1814:
many business ventures, including the
Riviera Beach land investments. "They just grew up together," Richman said. Rosatti, too, declined to be interviewed for this story. And through his lawyer, Mike Burman, he denied being a member of the Mafia. "Mr. Rosatti has no idea why he was described as a career criminal and a Colombo soldier," Burman wrote in an e-mail. "He has no knowledge of why any individual . . . would make that kind of representation, except for their own self gain." Yet, previously unreleased details about Staluppi's history, and indirectly about Rosatti, came to light in 1992-93, courtesy of the Casino Control Commission. Staluppi appeared on the radar screen of casino authorities when his company, Dillinger Charter Services, applied for a license to shuttle casino patrons to and from New York City by helicopter. The license was denied on the basis of information that Staluppi was a member of the Colombo crime family, according to CCC records. Staluppi's name surfaced again a year later, this time as the CCC considered banning him for life from Boardwalk gambling joints. During that yearlong procedure, the CCC heard from law enforcement agents specializing in organized crime. One described how, in 1980, a Suffolk County undercover agent became Staluppi's limousine chauffeur and reported driving him to numerous meetings with high-ranking Colombo operatives, including then-boss Carmine "The Snake" Persico. The CCC also heard from an agent with the Jersey Division of Gambling Enforcement who obtained Staluppi's personal phone directory and appointment book. It contained the phone numbers of another onetime godfather, Victor "Little Vic" Orena, and of Colombo capos (or crew leaders) Theodore Persico Sr. and Pasquale Amato. The book showed Staluppi had been invited to the wedding of the daughter of another Colombo capo, Dominick "Donnie Shacks" Montemarano. Testifying in his defense, Staluppi admitted to meeting and knowing the Colombo leadership, but only in a business capacity. He told the CCC he sold cars to Orena, owned buildings with Carmine Persico's sons, bought carpets from Theodore Persico Sr. and was a close friend of Amato. But, Staluppi swore, he had no idea all were members of the Colombo family. "The Snake" Persico, Orena, Amato and Theodore Persico Sr. are serving life sentences in various federal lockups, while "Donnie Shacks" served 11 years for racketeering. Staluppi also brought his own set of character witnesses to the CCC. Among them was Palm Beach businessman and philanthropist Robert Cuillo, for whom West Palm Beach's Cuillo Centre for the Performing Arts is named. Cuillo appeared as a retired NYPD detective and a Florida car dealer who had done business with Staluppi. "John is a respectable businessman," he told the CCC, "and I think he is being stereotyped because he's Italian." In the end, the CCC denied the petition by the Division of Gaming Enforcement to ban Staluppi because there was "insufficient credible evidence" after FBI Special Agent Brian Taylor refused to reveal his sources. Then a strange thing happened: While the CCC was considering the ban on Staluppi, his name and that of his pal Rosatti popped up in FBI interviews of suspected mobsters. In the early 1990s, a war within the Colombo gang transformed Brooklyn into a battlefield. Eleven people, including an innocent bystander, were killed and 14 were injured. The gunplay between warring factions faithful to "The Snake" Persico and "Little Vic" Orena prompted the FBI to make a series of arrests. In transcripts of FBI interviews with some of those arrested and informants, no fewer than eight persons told the Feds on separate occasions that Staluppi and Rosatti participated in gang activities in one way or another. Several told the FBI that Staluppi and Rosatti sided with the Orena faction at first, then rejoined the Persico faction after Orena was arrested. In one of these interviews, Colombo enforcer Sal Miciotta, who was eventually sentenced to 14 years in prison, said in late 1993 that Rosatti had been asked by Orena to provide cars from his dealership to be used to carry out murders. Miciotta said Rosatti refused but gave Orena $ 50,000. Miciotta also told the Feds that Rosatti and Staluppi contributed another $ 50,000 for the legal defense of Orena and his lieutenant, Pasquale Amato, and that Staluppi lent his helicopter to high-ranking gangsters to attend a meeting in upstate New York. Another statement made by Colombo family accountant Kenneth Geller suggested that Staluppi and Rosatti were known to provide gangsters with "no-show" jobs in their dealerships - jobs for which gang members were paid $ 500 a week without working. Geller and his family are in a witness protection program. If there is anything Staluppi was ever guilty of, attorney Richman counters, it's growing up with people "who might otherwise have been investigated."
1756:
Christensen official said. Christensen
Shipyards Ltd. renowned for its composite hull yachts, has hired a New Zealand luxury boatmaker to engineer its newest generation of ships to be built at a new manufacturing plant in Tennessee. Joe Foggia, Christensen president and chief operating officer, considers High Modulus to be the best company in the world to design and engineer the hull and chemical makeup of the composite material to be used on the newest line of Christensen yachts, which will stretch from 165 feet to 225 feet in length and cost up to $ 80 million. Christensen will be working with High Modulus' office in Hamble, England. High Modulus produces several sailing and power boats and earned its reputation in working with composite material in the 1980s when it designed New Zealand's sailing boat that raced in the America's Cup. The partnership is a major step in Christensen's efforts to increase its European presence. The first push east came in 2006 when it cemented plans to build a $ 20 million complex in Vonore, Tenn., a hotbed of boatmakers 30 miles from Knoxville. The plant sits on 55 acres with 2,000 feet of waterfront access to a deep water lake that feeds into the Tennessee River. Foggia said work on the building is expected to end this month. It will take the rest of the year to build the tooling and molds needed for the new yachts. High Modulus' expertise is especially needed since the larger boats are regulated differently than the ships built in Vancouver. The Vancouver-built yachts weigh less than 500 gross tons and require fire retardation construction to be focused on the engine compartment, Foggia said. The Tennessee-built vessels will exceed that weight benchmark and require fire retardation design for the entire ship. The interiors of the bigger yachts will also increase. A 160-foot yacht has about 6,500 square feet of interior space. A 190-foot yacht has 13,000 square feet. Christensen already has an order for the first yacht to come from Tennessee. John Rosatti, who owns two Christensen yachts, wants a 186-foot model that is expected to be completed by 2011.
1761:
expects 100 to 150 people to be working at the facility within the next 18 months and up to 450 people within five years. Despite sagging consumer confidence and an economy some suspect is in the midst of a recession, Christensen operates in an industry that is somewhat bulletproof. Its
Vancouver plant builds ships that top out in size at 157 feet long. Foggia said companies that produce ships bigger than 130 feet long experience little trouble in attracting buyers. Those well-heeled consumers are flocking to Miami this week for the 20th annual Miami Yacht & Brokerage Show. Foggia, who is in the south Florida city, said Christensen has three of its yachts on display. The show is the ideal place for people to see the interior of the company's yachts and to get a sense of the craftsmanship. Foggia said that despite new hull engineering and slight alteration in styling, there will be no mistaking that the ships produced in Tennessee are Christensen yachts." Sorry, I forgot to sign this earlier. I underlined the interesting statement which is not qualified by the wrod alleged or similar.
1438:. Without the mafia sources, this article does not seem to be notable (hence the previous deletion). The crime sources do not seem to be BLP-worthy; the article seems to have overstated what sources have actually said about the subject. I'm particularly disturbed that the article cited the criminal appeal of third parties in order to implicate this individual in a crime he was apparently never even charged with. For future reference: criminal prosecutors and defendants often construct alternative and motives and theories for crimes, and courts must often evaluate these theories in discussing a case on appeal. That does not mean the theories have any basis in fact—juries do not typically return verdicts about background information like this. They only find whether
1865:. The harm in this case is not potential, it is actual. If you enter the subject's name in google right now, the second hit is the cached version of our article, stating confidently that the subject presently is a member of a crime family. One of the sources brought forth by those who added this information (underlined above) actually speaks of "past ties"; another, further below, describes organized crime figures demanding that the subject aid them in the perpetration of crimes, and the subject preferring to pay them money rather than doing so. For all I know, that may have been the only viable choice for him under the circumstances.
915:. I have no confidence that this article, if retained, has any chance now of a BLP-compliant existence in our project. The claims are out there on the web for those interested in them. Given the subject's marginal notability, we have more to lose than to gain by having an article on him. Lastly, the editors who are insistent on having these allegations in Knowledge should reflect on the fact that if they had included them in a responsible, BLP-compliant manner in the first place, i.e. as attributed allegations, they might well have prevented this AfD. --
1693:, and rightly so. The additional Village Voice article simply references the article that is being so hotly debated, so for that it comes down to whether an article that is written by a reliable source, but only uses sources we at Knowledge would deem unreliable (like witness statements before trial) can be considered. Other than that, we have established that he paid a really big fine. The nature of organized crime is such that it's difficult to get a conviction for it, and labeling someone with it prior to a conviction can be a very big deal.
1460:. For example, the criminal appeal of Louis Malpeso (cited here) is a primary source about Louis Malpeso. You could write "Malpeso's appeal was denied." They are not even primary sources for this subject. The facts about John Rosatti were not determined by a judge or jury. They are therefore dangerously irrelevant. Discussion of background information from third partys' cases should be given no WEIGHT because they are unpublished in the editorial sense.
1580:
the subject was one among many donors to the school.) The only real notability of the subject is the variously sourced claims that he is a member of an organized crime family. However, the author of the article strenuously objects to inclusion of that information in the article. Without it, the subject is simply another retired business person among tens of thousands of other retired business people, not notable in any way, and the article is up for
1082:. A single source stated it as fact, and the other sources stated it as what it was: an allegation. If you want to include the material, you can't argue about having it state the allegation as a fact, as you cannot argue that because source B cites source A, source A is right. You have to read the details, as it is quite clearly source B citing the statements made in source A as what they are: allegations. Nothing less than allegations, as we
964:, or to unnamed law enforcement officials. None except Bastone presented it as an unattributed fact. The subject has never been charged with respect to these allegations, and they have never been tested in court. BLP policy, quoted above, is clear: if damaging allegations are represented at all, the article should "state that the sources make certain 'allegations', with the Knowledge article taking no position on their truth." --
413:, a newpaper which won, inter alia, three Pulitzer Prizes and was widely respected for its investigative journalism, particularly regarding corruption and organized crime in New York, is somehow an unreliable source. That the quality of its journalism has declined over the last few years after corporate meddling doesn't magically render its previous decades of high-quality work worthless.
1791:
1633:: The infobox lists "world's fastest yacht" as what he is "known for". But that is questionable. In a Google search for "world's fastest yacht," Rosatti is not mentioned - at least not in the first two pages of ghits. A boat built by his company gets two mentions, or rather the same mention twice, but it does not name Rosatti. Further evidence of his lack of notability. --
438:: That POV seems to ignore the fact that newspapers, even the NYT, have to print retractions on a regular basis. Newspapers have printed things later shown to be false. They've been sued for libel and lost. Just saying that a paper is reputable doesn't mean everything they say about a person is correct. The NYT is "respected", but that didn't prevent
1899:
This article, as originally created, was deprecated as a puff piece, and deleted as such. It is presently an orphan; nothing else in namespace links to it. Given that
Knowledge has already done the subject harm, is currently doing him harm, that we can't ensure that this harm will not recur, and that
1835:
These are large businesses with a major presence. He's a significant businessman, both with respect to automobiles and boats. The place discuss the content is at the BLP noticeboard, but my view is that if he is in fact a convicted felon for crimes involving stealing automobiles, that part at least
1813:
Take John
Rosatti, for example. Also a local business stalwart and a convicted felon, Rosatti was found to be a "career offender" by the New Jersey Casino Control Commission, based in part on testimony that he was a "made member" of the Colombo family. Rosatti is Staluppi's best friend and partner in
1259:
I agree with your critique of past versions, especially in re making bald assertions, and if this is kept I will contribute to "getting it right". Also on the court documents issue (I don't like the policy, but I agree that you are reading it correctly). I think you can count on similar cooperation
746:
applies here, and it is doubtful whether the sources are good and frequent enough to justify inclusion of the allegations in this BLP. Yet if the article exists, it will always attract this content (see article history). Given the subject's marginal notability, and considering the possibility of harm
1552:
I am saying that you are attempting to erect new standards for verification that never previously existed, when no reasonable grounds exist to doubt the desire of the subject. Has there been any BLP subject outside the field of professional rap music who relished being the subject of allegations of
1344:
Perfectly true. One of the two users is Cool Hand Luke, a sitting arbitrator, who surely can think for himself, and the other, Durova, has let it be known that she has an interest in BLPs of this type. If you knew our history, you would also know that Durova and I have often disagreed, so I think it
1260:
from other editors here, and so I am more optimistic about "getting it right". I too have no agenda here except BLP, and my only concern is that certain editors (not you) are misusing it. In any event, I continue to think he is notable and am happy to contribute towards addressing other concerns.
1760:
Rosatti was also a previous co-owner of
Millennium Super Yachts. Foggia said Christensen, which employs 450 people at its Vancouver facilities, is fielding numerous calls about the bigger yachts, but said the company won't actively market the vessels until the Tennessee plant is operational. Foggia
1688:
and not include it in this BLP case unless it's unequivocal. I had looked over some of your other suggestions before nominating this, and honestly I think they fall short. If we wrote articles here with phrases like "authorities claim he has organized crime ties," "allegedl crime boss," and so on
1579:
The previous article was deleted as non-notable. The current article does not establish any greater notability than the deleted article. (Example: two sources are now cited for the supposedly huge donation by the subject to a school, but neither source verifies the claim; they simply establish that
1524:
When people begin citing court procedure on hearsay as if it applied to encyclopedia deletion discussions, something has gone off track. Articles have been deleted by this rationale without any formal requirement to email OTRS. This is someone who has had damaging allegations against him published
1108:
As the content is clearly controversial, not covered nationally by major publications, and accusatory in nature, mostly unproven allegations that could well be extremely damaging in nature to a living person we clearly need to take care with such content. You can't discuss citations out of context
48:. While an argument can be put forward that there are enough sources mentioning John Rosatti that he meets our notability guidelines even without the organized crime speculations, that notability is not sufficent to place Knowledge and the subject under risk of poorly introduced speculation. Under
1755:
I posted the extract of of the
Columbian reference at BLPN, but as you missed it, here is the full text: Nelson, Jonathan (14 February 2008). "Yachts built by Vancouver-based Christensen Shipyards Ltd. set sail. The downturn in the U.S. economy has had little impact on the luxury-boat industry, a
1702:
Notability can be established by as little as one source, if it covers the subject with sufficient depth. There is only one source - the
Bastone Village Voice article - which really covers the subject and implicates him with organized crime, rather than saying that it's a rumor or allegation. I
1197:
was about, and the BLP subject has never been indicted, as far as I can tell, in relation to this allegation. The convictions you refer to are outcomes of court actions mentioned in newspapers; those aspects seem less of a BLP problem. I have no agenda here except BLP, which applies to everyone,
1112:
appears to be a simple copy of a court record, there is no discussion, no analytic anything, it is a copy of a primary court report and imo unusable. If the article is kept then there are people that dispute the desired additions and people that want to include it, this will be discussed at more
485:
This comment is either deliberately misleading or the product of faulty reading ability. I'd like to think it's the latter, but given that the additional sources supporting the contention in question appear in the first screen of the BLPN discussion it's hard to give up on the former. There are
1856:
I agree that material on the two attested and reported convictions (punished by five years' and one year's probation respectively, according to sources cited) could be included, and agree that the present article hides this information. However, the way you have characterised the principle some
1395:
requested that it be salted (but not specifically deleted) vis-a-vis one of the editors participating in this debate, but not by any formal, verifiable means. I'm not familiar with how such a request is made offhand, but it would probably be appreciated by the subject if the relevant link were
276:
as per nominator. The subject is not notable, a car dealer who owns a a fast boat. The BLP discussion concerns allegations of the subject's links to organised crime. Statements about this side of subject's life have been removed from the article, along with citations. If left in they would
1525:
in major newspapers, yet has never been charged or given his day in court. It doesn't take much to see why he wouldn't want this, and outside our internal workings many people don't understand the OTRS system. We don't turn people away because they fail to fill out form 318A in triplicate.
1184:
source that states as an unattributed fact that the subject is a member of a crime family. The other sources say it is said or alleged, and they say who says or alleges it. Our article, on the other hand, followed
Bastone in making a bald statement of fact, and that is a problem per
470:
That is not the case at all, the fact that controversial content which has been cited to a single source and has been disputed is not a reflection on the overall reliability of the source but a isolated reflection on the single situation as regards specific controversial content.
959:
Jezhotwells, those are the other two or three sources I was referring to above, and they are represented in the diffs I posted. As far as I could see when I researched these secondary sources, they all attributed the allegation to someone: either to
Bastone in the
1614:
magazine). However, since all sources use some variant of "alleged" in describing his crime connection, the information is probably not solid enough to provide the basis for a Knowledge article. Thus, my vote that the subject should be deleted as non-notable.
500:
Please assume good faith Nomo, I will assure you, although I should not have to, my comment has no attempt to be deliberately misleading in any way and although you question the fact, I can read. This is AFD not the place to dispute the reliability of sources.
1334:
with a non-neutral messages "I have some BLP concerns; the subject is of marginal notability", "another one of those problem BLPs...Apparently, the subject has asked for it to be salted". This two editors have never been involved in this article before.
1442:(not third parties) are guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Therefore third-party background individuals should not be listed as mobsters in an online encyclopedia. I would also support salting with a requirement to DRV before re-creation.
1943:
these stories are all fabricated lies which has caused me to contact johns attorney . If these sources are used as reliable sources then wikipedian editors are supporting slander and defamation of character without proper research
1034:
You're simply wrong here. You've reached the point of arguing that all "public documents" are primary sources, and can't be used as sources, and that all court documents are primary sources, and can't be used as sources. From
1836:
can be mentioned. The original version of the article was unfairly negative, the present one hides sourced negative information. The principle of deleting an article because there is weakly sourced negative information that
1041:
Secondary sources are second-hand accounts, at least one step removed from an event. Secondary sources write about primary sources, often making analytic, synthetic, interpretive, explanatory, or evaluative claims about
1900:
the notability of the subject is not such that we owe the public an article on him, I still think delete and salt is a decent thing to do. But I respect your view, and accept that you may see the matter differently. --
1222:
10 years ago, when it was a nationally distributed newsweekly of great repute. One might as well argue that the work of noted scientist X is unreliable because the individual has since fallen victim to dementia.
1127:
Pulitzer-prize winning newspapers aren't "major"; secndary sources are primary, reporting felony/criminal convictions is accusatory, and on and on. The consensus at BLPN went against you. Stop making stuff up.
189:
1062:
that you can't admit that you're wrong. You keep citing a supposed court document that lists this man as having ties with the mob? Link to it specifically, but while you do this, make sure that you follow
1377:
My position on BLP is fairly well known. Unfortunately this comes at a particularly busy time regarding other commitments, so a quick question here: has the subject of this biography requested deletion?
392:
It wasn't mounted with a false premise - I fully support including the crime family sources, but consensus isn't leaning that way. My premise is that if the sources can't be included, he's not notable.--
224:, in which some editors strongly believe that the sources tying the subject to organized crime are insufficient and should not be included. Sans that portion of the subject's life, the article fails
1067:
to the letter. So far, we have had a single person make claims(Bas) and present them as facts, without citing any source that is verifiable. We then have had several other sources cite Bas, but,
90:
725:
of his being a big mob boss, which were imo poorly sourced comments which turned the article into an attack page, without this accusatory titillation the subject is not notable as a buisnessman.
1670:(Vancouver WA), February 14, 2008. Are we really going to continue to pretend that there are insufficient sources to write (in a measured, proper way) about this in an article on Rosatti?
1506:
Agreed, personal opinions on editors' trustworthiness and off wiki converstations have no place here. Either the subject has emailed the OTRS team or they have not. Any thing else is
1876:
Comment: Google's second hit now returns the bowdlerized version of this article - the puff piece without any criminal allegations, but also without anything that makes him notable. --
367:, with restoration of the crime family association passages. That issue was supported by perfectly respectable sources (newspapers in Philadelphia and Palm Beach, in addition to the
250:
1606:
Thanks to Nomoskedasticity for solid reporting here. It's clear that the sources establishing his notability as a figure in organized crime are far more numerous, and far more
751:, is just not worth our while. We should review the situation if more significant sources appear, e.g. mention of the allegations in several top-quality papers like the NYT. --
277:
perhaps establish some sort of notoriety or notability but at present there is only ownership of a car dealership and a boat and donations to a school. The article's creator
1861:
is an essay today, but BLP policy still requires us to consider the possibility of harm to a BLP subject. WP:BLP quotes Jimmy Wales advocating the Knowledge principle that
144:
1984:
183:
883:
In the laws of many countries, simply repeating the defamatory claims of another is illegal, and there are special protections for people who are not public figures.
1172:
is a free alternative paper; while it is an RS, its reliability is not on a par with that of a national newspaper that people pay money for. Bastone is known for
861:
Knowledge also contains biographies of people who, while notable enough for an entry, are not generally well known. In such cases, exercise restraint and include
149:
1014:, unless a reliable secondary source has already cited them." If you want to work in controversial BLPs, it would really make sense to read up on BLP policy. --
1044:
And that's exactly what we have here, an appeals court document reviewing primary source material (the trail transcript/record), therefore a secondary source.
1758:
Rosatti is a multimillionaire who owns several car dealerships on the East Coast, and is also known for his past ties to the Colombo Mafia family of New York.
589:
85:
1010:
public records that include personal details—such as date of birth, home value, traffic citations, vehicle registrations, and home or business addresses—or
937:
Other sources , the Palm Beach Post, Philadelphia Daily News, Village Voice, UPI, were introduced to support the allegations, but they were then removed by
1218:
The standard for measuring the reliability of the Village Voice here should be the quality and reputation at the time the relevant material was published,
677:
It is not a fact, it is a comment from you that alleges that you have communication from the article subject. It does raise the issue that you may have a
613:
to closing admin - The subject of the article in question has requested that in the case that this article is deleted, it be protected from recreation.
228:, because it's then just about a car salesman who owns a fast boat. In the interest of protecting the subject from these ongoing disputes, I recommend
988:
Those "court records" aren't primary sources. The testimony would be the primary source. The appeals court review of testimony is a secondary source.
486:
multiple reliable sources asserting a connection between Rosatti and the crime family. Why are people having a difficult time acknowledging this?
515:
That last point makes no sense to me. The reliability of the Voice was central to the BLP discussion, which is central to the deletion rationale.
315:
comments. As to the nominator's comment "but consensus isn't leaning that way" is not correct as a good look at the BLPN discussion will show.
1964:
OK, wait a minute here - Crackofdawn, aren't you the original author of the article? Are you now requesting that your article be deleted? --
307:
who has yet to post any convincing argumensts as to why VV, the Palm Beach Post and the Philadelphia Daily News are not RS. Likewise with
1198:
regardless of their perceived merits or failings. If we can't get the article of a marginally notable person right, then it should go. --
311:, who posts mysterious comments allegedly from the artcile subject. Let the subject post here, I feel that no weight should be given to
531:
This AFD stands alone, if people still have issues as regards the disputed content then this should be discussed at relevant locations.
1661:
904:
the Knowledge article states that the sources make certain "allegations", with the Knowledge article taking no position on their truth.
850:, has presented it as such. The other sources (and there are only two or three) mention it as an (attributed) allegation. Editors also
571:
375:
and it is disingenuous to delete the portions of the article that establish notability and then to claim that he is not notable.
1658:
117:
112:
1703:
think the question really is whether or not that single source covers the subject in sufficient depth to establish notability.--
2131:
2113:
2097:
2081:
2060:
2037:
2028:
1996:
1973:
1953:
1935:
1913:
1885:
1851:
1825:
1770:
1750:
1710:
1679:
1642:
1624:
1593:
1561:
1547:
1533:
1519:
1501:
1487:
1469:
1451:
1420:
1403:
1386:
1372:
1358:
1339:
1309:
1287:
1269:
1250:
1232:
1228:
1211:
1155:
1137:
1133:
1122:
1099:
1053:
1049:
1027:
997:
993:
977:
954:
928:
868:
Material from third-party primary sources should not be used unless it has first been published by a reliable secondary source.
804:
800:
790:
778:
774:
764:
734:
713:
690:
672:
647:
633:
604:
579:
554:
540:
524:
520:
510:
495:
480:
459:
422:
418:
399:
384:
359:
337:
324:
290:
265:
239:
121:
69:
17:
1657:, not (as far as I can tell) previously used in this article, that allege ties between Rosatti and the Colombo crime family:
1194:
1110:
1840:
be added is unreasonable and unencyclopedic. We have dealt successfully with much more difficult problems of the sort.
1492:
Please provide substantiation of a request from the subject. I am not at all convinced that such a request has been made.
204:
104:
171:
854:
Direct citation of such primary sources, if they have not first been published by a secondary source, is a violation of
1193:, such as a newspaper or book reporting on the trial; particularly as the specific allegation quoted was not what the
1142:
How about you stop making stuff up first? The consensus at BLPN did not go against him, 4 editors is not consensus.—
747:
to him, having the article and policing it to make sure it is at all times "written conservatively", as required by
1675:
1543:
1497:
1265:
1224:
1129:
1045:
989:
796:
770:
643:
600:
516:
491:
414:
380:
1610:, than the sources establishing his notability as a benign public figure (which amount to a couple of mentions in
221:
2146:
36:
2068:- Non-notable unless allegations are true, and there is no evidence of that, even so, we are not a rumor mill.—
2145:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
1465:
1447:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
409:. This AFD, like the bowdlerization of the underlying article, is based on the entirely false notion that the
165:
1162:
1538:
Are you saying (among other things) that you can't substantiate the claim that he has requested deletion?
652:
I'm simply notifying the admin of the fact - I'm not supporting or opposing the protection of the article.
2034:
1932:
769:
Exactly why do you think that a newsweekly which had won three Pulitzer Prizes wouldn't be "top-quality"?
575:
1166:
is a struggling tabloid that has won Pulitzers for its cartoons (1992) and editorial writing (1985). The
161:
2109:
2075:
2024:
1949:
1766:
1671:
1664:
1539:
1515:
1493:
1416:
1261:
1149:
1093:
950:
686:
639:
596:
550:
487:
455:
376:
320:
286:
638:
Unless there is an OTRS number associated with this request, X's comment here should be duly ignored.
108:
2105:
2012:
1945:
938:
299:: (change position) with the RS which clearly establish the crime links. I am having a very hard time
278:
232:
the entry until such time as there are sufficient, undisputed sources establishing his notability. --
1707:
1400:
1368:
1305:
1118:
821:
Editors have several times presented the subject's being a member of an organised-crime family as an
787:
730:
667:
628:
536:
506:
476:
396:
355:
261:
236:
1078:. Huge difference there. You're arguing to include poorly sourced material, in clear violation of
865:
material relevant to their notability, and omit information that is irrelevant to their notability.
211:
2124:
2089:
Borderline notability, problems with sourcing, and the subject has requested deletion. No brainer.
1821:
1461:
1443:
1036:
912:
709:
197:
100:
75:
1992:
1969:
1907:
1881:
1744:
1638:
1620:
1589:
1352:
1281:
1244:
1205:
1021:
971:
922:
758:
66:
2033:
Subsequently unblocked per Alison: "Editor has now unequivocally retracted their legal threats"
1983:
NOTE: The above comment by Crackofdawn about "contacting johns attorney" is under discussion at
1719:, this might be a more difficult decision; but an article by a tabloid journalist, printed in a
1684:
I'd like to see the Nexis source, but if it's not publicly accessible we should probably invoke
2090:
1666:, and one available only via Nexis: Jonathan Nelson, "Christensen, New Zealand firm OK deal",
1173:
847:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
1363:
Contacting a couple of experienced editors in the BLP field is not even close to canvassing.
880:
Material that may adversely affect a person's reputation should be treated with special care.
2070:
2020:
2016:
1785:
1762:
1690:
1511:
1412:
1144:
1088:
946:
945:, so the above assertation is plainly untrue as a reading of the article history will show.
682:
546:
451:
316:
282:
281:
claims a close association with the subject and is clearly only interested in a puff piece.
1704:
1397:
1364:
1301:
1114:
1059:
858:, the text of which I'll reproduce here with the relevant passages marked in bold italics:
837:
784:
726:
545:
Perhaps you should explain why you do not find the multiple sources reliable at BLPN then
532:
502:
472:
393:
351:
304:
257:
233:
177:
852:
cited court records directly to suggest the subject had asked for someone to be murdered.
2056:
1862:
1858:
1817:
1190:
705:
347:
53:
1988:
1965:
1924:
1902:
1877:
1847:
1739:
1726:
1721:
1685:
1634:
1616:
1585:
1347:
1276:
1239:
1200:
1186:
1168:
1083:
1079:
1016:
1003:
966:
917:
855:
842:
753:
748:
743:
678:
443:
410:
372:
300:
59:
49:
1607:
661:
622:
439:
229:
1584:
as a reposting without susbtantial improvement of a previously deleted article. --
138:
1928:
1555:
1527:
1481:
1479:
per the subject's request. X! is a trustworthy Wikipedian so I'll accept that.
1380:
1064:
447:
331:
225:
1237:
The Village Voice article is from 1998, the Philadelphia News one from 2004. --
1800:
1189:. So is accessing court records that have not previously been referenced in a
704:
With reliable sources mentioning organized crime links and criminal history.
2052:
1336:
1411:
asserts that the subject has contacted them off-wiki, with such a request.
783:
Perhaps the operative term is "several" in this case, not "top-quality."--
1842:
1729:, which demands corroboration by "multiple highly reliable sources". The
795:
Even if that's the issue, the Philadelphia Daily News has two Pulitzers.
1507:
1408:
655:
616:
312:
308:
1008:
Exercise great care in using primary sources. Do not use, for example,
901:(2) the allegations are relevant to the subject's notability and; (3)
1931:. If the businesses are notable they can have articles of their own.
1456:
To Hullaballoo Wolfowitz: court documents would be primary sources
1863:"Zero information is preferred to misleading or false information"
871:
Material published by the subject must be used with caution. (See
371:). This AfD has been mounted with a false premise; Rosatti meets
872:
2139:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
942:
886:
Any such potentially damaging information about a private person
721:
Without the recently added and removed criminal accusations and
1784:: This is copied from the BLP discussion (originally posted by
52:
we need to very careful and sure of controversial topics. Will
1329:
closing nominator please note, Jayen466 contacted two editors
1012:
trial transcripts and other court records or public documents
346:
To read the explanation of wikipedia salting please see..
220:
This article is currently the subject of a BLP discussion
1345:
is unlikely she would do me any personal favours here. --
1857:
editors seek to apply here does not quite hit the mark.
442:
from getting fabrications printed. The New Republic and
1332:
1330:
1109:
without the content you want to support, this citation
851:
834:
832:
830:
828:
826:
134:
130:
126:
329:"Hearsay"? This is an encyclopedia, not a courtroom.
196:
251:
list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions
91:
Articles for deletion/John Rosatti (2nd nomination)
911:On the subject of court records in BLPs, also cf.
898:corroborated by multiple, highly reliable sources;
2123:per strange attempts to remove reliable sources.
570:As per nominator, simply not notable (enough). --
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
2149:). No further edits should be made to this page.
1985:Knowledge:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents
859:
210:
8:
450:for story that was later shown to be a lie.
1458:when they are actually about the individual
1073:do not state what he has said as fact, but
2104:Yes i want the page deleted and protected
590:list of Crime-related deletion discussions
584:
245:
1792:"Is John Staluppi Saving Riviera Beach?"
1113:relevant places if the article is kept.
588:: This debate has been included in the
249:: This debate has been included in the
1300:No it didn't. We will see how it goes.
83:
1715:If it were an in-depth article in the
2015:has now been indefinitely blocked by
7:
407:Strong keep, restore deleted content
82:
348:Knowledge:SALT#Creation protection
86:Articles for deletion/John Rosatti
24:
1790:Lambiet, Jose (24 October 2004).
1737:reliable (see opinion at RSN). --
1391:The subject has, we are advised,
1725:, does not meet the standard of
446:? Hell, a Pulitzer was given to
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
1002:This is a verbatim quote from
1:
1799:Palm Beach Post, archived at
873:Using the subject as a source
702:Keep, restore deleted content
2132:15:10, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
2114:10:39, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
2098:06:10, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
2082:05:38, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
2061:19:49, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
2038:15:10, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
2029:03:55, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
1997:01:14, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
1974:16:05, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
1954:13:42, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
1936:20:48, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
1914:21:55, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
1886:03:16, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
1852:16:53, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
1826:16:00, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
1804:. The Palm Beach Newspapers
1771:16:48, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
1751:16:38, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
1711:15:06, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
1680:12:19, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
1643:04:31, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
1625:17:05, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
1594:05:39, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
1562:20:42, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
1548:17:33, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
1534:17:15, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
1520:10:33, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
1502:08:02, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
1488:02:06, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
1470:00:48, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
1452:00:38, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
1421:00:03, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
1404:23:26, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
1387:22:53, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
1373:22:01, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
1359:18:27, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
1340:18:09, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
1310:15:52, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
1288:18:29, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
1270:17:59, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
1251:18:29, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
1233:18:07, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
1212:17:18, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
1156:05:38, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
1138:15:48, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
1123:11:24, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
1100:05:38, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
1058:No, you're so caught up in
1054:00:35, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
1028:00:10, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
998:23:44, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
978:09:41, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
955:04:23, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
929:23:35, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
805:20:51, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
791:20:35, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
779:20:08, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
765:18:28, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
735:17:17, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
714:10:29, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
691:04:27, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
673:00:22, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
648:09:26, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
634:00:01, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
605:21:33, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
580:18:42, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
555:01:57, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
541:19:47, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
525:19:23, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
511:19:01, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
496:18:30, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
481:18:20, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
460:18:29, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
423:17:04, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
400:17:02, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
385:16:44, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
360:16:13, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
338:17:18, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
325:01:54, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
291:16:06, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
266:16:01, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
240:15:45, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
70:16:01, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
2166:
840:, who has since left the
2142:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
1795:(Subscription required)
1174:tabloid-style reporting
1163:Philadelphia Daily News
1553:organized crime ties?
908:
81:AfDs for this article:
1225:Hullaballoo Wolfowitz
1176:. His writing in the
1130:Hullaballoo Wolfowitz
1046:Hullaballoo Wolfowitz
990:Hullaballoo Wolfowitz
797:Hullaballoo Wolfowitz
771:Hullaballoo Wolfowitz
517:Hullaballoo Wolfowitz
415:Hullaballoo Wolfowitz
1084:are not a rumor mill
681:with this, however.
1393:made such a request
836:. Only one source,
301:assuming good faith
1782:additional sources
1689:they'd be branded
1655:additional sources
1604:Additional comment
44:The result was
1788:for convenience:
1180:is presently the
848:TheSmokingGun.com
671:
632:
607:
593:
268:
254:
2157:
2144:
2129:
2095:
2094:
2078:
2073:
2017:User:Tanthalas39
2013:User:Crackofdawn
1910:
1905:
1816:
1810:
1809:
1796:
1786:user:Jezhotwells
1747:
1742:
1672:Nomoskedasticity
1631:One more comment
1560:
1558:
1540:Nomoskedasticity
1532:
1530:
1494:Nomoskedasticity
1486:
1484:
1385:
1383:
1355:
1350:
1284:
1279:
1262:Nomoskedasticity
1247:
1242:
1208:
1203:
1191:secondary source
1152:
1147:
1096:
1091:
1024:
1019:
974:
969:
939:User:Crackofdawn
925:
920:
823:established fact
761:
756:
664:
658:
653:
640:Nomoskedasticity
625:
619:
614:
597:Nomoskedasticity
594:
488:Nomoskedasticity
377:Nomoskedasticity
336:
334:
279:User:Crackofdawn
274:Delete and salt'
255:
215:
214:
200:
152:
142:
124:
68:
62:
34:
2165:
2164:
2160:
2159:
2158:
2156:
2155:
2154:
2153:
2147:deletion review
2140:
2125:
2092:
2091:
2076:
2071:
2066:Delete and salt
1908:
1903:
1807:
1805:
1794:
1789:
1745:
1740:
1582:speedy deletion
1556:
1554:
1528:
1526:
1482:
1480:
1381:
1379:
1353:
1348:
1282:
1277:
1245:
1240:
1206:
1201:
1150:
1145:
1094:
1089:
1022:
1017:
972:
967:
923:
918:
838:William Bastone
825:in the article
759:
754:
740:Delete and salt
662:
656:
623:
617:
332:
330:
157:
148:
115:
99:
96:
79:
60:
57:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
2163:
2161:
2152:
2151:
2135:
2134:
2117:
2116:
2101:
2100:
2084:
2063:
2046:
2045:
2044:
2043:
2042:
2041:
2040:
2001:
2000:
1981:
1980:
1979:
1978:
1977:
1957:
1956:
1938:
1918:
1917:
1916:
1894:
1893:
1892:
1891:
1890:
1889:
1869:
1868:
1867:
1866:
1829:
1828:
1778:
1777:
1776:
1775:
1774:
1773:
1753:
1717:New York Times
1697:
1696:
1695:
1694:
1651:
1650:
1649:
1648:
1647:
1646:
1598:
1597:
1574:
1573:
1572:
1571:
1570:
1569:
1568:
1567:
1566:
1565:
1564:
1474:
1473:
1472:
1433:
1432:
1431:
1430:
1429:
1428:
1427:
1426:
1425:
1424:
1423:
1323:
1322:
1321:
1320:
1319:
1318:
1317:
1316:
1315:
1314:
1313:
1312:
1298:
1297:
1296:
1295:
1294:
1293:
1292:
1291:
1290:
1257:
1256:
1255:
1254:
1253:
1158:
1106:
1105:
1104:
1103:
1102:
986:
985:
984:
983:
982:
981:
980:
909:
892:if and only if
877:
876:
814:
813:
812:
811:
810:
809:
808:
807:
737:
716:
699:
698:
697:
696:
695:
694:
693:
608:
582:
564:
563:
562:
561:
560:
559:
558:
557:
529:
528:
527:
468:
467:
466:
465:
464:
463:
462:
426:
425:
404:
403:
402:
362:
344:
343:
342:
341:
340:
269:
218:
217:
154:
150:AfD statistics
95:
94:
93:
88:
80:
78:
73:
56:as requested.
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
2162:
2150:
2148:
2143:
2137:
2136:
2133:
2130:
2128:
2122:
2119:
2118:
2115:
2111:
2107:
2103:
2102:
2099:
2096:
2088:
2085:
2083:
2080:
2079:
2074:
2067:
2064:
2062:
2058:
2054:
2050:
2047:
2039:
2036:
2032:
2031:
2030:
2026:
2022:
2018:
2014:
2010:
2007:
2006:
2005:
2004:
2003:
2002:
1998:
1994:
1990:
1986:
1982:
1975:
1971:
1967:
1963:
1962:
1961:
1960:
1959:
1958:
1955:
1951:
1947:
1942:
1939:
1937:
1934:
1930:
1926:
1922:
1919:
1915:
1912:
1911:
1906:
1898:
1897:
1896:
1895:
1887:
1883:
1879:
1875:
1874:
1873:
1872:
1871:
1870:
1864:
1860:
1855:
1854:
1853:
1849:
1845:
1844:
1839:
1834:
1831:
1830:
1827:
1823:
1819:
1815:
1803:
1802:
1793:
1787:
1783:
1780:
1779:
1772:
1768:
1764:
1759:
1754:
1752:
1749:
1748:
1743:
1736:
1732:
1731:Village Voice
1728:
1724:
1723:
1718:
1714:
1713:
1712:
1709:
1706:
1701:
1700:
1699:
1698:
1692:
1687:
1683:
1682:
1681:
1677:
1673:
1669:
1668:The Columbian
1665:
1662:
1659:
1656:
1653:
1652:
1644:
1640:
1636:
1632:
1629:
1628:
1626:
1622:
1618:
1613:
1609:
1605:
1602:
1601:
1600:
1599:
1595:
1591:
1587:
1583:
1578:
1575:
1563:
1559:
1551:
1550:
1549:
1545:
1541:
1537:
1536:
1535:
1531:
1523:
1522:
1521:
1517:
1513:
1509:
1505:
1504:
1503:
1499:
1495:
1491:
1490:
1489:
1485:
1478:
1475:
1471:
1468:
1467:
1463:
1459:
1455:
1454:
1453:
1450:
1449:
1445:
1441:
1437:
1434:
1422:
1418:
1414:
1410:
1407:
1406:
1405:
1402:
1399:
1394:
1390:
1389:
1388:
1384:
1376:
1375:
1374:
1370:
1366:
1362:
1361:
1360:
1357:
1356:
1351:
1343:
1342:
1341:
1338:
1333:
1331:
1328:
1325:
1324:
1311:
1307:
1303:
1299:
1289:
1286:
1285:
1280:
1273:
1272:
1271:
1267:
1263:
1258:
1252:
1249:
1248:
1243:
1236:
1235:
1234:
1230:
1226:
1221:
1217:
1216:
1215:
1214:
1213:
1210:
1209:
1204:
1196:
1192:
1188:
1183:
1179:
1178:Village Voice
1175:
1171:
1170:
1169:Village Voice
1165:
1164:
1159:
1157:
1154:
1153:
1148:
1141:
1140:
1139:
1135:
1131:
1126:
1125:
1124:
1120:
1116:
1111:
1107:
1101:
1098:
1097:
1092:
1085:
1081:
1077:
1076:
1075:an allegation
1070:
1066:
1061:
1057:
1056:
1055:
1051:
1047:
1043:
1038:
1033:
1032:
1031:
1030:
1029:
1026:
1025:
1020:
1013:
1009:
1005:
1001:
1000:
999:
995:
991:
987:
979:
976:
975:
970:
963:
962:Village Voice
958:
957:
956:
952:
948:
944:
940:
936:
935:
934:
933:
932:
931:
930:
927:
926:
921:
914:
910:
907:
906:
905:
900:
899:
894:
893:
889:may be cited
888:
887:
882:
881:
874:
870:
869:
864:
857:
853:
849:
846:and now runs
845:
844:
843:Village Voice
839:
835:
833:
831:
829:
827:
824:
820:
819:
818:
817:
816:
815:
806:
802:
798:
794:
793:
792:
789:
786:
782:
781:
780:
776:
772:
768:
767:
766:
763:
762:
757:
750:
745:
741:
738:
736:
732:
728:
724:
720:
717:
715:
711:
707:
703:
700:
692:
688:
684:
680:
676:
675:
674:
669:
665:
659:
651:
650:
649:
645:
641:
637:
636:
635:
630:
626:
620:
612:
609:
606:
602:
598:
591:
587:
583:
581:
577:
573:
569:
568:Strong delete
566:
565:
556:
552:
548:
544:
543:
542:
538:
534:
530:
526:
522:
518:
514:
513:
512:
508:
504:
499:
498:
497:
493:
489:
484:
483:
482:
478:
474:
469:
461:
457:
453:
449:
445:
444:Stephen Glass
441:
437:
434:
433:
432:
431:
430:
429:
428:
427:
424:
420:
416:
412:
411:Village Voice
408:
405:
401:
398:
395:
391:
388:
387:
386:
382:
378:
374:
370:
369:Village Voice
366:
363:
361:
357:
353:
349:
345:
339:
335:
328:
327:
326:
322:
318:
314:
310:
306:
302:
298:
295:
294:
293:
292:
288:
284:
280:
275:
270:
267:
263:
259:
252:
248:
244:
243:
242:
241:
238:
235:
231:
227:
223:
213:
209:
206:
203:
199:
195:
191:
188:
185:
182:
179:
176:
173:
170:
167:
163:
160:
159:Find sources:
155:
151:
146:
140:
136:
132:
128:
123:
119:
114:
110:
106:
102:
98:
97:
92:
89:
87:
84:
77:
74:
72:
71:
67:
64:
63:
55:
51:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
2141:
2138:
2126:
2120:
2086:
2069:
2065:
2048:
2035:Orderinchaos
2008:
1940:
1933:Orderinchaos
1920:
1901:
1841:
1837:
1832:
1812:
1806:. Retrieved
1798:
1781:
1757:
1738:
1734:
1730:
1722:free tabloid
1720:
1716:
1691:weasel words
1667:
1654:
1630:
1611:
1603:
1581:
1576:
1476:
1464:
1457:
1446:
1439:
1435:
1392:
1346:
1326:
1275:
1238:
1219:
1199:
1181:
1177:
1167:
1161:
1143:
1087:
1074:
1072:
1068:
1040:
1037:WP:SECONDARY
1015:
1011:
1007:
965:
961:
916:
913:WP:WELLKNOWN
903:
902:
897:
896:
895:: (1) it is
891:
890:
885:
884:
879:
878:
867:
866:
862:
860:
841:
822:
752:
739:
722:
718:
701:
610:
585:
572:80.192.1.168
567:
440:Jayson Blair
435:
406:
389:
368:
364:
303:with editor
296:
273:
272:
246:
219:
207:
201:
193:
186:
180:
174:
168:
158:
101:John Rosatti
76:John Rosatti
58:
45:
43:
31:
28:
2106:Crackofdawn
2051:per DGG. --
2021:Jezhotwells
1946:Crackofdawn
1763:Jezhotwells
1512:Jezhotwells
1413:Jezhotwells
947:Jezhotwells
683:Jezhotwells
547:Jezhotwells
452:Niteshift36
448:Janet Cooke
317:Jezhotwells
283:Jezhotwells
184:free images
1808:2009-12-31
1801:LexisNexis
1440:defendants
1365:Off2riorob
1327:Canvassing
1302:Off2riorob
1274:Thanks. --
1115:Off2riorob
1069:guess what
727:Off2riorob
533:Off2riorob
503:Off2riorob
473:Off2riorob
352:Off2riorob
305:Off2riorob
258:Off2riorob
226:notability
1818:Marokwitz
1627:MelanieN
1608:important
1462:Cool Hand
1444:Cool Hand
1396:posted.--
875:, above.)
742:per nom.
706:Marokwitz
1999:MelanieN
1989:MelanieN
1976:MelanieN
1966:MelanieN
1888:MelanieN
1878:MelanieN
1645:MelanieN
1635:MelanieN
1617:MelanieN
1612:Yachting
1596:MelanieN
1586:MelanieN
145:View log
61:SilkTork
2093:AniMate
2009:Comment
1859:WP:HARM
1733:is not
1508:hearsay
1409:User:X!
1071:, they
723:rumours
611:Comment
436:Comment
390:Comment
313:hearsay
309:User:X!
230:salting
190:WP refs
178:scholar
118:protect
113:history
54:WP:SALT
2127:Şłџğģő
2087:Delete
1941:Delete
1925:WP:BLP
1921:Delete
1735:highly
1727:WP:NPF
1705:otherl
1686:WP:IAR
1577:Delete
1557:Durova
1529:Durova
1483:Durova
1477:Delete
1436:Delete
1398:otherl
1382:Durova
1187:WP:NPF
1080:WP:BLP
1004:WP:BLP
856:WP:NPF
785:otherl
749:WP:BLP
744:WP:NPF
719:Delete
679:WP:COI
394:otherl
373:WP:BIO
333:Durova
234:otherl
162:Google
122:delete
50:WP:BLP
46:delete
2077:dαlus
1848:talk
1838:could
1151:dαlus
1095:dαlus
1060:truth
1042:them.
666:) ·
627:) ·
205:JSTOR
166:books
139:views
131:watch
127:links
16:<
2121:Keep
2110:talk
2057:talk
2053:John
2049:Keep
2025:talk
1993:talk
1987:. --
1970:talk
1950:talk
1929:WP:N
1923:per
1882:talk
1833:Keep
1822:talk
1767:talk
1708:left
1676:talk
1639:talk
1621:talk
1590:talk
1544:talk
1516:talk
1498:talk
1466:Luke
1448:Luke
1417:talk
1401:left
1369:talk
1337:Ikip
1306:talk
1266:talk
1229:talk
1195:case
1182:only
1160:The
1134:talk
1119:talk
1065:WP:V
1050:talk
994:talk
951:talk
941:and
863:only
801:talk
788:left
775:talk
731:talk
710:talk
687:talk
668:@057
663:talk
644:talk
629:@043
624:talk
601:talk
586:Note
576:talk
551:talk
537:talk
521:talk
507:talk
492:talk
477:talk
456:talk
419:talk
397:left
381:talk
365:Keep
356:talk
321:talk
297:Keep
287:talk
262:talk
247:Note
237:left
222:here
198:FENS
172:news
135:logs
109:talk
105:edit
1909:466
1843:DGG
1746:466
1354:466
1283:466
1246:466
1207:466
1086:.—
1023:466
1006:: "
973:466
924:466
760:466
212:TWL
147:•
143:– (
2112:)
2072:Dæ
2059:)
2027:)
2019:.
2011::
1995:)
1972:)
1952:)
1927:,
1904:JN
1884:)
1850:)
1824:)
1811:.
1797:.
1769:)
1741:JN
1678:)
1663:,
1660:,
1641:)
1623:)
1615:--
1592:)
1546:)
1518:)
1510:.
1500:)
1419:)
1371:)
1349:JN
1308:)
1278:JN
1268:)
1241:JN
1231:)
1220:20
1202:JN
1146:Dæ
1136:)
1121:)
1090:Dæ
1052:)
1039::
1018:JN
996:)
968:JN
953:)
943:X!
919:JN
803:)
777:)
755:JN
733:)
712:)
689:)
670:·
660:·
657:X!
646:)
631:·
621:·
618:X!
603:)
592:.
578:)
553:)
539:)
523:)
509:)
494:)
479:)
458:)
421:)
383:)
358:)
350:.
323:)
289:)
264:)
253:.
192:)
137:|
133:|
129:|
125:|
120:|
116:|
111:|
107:|
2108:(
2055:(
2023:(
1991:(
1968:(
1948:(
1880:(
1846:(
1820:(
1765:(
1674:(
1637:(
1619:(
1588:(
1542:(
1514:(
1496:(
1415:(
1367:(
1304:(
1264:(
1227:(
1132:(
1117:(
1048:(
992:(
949:(
799:(
773:(
729:(
708:(
685:(
654:(
642:(
615:(
599:(
595:—
574:(
549:(
535:(
519:(
505:(
490:(
475:(
454:(
417:(
379:(
354:(
319:(
285:(
271:'
260:(
256:—
216:)
208:·
202:·
194:·
187:·
181:·
175:·
169:·
164:(
156:(
153:)
141:)
103:(
65:*
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.