449:
as per JzG. And note to closing administrator, please evaluate carefully for sockpuppets/meatpuppets.
1333:
1553:
But don't stress too much. We're human, but we're not quite as stupid as some would wish. Heh heh...
808:
702:
689:
662:
654:
566:
491:
131:
105:
1755:
1077:
942:
433:
421:
404:
372:
331:
295:
266:
187:
90:
1666:
1419:
1259:). If you’d like to join a network of Christians with a purpose on Knowledge, please see our site!
637:
552:
362:
317:
246:
1601:
1165:
1125:
976:
509:
205:
137:
68:
1507:
1491:
1464:
1153:
1141:
1056:
962:
925:
779:
452:
283:
274:
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.
792:. Religious media personality and author. I'm also shocked by the sarcasm displayed here. --
389:
Non of the books appear to be from well-known publishers or have significant Amazon ranks.
1661:
1414:
1001:
816:
766:
744:
632:
547:
475:
357:
312:
241:
1101:
658:
463:
1506:
I don't get it. Do you think every person employed by Focus on the Family is notable? --
1629:
1076:
out. This guy appears to be one of the more notable ones, quoted for example by the NZ
1013:
989:
937:
753:
716:
521:
390:
340:
275:
183:
218:: they consist almost solely of soliciting others to come to these AfDs and vote keep.
215:
1729:
1704:
1686:
1568:
1541:
1438:
1194:
1137:
887:
875:
775:
432:
as non-notable vanity gastrich-cruft from a holder of a fake pHd from a diploma mill.
201:
1060:
1743:
1718:
1554:
1089:
1049:
975:
As long as the article is NPOV. This is a factual biography of a published author.
911:
676:
565:
Shouldnt that mean the article be edited to say that rather than being deleted? --
449:
445:
280:
165:
153:
121:
1540:
to rig an AfD. Heh heh heh. Fortunately, they're all based on the assumption that
1164:
Another non-notable from our most prolific creator of non-notable bios, Gastrich.
1635:. BTW, I hope my vote isn't discounted, I count myself as a influencial editor...
100:
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to
1613:
1525:
1498:
1476:
1025:
824:
812:
762:
606:
586:
1246:
Below are some of the links that need attention. Thanks for your consideration.
1589:
1380:
1113:
1081:
899:
851:
838:
1212:
1136:, as per Peyna and Alkivar. Perhaps this is a close call, but it does meet
1085:
1072:. As with (US) college professors, being a church pastor doesn't get you in
793:
728:
486:
with some sort of tag, pov - disputed etc. Seems fairly notable from google
371:
At least 5 out of the 11 alumni on the LBU page were not written by me. --
1648:
1450:
1401:
1301:
http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/J._Otis_Ledbetter
619:
534:
344:
299:
294:
A man with a "PhD" from an unaccredited "university", article created by
228:
1642:
There are two reasons why your comment above is wrong. The first is, I
1367:
http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Daniel_Dorim_Kim
1255:
By the way, I recently started an organization called Wiki4Christ (see
1323:
http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Mike_Randall
1396:
Assuming that you are addressing those remarks to me, here is the "
1356:
http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Neal_Weaver
1345:
http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/James_Combs
1312:
http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Ron_Moseley
1486:
Why do you think his publishing passes the test? He gets a measly
1334:
http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Thomas_Ice
1774:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
63:
1583:
a conversation about what makes a person notable, and there
1124:
Inclusion is based on notability, not a person's background.
94:(agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments,
182:
This AfD process has been further disrupted by a suspected
1524:
per nom. suggest admin verify legitimacy of all votes.
1256:
1152:- just about passes the notability guidelines for me. --
1684:
44:
The result of the debate was No consensus to delete. --
533:
It's relevant because he claims to be an educator. -
508:, non-notable, religious figure or no significance. -
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
688:. Appears to be personal vendetta by someone. --
1784:). No further edits should be made to this page.
761:You're a real person; where is your article? --
1024:Keep I see no reason to delete this article.
225:Knowledge:Requests for comment/Jason Gastrich
114:Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected
84:among Knowledge contributors. Knowledge has
8:
1000:I see no reason to delete this article. --
88:regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
1548:. Contributors can make the admins job a
1742:not notable enough to merit inclusion.--
448:have tarnished the reputations of many.
108:on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.
420:. Very notable author and minister. --
7:
752:. He's a real person; enough said.
1084:just because they appear mainly on
774:No, not enough said. Please review
823:) 14:18, 20 January 2006. Sorry --
24:
1544:can outthink the admins. Heh heh
1717:The individual clearly exists.
1660:
1413:
1059:
804:. Non-notable religious figure.
631:
546:
356:
311:
240:
67:
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
1612:as POV-pushing Gastrichcruft.
1:
104:on the part of others and to
1764:18:54, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
1747:00:57, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
1733:00:26, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
1722:15:47, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
1708:02:53, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
1701:Louisiana Baptist University
1690:02:05, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
1671:14:41, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
1633:04:20, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
1617:00:30, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
1605:20:40, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
1593:17:57, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
1572:17:03, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
1558:10:55, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
1529:07:59, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
1511:21:51, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
1502:13:49, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
1480:07:27, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
1468:05:11, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
1454:02:09, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
1442:02:07, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
1424:10:44, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
1384:01:09, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
1218:16:32, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1198:02:05, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
1186:22:13, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1169:22:08, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1157:21:57, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1145:21:45, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1129:21:35, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1117:21:24, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1105:21:18, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1093:20:11, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1065:18:40, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1041:18:16, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1029:18:00, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1017:17:41, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1005:17:39, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
993:17:22, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
980:17:20, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
966:21:57, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
952:16:28, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
929:16:22, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
915:22:46, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
903:15:59, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
891:15:28, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
879:14:57, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
867:14:52, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
855:15:00, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
842:14:25, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
797:13:37, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
783:09:18, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
770:14:18, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
757:13:20, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
732:13:14, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
720:12:31, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
706:15:16, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
693:12:30, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
680:10:38, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
667:07:22, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
642:10:14, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
610:07:18, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
590:07:38, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
576:10:33, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
557:10:11, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
525:06:57, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
513:06:23, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
501:05:57, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
479:03:31, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
467:03:30, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
455:03:06, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
437:02:33, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
425:01:44, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
413:01:17, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
376:10:20, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
367:10:08, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
335:05:16, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
322:01:03, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
286:05:45, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
270:00:56, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
251:12:02, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
53:19:24, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
1140:guidelines for inclusion.
1801:
727:as per JzG and Blngyuen --
1683:Click the link and learn
1536:: There are many ways to
1777:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
146:; accounts blocked for
116:single-purpose accounts
86:policies and guidelines
1257:http://wiki4christ.com
476:King of All the Franks
341:a suspected sockpuppet
1176:per Hall Monitor. --
605:, published author.
1078:Focus on the Family
715:, Popular Minister.
296:User:Jason Gastrich
98:by counting votes.
77:not a majority vote
1762:
1012:same as above. --
950:
874:per nomination --
828:
811:comment added by
574:
499:
444:as per Blnguyen.
179:
178:
175:
102:assume good faith
59:J. Otis Ledbetter
1792:
1779:
1758:
1664:
1652:
1437:as an author. --
1417:
1405:
1215:
1063:
1054:
940:
827:
805:
745:The Great Gavini
635:
623:
569:
550:
538:
494:
462:per nomination.
410:
407:
402:
399:
396:
393:
360:
348:
315:
303:
244:
232:
173:
161:
145:
129:
110:
80:, but instead a
71:
64:
50:
34:
1800:
1799:
1795:
1794:
1793:
1791:
1790:
1789:
1788:
1782:deletion review
1775:
1681:
1659:
1650:
1412:
1403:
1213:
1050:
806:
703:StuffOfInterest
690:StuffOfInterest
655:User:Astrokey44
630:
621:
545:
536:
408:
405:
400:
397:
394:
391:
355:
346:
310:
301:
239:
230:
163:
151:
135:
119:
106:sign your posts
62:
46:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
1798:
1796:
1787:
1786:
1769:
1767:
1766:
1749:
1736:
1735:
1725:
1724:
1711:
1710:
1696:Strong Delete.
1680:
1677:
1676:
1675:
1674:
1673:
1656:
1637:
1636:
1619:
1607:
1595:
1574:
1562:
1561:
1560:
1518:
1517:
1516:
1515:
1514:
1513:
1483:
1482:
1470:
1457:
1456:
1444:
1431:
1430:
1429:
1428:
1427:
1426:
1409:
1389:
1388:
1387:
1386:
1373:
1372:
1371:
1370:
1369:
1361:
1360:
1359:
1358:
1350:
1349:
1348:
1347:
1339:
1338:
1337:
1336:
1328:
1327:
1326:
1325:
1317:
1316:
1315:
1314:
1306:
1305:
1304:
1303:
1295:
1294:
1293:
1292:
1283:
1281:
1280:
1279:
1278:
1277:Jason Gastrich
1272:
1271:
1270:
1269:
1263:
1262:
1261:
1260:
1250:
1249:
1248:
1247:
1241:
1240:
1239:
1238:
1231:
1230:
1229:
1228:
1222:
1206:
1205:
1200:
1188:
1178:Idont Havaname
1171:
1159:
1147:
1131:
1119:
1107:
1095:
1088:sites, do we?
1067:
1043:
1031:
1019:
1007:
995:
983:
969:
968:
955:
954:
931:
918:
917:
905:
893:
881:
869:
864:badlydrawnjeff
857:
844:
830:
829:
799:
787:
786:
785:
772:
747:
734:
722:
710:
709:
708:
682:
669:
647:
646:
645:
644:
627:
613:
612:
599:
598:
597:
596:
595:
594:
593:
592:
579:
578:
560:
559:
542:
528:
527:
515:
503:
481:
469:
457:
439:
427:
422:Jason Gastrich
415:
383:
382:
381:
380:
379:
378:
373:Jason Gastrich
352:
332:Jason Gastrich
307:
292:
291:
290:
289:
288:
267:Jason Gastrich
254:
236:
221:
188:Jason Gastrich
177:
176:
72:
61:
56:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1797:
1785:
1783:
1778:
1772:
1771:
1770:
1765:
1761:
1757:
1753:
1750:
1748:
1745:
1741:
1738:
1737:
1734:
1731:
1727:
1726:
1723:
1720:
1716:
1713:
1712:
1709:
1706:
1702:
1697:
1694:
1693:
1692:
1691:
1688:
1685:
1678:
1672:
1669:
1668:
1663:
1658:
1654:
1645:
1641:
1640:
1639:
1638:
1634:
1631:
1627:
1623:
1620:
1618:
1615:
1611:
1610:Strong delete
1608:
1606:
1603:
1602:Grandmasterka
1599:
1596:
1594:
1591:
1586:
1582:
1578:
1575:
1573:
1570:
1566:
1563:
1559:
1556:
1551:
1547:
1543:
1539:
1535:
1532:
1531:
1530:
1527:
1523:
1520:
1519:
1512:
1509:
1505:
1504:
1503:
1500:
1495:
1494:
1493:
1489:
1485:
1484:
1481:
1478:
1474:
1471:
1469:
1466:
1462:
1459:
1458:
1455:
1452:
1448:
1445:
1443:
1440:
1436:
1433:
1432:
1425:
1422:
1421:
1416:
1411:
1407:
1399:
1395:
1394:
1393:
1392:
1391:
1390:
1385:
1382:
1377:
1376:
1375:
1374:
1368:
1365:
1364:
1363:
1362:
1357:
1354:
1353:
1352:
1351:
1346:
1343:
1342:
1341:
1340:
1335:
1332:
1331:
1330:
1329:
1324:
1321:
1320:
1319:
1318:
1313:
1310:
1309:
1308:
1307:
1302:
1299:
1298:
1297:
1296:
1291:
1288:
1287:
1286:
1285:
1284:
1276:
1275:
1274:
1273:
1267:
1266:
1265:
1264:
1258:
1254:
1253:
1252:
1251:
1245:
1244:
1243:
1242:
1235:
1234:
1233:
1232:
1226:
1225:
1224:
1223:
1221:
1219:
1216:
1210:
1204:
1201:
1199:
1196:
1192:
1189:
1187:
1183:
1179:
1175:
1172:
1170:
1167:
1166:FeloniousMonk
1163:
1160:
1158:
1155:
1151:
1148:
1146:
1143:
1139:
1135:
1132:
1130:
1127:
1126:the1physicist
1123:
1120:
1118:
1115:
1111:
1108:
1106:
1103:
1099:
1096:
1094:
1091:
1087:
1083:
1079:
1075:
1071:
1068:
1066:
1062:
1058:
1055:
1053:
1047:
1044:
1042:
1039:
1035:
1032:
1030:
1027:
1023:
1020:
1018:
1015:
1011:
1008:
1006:
1003:
999:
996:
994:
991:
988:per Itake -
987:
984:
981:
978:
974:
971:
970:
967:
964:
960:
957:
956:
953:
948:
944:
939:
935:
932:
930:
927:
924:Non-notable.
923:
920:
919:
916:
913:
909:
906:
904:
901:
897:
894:
892:
889:
885:
882:
880:
877:
873:
870:
868:
865:
861:
858:
856:
853:
848:
845:
843:
840:
835:
832:
831:
826:
822:
818:
814:
810:
803:
800:
798:
795:
791:
788:
784:
781:
777:
773:
771:
768:
764:
760:
759:
758:
755:
751:
748:
746:
742:
738:
735:
733:
730:
726:
723:
721:
718:
714:
711:
707:
704:
700:
697:
696:
695:
694:
691:
687:
683:
681:
678:
673:
670:
668:
664:
660:
656:
652:
649:
648:
643:
640:
639:
634:
629:
625:
617:
616:
615:
614:
611:
608:
604:
601:
600:
591:
588:
583:
582:
581:
580:
577:
573:
568:
564:
563:
562:
561:
558:
555:
554:
549:
544:
540:
532:
531:
530:
529:
526:
523:
519:
516:
514:
511:
510:WarriorScribe
507:
504:
502:
498:
493:
489:
485:
482:
480:
477:
473:
470:
468:
465:
461:
458:
456:
453:
451:
447:
446:Diploma mills
443:
442:Speedy delete
440:
438:
435:
431:
428:
426:
423:
419:
416:
414:
411:
403:
388:
385:
384:
377:
374:
370:
369:
368:
365:
364:
359:
354:
350:
342:
338:
337:
336:
333:
329:
326:
325:
324:
323:
320:
319:
314:
309:
305:
297:
287:
284:
282:
277:
273:
272:
271:
268:
263:
259:
256:
255:
253:
252:
249:
248:
243:
238:
234:
226:
220:
219:
217:
216:contributions
213:
210:
207:
203:
199:
196:
193:
189:
185:
171:
167:
159:
155:
149:
143:
139:
133:
127:
123:
117:
113:
109:
107:
103:
97:
93:
92:
87:
83:
79:
78:
73:
70:
66:
65:
60:
57:
55:
54:
51:
49:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
1776:
1773:
1768:
1751:
1739:
1714:
1695:
1682:
1665:
1643:
1626:Further Note
1625:
1621:
1609:
1597:
1584:
1580:
1576:
1569:Evan Donovan
1564:
1549:
1545:
1537:
1533:
1521:
1508:Pierremenard
1492:Pierremenard
1472:
1465:Pierremenard
1460:
1446:
1434:
1418:
1282:
1207:
1202:
1190:
1173:
1161:
1154:Spondoolicks
1149:
1142:Hall Monitor
1133:
1121:
1109:
1097:
1073:
1069:
1051:
1045:
1033:
1021:
1009:
997:
985:
982:(added sig.)
972:
963:Spondoolicks
958:
933:
926:Justin Eiler
921:
907:
895:
883:
871:
859:
846:
833:
807:— Preceding
801:
789:
780:Pierremenard
749:
740:
736:
724:
712:
698:
685:
684:
671:
650:
636:
602:
551:
517:
505:
483:
474:per nom. --
471:
459:
441:
429:
417:
386:
361:
327:
316:
293:
261:
257:
245:
222:
214:). See his
208:
194:
181:
180:
169:
157:
148:sockpuppetry
141:
130:; suspected
125:
111:
99:
95:
89:
81:
75:
47:
43:
31:
28:
1754:per above.
1542:the ungodly
1398:some reason
1098:Strong Keep
1082:astronomers
1002:Shanedidona
986:Strong Keep
847:Strong Keep
790:Strong Keep
737:Strong keep
418:Strong keep
48:a.n.o.n.y.m
1719:Kurt Weber
1268:Sincerely,
672:Weak keep.
567:Astrokey44
492:Astrokey44
464:KrazyCaley
184:sockpuppet
82:discussion
1653:you know?
1649:Just zis
1630:Spawn Man
1598:Weak Keep
1406:you know?
1402:Just zis
1214:Cyde Weys
1203:ATTENTION
1150:Weak Keep
1086:astronomy
1014:Yonghokim
990:Amazon10x
938:Thesquire
860:Weak keep
754:Kerobaros
717:Tvaughn05
624:you know?
620:Just zis
539:you know?
535:Just zis
522:Logophile
488:1470 hits
349:you know?
345:Just zis
304:you know?
300:Just zis
233:you know?
229:Just zis
138:canvassed
132:canvassed
91:consensus
1756:Ashibaka
1730:Arbustoo
1705:Arbustoo
1687:Jim62sch
1679:Wiggins2
1439:Vizcarra
1195:Jim62sch
1193:per FM.
1036:per nom
947:contribs
888:Walkerma
876:kingboyk
821:contribs
809:unsigned
434:Blnguyen
258:Rebuttal
212:contribs
202:Wiggins2
198:contribs
170:username
164:{{subst:
158:username
152:{{subst:
142:username
136:{{subst:
126:username
120:{{subst:
1744:Alhutch
1577:Comment
1555:Andrewa
1534:Comment
1191:Delete.
1162:Delete.
1090:Andrewa
1052:ALKIVAR
959:Comment
922:Delete:
912:Gubbubu
699:Abstain
677:Rogue 9
450:Sycthos
328:Comment
281:Sycthos
276:WP:SOCK
134:users:
1752:Delete
1740:Delete
1614:Stifle
1526:Dbchip
1522:Delete
1499:Crunch
1477:Crunch
1461:Delete
1447:Delete
1227:Hello,
1138:WP:BIO
1110:Delete
1102:Hayson
1034:Delete
1026:Lerner
977:Wynler
934:Delete
872:Delete
825:Calton
813:Calton
802:Delete
776:WP:BIO
763:Calton
725:Delete
607:Alphax
587:Crunch
506:Delete
472:Delete
460:Delete
430:Delete
387:Delete
1728:And?
1590:rodii
1400:". -
1381:Itake
1114:rodii
1038:Grimm
900:Peyna
852:Itake
839:Ginar
112:Note:
16:<
1760:tock
1715:Keep
1667:AfD?
1651:Guy,
1622:Keep
1565:Keep
1473:Keep
1435:Keep
1420:AfD?
1404:Guy,
1182:Talk
1174:Keep
1134:Keep
1122:Keep
1070:Keep
1046:Keep
1022:Keep
1010:Keep
998:Keep
973:Keep
943:talk
908:keep
896:Keep
884:Keep
834:keep
817:talk
794:JJay
767:Talk
750:Keep
729:Deiz
713:Keep
686:Keep
665:···
663:Talk
657:···
653:per
651:Keep
638:AfD?
622:Guy,
603:Keep
572:talk
553:AfD?
537:Guy,
518:Keep
497:talk
484:Keep
363:AfD?
347:Guy,
343:. -
318:AfD?
302:Guy,
262:only
247:AfD?
231:Guy,
227:. -
206:talk
192:talk
1550:lot
1546:heh
1538:try
1488:10k
1451:MCB
741:you
659:rWd
490:--
401:493
200:),
186:of
166:csp
162:or
154:csm
122:spa
96:not
1644:am
1585:is
1581:is
1220:"
1184:)
1100:--
1074:or
945:-
819:•
765:|
661:·
409:lk
406:Ta
398:ns
395:yo
392:Dl
265:--
172:}}
160:}}
150::
144:}}
128:}}
118::
1699:(
1655:/
1408:/
1180:(
1057:™
949:)
941:(
815:(
626:/
570:|
541:/
495:|
351:/
306:/
235:/
209:·
204:(
195:·
190:(
174:.
168:|
156:|
140:|
124:|
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
