1420:. That rule specifies that a rule may be ignored if it is necessary for improving or maintaining Knowledge (XXG). Thus, one may ignore the letter of a rule, to adhere to another and more fundamental principle of Knowledge (XXG). But in this case, I don´t think we have seen which fundamental principle ignoring the rules of notability would favor. IAR is not a carte blanche card to ignore all rules simply because it´s cool, nice or may be good PR for Knowledge (XXG). The background here is also that we have people on Knowledge (XXG) each day who are frustrated because their favorite, cool person or thing is not considered notable. In this respect, this case may be a test on whether the community is able to hold Knowledge (XXG) related articles to the same standard that we normally hold articles on other topics. Kind regards,
1391:, coverage seems to be multiple, independent articles and interviews, rather than say one AP/UPI article regurgitated endlessly. I think he has become a sort of second face of Knowledge (XXG) to the world now. BLP1E doesnt have to apply, as some 1E's are rather big. this is not that big, but is enough. 2 more reasons: he appears to be locally famous in his home state, and as an IAR, his public image and accomplishment may attract more editors, while us deleting his article for borderline reasons may discourage new editors unfamiliar with the arcana of notability, but disappointed we cannot honor our heroes in this small manner.
60:, but that too is a weak argument in light of that policy's wording, which is: "If a rule prevents you from improving or maintaining Knowledge (XXG), ignore it." It is not apparent to me (and the people making this argument would have had to show) how exactly the rule that we don't cover people known only for one event would in this instance prevent us from improving or maintaining Knowledge (XXG). A clear rationale for why IAR should apply would have been necessary particularly because the policy whose derogation is being advocated, BLP1E, is part of one of Knowledge (XXG)'s core policies,
1283:. There is an absolute tonne of coverage here, and some of it goes beyond *just* being about his 1 million edits - a lot of interviews with him, the Justin Knapp day started by Jimbo is also sort-of its own event as well. International coverage as well. Ironically, Knowledge (XXG) editors seem to be very active at trying to delete their fellow Wikipedians' articles - I've seen a couple of these sorts of AfDs, one of which was blatantly notable outside of the Wiki.
1185:
1416:, where I think that information is meaningful. If the Justin Knapp article is deleted, we could add a few biographical notes, but I don´t think we should expand the history article more than that. I am not familiar with the merging concept, so I don´t know if such a brief mentions counts as merging? As for
1521:
If I understand correctly, you're proposing that Justin Knapp Day and Justin Knapp's one-millionth edit are completely unrelated events, and you believe that they're both notable events which make the individual notable? These convoluted arguments for inclusion (BLP2E, BLP3E, IAR) are really just a
1625:
The nomination does not show that WP:BEFORE has been followed, or the applicability of WP:BLP1E except that the person is living. The claim that applicability is "clear" without defining the "event" creates confusion. Without evidence to the contrary, we WP:AGF of the editors who did the work of
1544:
Rubbish. Kindly explain to me how they have to be completely and utterly unrelated to be separate events? I'll give you an example, a professional athlete appearing in two matches, one of which was a qualifier, the other of which was a heat. Knapp's 1 million edits are blatantly notable, and pass
1730:
The long list of sources at the top of this page is not persuasive to me, because I see only a few that could perhaps establish notability. We routinely delete articles about subjects that have gotten much more attention than that. The first article you mention is the one from the BBC, but that
1549:
by a million miles. And the Justin Knapp Day is almost as well covered. The events are related, but no more so than a lot of others. And I'd never heard of this guy before the AfD, and think the article itself needs improving. But he's notable, for two events that pass GNG.
1643:, unless someone can persuade me that he has received serious press attention. What I'm seeing is some very limited and ephemeral attention. Most of the attention appears to be from blog-ish sources, and I don't feel that is sufficient to establish notability.
435:
395:
1459:
All of the references are from between April 19 and April 23, 2012. It's one event. He hasn't received any significant coverage in reliable sources, since then, demonstrating that the event did not have any lasting impact. Finally, I point out that
1247:
The UN website is a primary source, and Koavf is a low-profile individual outside of
Knowledge (XXG). If his speech at the UN had been notable it would have been covered in independent sources. Lasting impact is required to distinguish between
243:. It´s one event, and kind of too trivial to be notable. Mentioning the "Special Barnstar medal" and the "Golden Wiki" in the article appears very Wiki-internal and just strenghten the feeling of trivia. With regards
1047:
not only because I may brag for having the idea to create the article in the first place ;-) but also because I think we shouldn't be too strict in applying the rules; I definitely agree with J04n in this case :-)
181:
1494:
were May 2012. I stand by my point that it's almost certainly 2 events - the
Wikipedian Day, and the edit total. The UN speech, although minor, should in itself tip this into being more than a single event.
365:
872:
Someone mind deleting that cut-and-paste move? Obviously Koavf can have the page userfied if it gets deleted, but there's no sense in having an out-of-date copy lying around, especially when it's
954:, he is a low profile individual only covered by the media because he reached 1,000,000 edits, and let's not compare the significance of reaching 1,000,000 Knowledge (XXG) edits to the murder of
1340:
has no bearing here at all. The article is pretty awful and there's little, if any, room for expansion. Probably best deleted, but there's a possibility of merging this into one of the trillion
785:
While I feel that the delete arguments are significantly stronger, I'm not ... quite ... convinced there's a policy-based consensus given the keep rationales and the lack of any discussion of
1252:
and encyclopedic topics. I don't think that an individual reaching the one-million-edit mark is a significant event: it was bound to happen eventually. Is this more notable that the
906:
If it gets deleted (and it appears that it won't for now), then please use the actual move function immediately prior to that in order to save the edit history. Thanks one and all. —
134:
1163:. The UN speaking gig didn't attract any coverage in reliable sources, and there's no indication (and it seems unlikely) that his editing milestone will have any lasting impact.
1464:
suggests that the normal way of dealing with these articles is to merge the biographical information into the article about the event. What would we even title that article?
475:
713:
693:
175:
733:
1791:. Exceeding an arbitrary edit count isn't really a notable event. Most of the sources focus on Knowledge (XXG), rather than a biographical account of Knapp.
355:
522:
515:
480:
141:
1218:
individuals – does Koavf count as low-key? Also there's no need for "any lasting impact". What we have now (more than 40 rses) is already enough.
400:
1492:
495:
1588:. Writing a biography of a person who was only involved in a non-notable event (or even several non-notable events) is a violation of both
1437:- Surely BLP1E *doesn't* apply as he's notable for his Wiki day in addition to the number of edits? They're linked, but still separate.
1596:. If the event or events he was involved in were notable then we should have articles about the events and include Knapp's info there.
1486:
I'm pretty sure that the dates of the references are irrelevant - you can have two different events on the same day, for goodness sake.
525:
632:
380:
17:
1490:
528:
510:
1659:
531:
107:
102:
593:
known only for one event has his own article -- thanks to evidently strong and overwhelming coverage, very much like this case.
336:
280:, to delete or redirect. Sorry for the back and forth, I am not so familiar with considering other options than delete or keep.
111:
385:
375:
410:
196:
470:
94:
1409:
640:
340:
163:
519:
1821:
40:
1720:
1237:
1204:
1120:
1034:
1001:
924:
859:
829:
655:
605:
564:
485:
808:
366:"First man hits a MILLION Knowledge (XXG) edits—beating rivals in secretive clan of writers who control encyclopedia"
390:
490:
430:
1631:
1396:
1141:
1249:
212:
With all respect to Justin Knapp, who is an excellent
Wikipedian, I believe that this is a pretty clear case of
1731:
article only mentions the subject as part of a list of
Wikipedians—he's clearly not the focus of the article.
1581:
157:
885:
541:
928:
892:
833:
56:
are convincing, and have not been substantively rebutted. Several people advocate retention on the basis of
1413:
1345:
873:
265:
1706:
1677:
1223:
1190:
1106:
1022:
989:
848:
644:
594:
553:
307:
614:
456:
446:
153:
1817:
1802:
1779:
1740:
1725:
1652:
1635:
1605:
1567:
1562:
1535:
1512:
1507:
1473:
1454:
1449:
1429:
1400:
1379:
1375:
1357:
1324:
1300:
1295:
1265:
1242:
1209:
1172:
1145:
1125:
1098:
1085:
1061:
1039:
1006:
977:
933:
894:
863:
838:
795:
772:
745:
725:
705:
684:
659:
626:
622:
609:
585:
581:
568:
311:
289:
252:
225:
221:
76:
36:
1797:
1665:
1627:
1392:
1137:
793:
770:
1523:
1487:
546:
500:
203:
1736:
1648:
1551:
1496:
1438:
1353:
1284:
189:
1071:
756:
360:
1425:
1054:
880:
590:
476:"Desempregado americano é o maior editor da Knowledge (XXG) no mundo -- e não ganha para isso 15"
350:
344:
285:
273:
248:
1788:
1753:
1589:
1461:
1219:
1160:
951:
576:
Still, it's pretty clearly a case of BLP1E--even if 40 papers did publish a story on the event.
213:
53:
741:
721:
701:
680:
461:
303:
98:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
1816:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
370:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
1601:
1531:
1469:
1371:
1261:
1168:
618:
577:
505:
217:
1593:
1585:
1577:
1546:
1417:
1337:
1280:
963:
786:
636:
332:
320:
61:
57:
1792:
1320:
1014:
920:
825:
790:
767:
169:
1412:. I inserted one sentence about the 1 million milestone in the Knowledge (XXG) history,
986:
966:! Come on, we're Knowledge (XXG), he's the first to reach 1,000,000, leave the page. :)
420:
52:. With all respect to Mr. Knapp's accomplishments, the arguments that this is a case of
1732:
1701:
1644:
1349:
972:
67:
1094:
More policy based arguments please, IAR and creating the article aren't policy based.
401:"Seven Years, One Million Edits, Zero Dollars: Knowledge (XXG)’s Flat Broke Superstar"
1764:
1421:
1050:
281:
269:
244:
1253:
1309:
737:
717:
697:
676:
542:"Orwell, Guthrie, and No Sleep: How Knowledge (XXG)'s MVP Got to One Million Edits"
405:
90:
82:
1341:
552:
That said, you can't just simply ignore the staggering coverage, can you? Cheers,
128:
1366:
Yes, if we're going to IAR, we should create articles on everyone else mentioned
1597:
1527:
1465:
1257:
1164:
1095:
1082:
955:
451:
1367:
536:
1683:
1671:
1315:
950:
There is absolutely no policy-based argument to keep this page. It is clearly
907:
812:
496:"11 Questions With the First Person to Make One Million Knowledge (XXG) Edits"
425:
361:"Hardest working man on the internet passes one million Knowledge (XXG) edits"
1074:
to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
759:
to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
1689:
968:
415:
1584:: Knowledge (XXG) is not news. This event has no enduring notability, per
1757:
1695:
985:
apparently the handle "koavf" isn't only reserved for
Knowledge (XXG).
466:
516:"Week in Wiki out: Hoosier is top contributor to online encyclopedia"
1308:
per J04n, and because the subject apparently shares a birthday with
341:"Guy Becomes First Person to Make One Million Knowledge (XXG) Edits"
421:"Man earns online holiday with one million Knowledge (XXG) edits"
1810:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
537:"Knowledge (XXG): Meet the men and women who write the articles"
617:
is strongly deprecated as an argument in deletion discussions.
486:"Meet Justin Knapp, the hardest working man on Knowledge (XXG)"
426:"Un américain apporte un million de corrections au Wikipédia"
1657:
You are talking about some forty over sources citing Koavf.
452:"Người thực hiện 1 triệu lượt biên tập trên Knowledge (XXG)"
481:"Knowledge (XXG) : l'homme qui valait un million "d'edits""
1526:
arguments. This article is news at best, trivia at worst.
962:
for the first time in a deletion discussion I am invoking
462:"Knowledge (XXG) Volunteer Editor Reaches 1 Million Edits"
416:"Daily Roundup: Knowledge (XXG) Reaches One Million Edits"
376:"Justin Knapp: One man, one million Knowledge (XXG) edits"
319:
1E does not apply here, considering the massive amount of
471:"Meet the man who's made 1 million Knowledge (XXG) edits"
440:
467:"Meet Knowledge (XXG)'s most prolific volunteer editor"
124:
120:
116:
188:
847:
Done, but who said anything about deletion? Cheers,
1105:That's what IAR is for. To not mention policies. ☯
1081:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
766:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
436:"لأول مرة: مساهم في ويكيبيديا يتجاوز المليون تعديل"
356:"First man to make 1 million Knowledge (XXG) edits"
202:
491:"Single Knowledge (XXG) User Made 1 Million Edits"
396:"Човекът с 1 000 000 публикации в Knowledge (XXG)"
406:"Hard-Working Wikipedian Reaches 1 Million Edits"
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
1824:). No further edits should be made to this page.
386:"Man maakt miljoen Knowledge (XXG)-aanpassingen"
391:"Justin Knapp Makes History On Knowledge (XXG)"
506:"A Grateful World Celebrates Justin Knapp Day"
298:I bow in awe to his accomplishment, but yeah,
64:. The article has been userfied as requested.
714:list of Internet-related deletion discussions
511:"Wiki's Million Edit Man is lifelong Hoosier"
443:"مساهم أمريكي في ويكيبيديا يجري مليون تعديل"]
8:
988:Don't know what purpose it serves though. ☯
732:Note: This debate has been included in the
712:Note: This debate has been included in the
694:list of Indiana-related deletion discussions
692:Note: This debate has been included in the
371:"Knowledge (XXG) User Makes 1 Million Edits"
351:"The hardest working man on Knowledge (XXG)"
264:: Striking out delete. Merge or redirect to
734:list of People-related deletion discussions
268:, per my comment in the relisting section.
731:
711:
691:
1580:, however it also meets the criteria for
411:"Wikipedianer knackt eine Million Edits"
1765:
1756:. Or redirect as Iselilja suggests. —
1183:counts as an RS. Besides, this is an
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
457:"Knowledge (XXG)’s man in a million"
447:"Everybody Needs A Hobby of the Day"
1214:Policy states that 1E is only for
807:Prior to deletion, please move to
276:) 12:50, 26 February 2013 (UTC) -
24:
501:"Wahnsinn oder Weltverbesserung?"
302:per nom. One event isn't enough.
266:History of Knowledge (XXG), 2012
809:User:Koavf/Justin Anthony Knapp
643:and my point is no less valid.
381:"Justin Knapp: Internet Hero."
1:
1803:17:46, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
1780:16:09, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
1741:15:25, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
1726:14:15, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
1653:14:00, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
1636:22:27, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
1606:18:56, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
1568:18:18, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
1536:17:00, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
1513:15:28, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
1474:04:21, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
1455:15:32, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
1430:10:55, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
1401:07:35, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
1380:23:52, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
1358:16:41, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
1325:16:00, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
1301:13:40, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
1266:12:37, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
1243:06:19, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
1210:06:19, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
1173:04:17, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
1146:22:46, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
1126:06:19, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
1099:03:18, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
1086:03:13, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
1062:10:25, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
1040:12:19, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
1007:12:19, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
978:11:25, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
934:05:07, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
895:15:57, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
864:09:38, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
839:06:13, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
796:03:50, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
773:03:40, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
746:02:20, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
726:02:20, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
706:02:20, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
660:02:55, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
627:00:18, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
610:14:37, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
586:01:43, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
1254:one-billionth iTune download
685:02:34, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
569:14:12, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
312:22:42, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
253:17:13, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
226:16:59, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
1582:what Knowledge (XXG) is not
1841:
1346:History of Knowledge (XXG)
1021:Koavf is a UN speaker?? ☯
327:a few sources quoting him:
323:Knapp has amassed. I list
290:09:24, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
77:11:10, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
1813:Please do not modify it.
874:an attribution violation
787:alternatives to deletion
32:Please do not modify it.
1626:creating the article.
1279:- if necessary, citing
441:http://sabq.org/Ysgfde
547:"King of Corrections"
1666:Indianapolis Monthly
1344:sub-articles (e.g.,
1035:(Nonsensical Babble)
1002:(Nonsensical Babble)
860:(Nonsensical Babble)
656:(Nonsensical Babble)
606:(Nonsensical Babble)
565:(Nonsensical Babble)
1721:Nonsensical Babble
1238:Nonsensical Babble
1205:Nonsensical Babble
1121:Nonsensical Babble
639:should be largely
48:The result was
1705:. Not notable? ☯
1088:
1058:
798:
783:Relist rationale:
775:
748:
728:
708:
675:- Per Bonkers. --
431:"Mr. Know-It-All"
75:
1832:
1815:
1800:
1795:
1777:
1776:
1772:
1768:
1762:
1714:
1560:
1557:
1554:
1505:
1502:
1499:
1447:
1444:
1441:
1418:Ignore All Rules
1318:
1293:
1290:
1287:
1231:
1198:
1132:Actually WP:IAR
1114:
1080:
1076:
1059:
1056:
1053:
1030:
997:
976:
964:ignore all rules
932:
915:
888:
883:
856:
837:
820:
781:
765:
761:
652:
602:
561:
207:
206:
192:
144:
132:
114:
74:
72:
65:
34:
1840:
1839:
1835:
1834:
1833:
1831:
1830:
1829:
1828:
1822:deletion review
1811:
1798:
1793:
1774:
1770:
1766:
1758:
1707:
1669:. Not notable?
1628:Unscintillating
1576:This does pass
1558:
1555:
1552:
1503:
1500:
1497:
1445:
1442:
1439:
1393:Mercurywoodrose
1342:Knowledge (XXG)
1313:
1291:
1288:
1285:
1224:
1191:
1138:Unscintillating
1107:
1069:
1055:
1049:
1023:
990:
967:
918:
909:
886:
881:
849:
823:
814:
754:
645:
595:
554:
149:
140:
105:
89:
86:
68:
66:
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
1838:
1836:
1827:
1826:
1806:
1805:
1782:
1747:
1746:
1745:
1744:
1743:
1702:United Nations
1638:
1619:
1618:
1617:
1616:
1615:
1614:
1613:
1612:
1611:
1610:
1609:
1608:
1571:
1570:
1539:
1538:
1516:
1515:
1479:
1478:
1477:
1476:
1432:
1403:
1385:
1384:
1383:
1382:
1361:
1360:
1327:
1303:
1273:
1272:
1271:
1270:
1269:
1268:
1176:
1175:
1153:
1152:
1151:
1150:
1149:
1148:
1102:
1101:
1091:
1090:
1089:
1078:
1077:
1066:
1065:
1064:
1042:
1015:More like BLP:
1009:
980:
944:
943:
942:
941:
940:
939:
938:
937:
936:
898:
897:
867:
866:
842:
841:
801:
800:
799:
778:
777:
776:
763:
762:
751:
750:
749:
729:
709:
688:
687:
670:
669:
668:
667:
666:
665:
664:
663:
662:
550:
549:
544:
539:
534:
513:
508:
503:
498:
493:
488:
483:
478:
473:
464:
459:
454:
449:
444:
438:
433:
428:
423:
418:
413:
408:
403:
398:
393:
388:
383:
378:
373:
368:
363:
358:
353:
348:
338:
334:
329:
328:
314:
295:
294:
293:
292:
278:Changing again
256:
255:
210:
209:
146:
85:
80:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1837:
1825:
1823:
1819:
1814:
1808:
1807:
1804:
1801:
1796:
1790:
1786:
1783:
1781:
1778:
1773:
1763:
1761:
1755:
1751:
1748:
1742:
1738:
1734:
1729:
1728:
1727:
1723:
1722:
1718:
1715:
1713:
1710:
1704:
1703:
1698:
1697:
1692:
1691:
1686:
1685:
1680:
1679:
1678:The Telegraph
1674:
1673:
1668:
1667:
1662:
1661:
1656:
1655:
1654:
1650:
1646:
1642:
1639:
1637:
1633:
1629:
1624:
1621:
1620:
1607:
1603:
1599:
1595:
1591:
1587:
1583:
1579:
1575:
1574:
1573:
1572:
1569:
1566:
1565:
1561:
1548:
1543:
1542:
1541:
1540:
1537:
1533:
1529:
1525:
1520:
1519:
1518:
1517:
1514:
1511:
1510:
1506:
1493:
1491:
1489:- July 2012.
1488:
1485:
1484:
1483:
1482:
1481:
1480:
1475:
1471:
1467:
1463:
1458:
1457:
1456:
1453:
1452:
1448:
1436:
1433:
1431:
1427:
1423:
1419:
1415:
1411:
1407:
1404:
1402:
1398:
1394:
1390:
1387:
1386:
1381:
1377:
1373:
1369:
1365:
1364:
1363:
1362:
1359:
1355:
1351:
1347:
1343:
1339:
1335:
1331:
1328:
1326:
1322:
1317:
1311:
1307:
1304:
1302:
1299:
1298:
1294:
1282:
1278:
1275:
1274:
1267:
1263:
1259:
1255:
1251:
1246:
1245:
1244:
1240:
1239:
1235:
1232:
1230:
1227:
1221:
1217:
1213:
1212:
1211:
1207:
1206:
1202:
1199:
1197:
1194:
1188:
1187:
1182:
1179:UN's website
1178:
1177:
1174:
1170:
1166:
1162:
1158:
1155:
1154:
1147:
1143:
1139:
1135:
1131:
1130:
1129:
1128:
1127:
1123:
1122:
1118:
1115:
1113:
1110:
1104:
1103:
1100:
1097:
1093:
1092:
1087:
1084:
1079:
1075:
1073:
1068:
1067:
1063:
1060:
1052:
1046:
1043:
1041:
1037:
1036:
1031:
1029:
1026:
1020:
1018:
1013:
1010:
1008:
1004:
1003:
998:
996:
993:
987:
984:
981:
979:
974:
970:
965:
961:
957:
953:
949:
946:
945:
935:
930:
926:
922:
917:
913:
905:
902:
901:
900:
899:
896:
893:
891:
890:
889:
884:
875:
871:
870:
869:
868:
865:
862:
861:
857:
855:
852:
846:
845:
844:
843:
840:
835:
831:
827:
822:
818:
810:
806:
803:
802:
797:
794:
792:
788:
784:
780:
779:
774:
771:
769:
764:
760:
758:
753:
752:
747:
743:
739:
735:
730:
727:
723:
719:
715:
710:
707:
703:
699:
695:
690:
689:
686:
682:
678:
674:
671:
661:
658:
657:
653:
651:
648:
642:
638:
634:
630:
629:
628:
624:
620:
616:
613:
612:
611:
608:
607:
603:
601:
598:
592:
591:This fat dude
589:
588:
587:
583:
579:
575:
574:
573:
572:
571:
570:
567:
566:
562:
560:
557:
548:
545:
543:
540:
538:
535:
532:
529:
526:
523:
520:
517:
514:
512:
509:
507:
504:
502:
499:
497:
494:
492:
489:
487:
484:
482:
479:
477:
474:
472:
468:
465:
463:
460:
458:
455:
453:
450:
448:
445:
442:
439:
437:
434:
432:
429:
427:
424:
422:
419:
417:
414:
412:
409:
407:
404:
402:
399:
397:
394:
392:
389:
387:
384:
382:
379:
377:
374:
372:
369:
367:
364:
362:
359:
357:
354:
352:
349:
346:
342:
339:
337:
335:
333:
331:
330:
326:
322:
318:
315:
313:
309:
305:
301:
297:
296:
291:
287:
283:
279:
275:
271:
267:
263:
260:
259:
258:
257:
254:
250:
246:
242:
238:
237:
233:
230:
229:
228:
227:
223:
219:
215:
205:
201:
198:
195:
191:
187:
183:
180:
177:
174:
171:
168:
165:
162:
159:
155:
152:
151:Find sources:
147:
143:
139:
136:
130:
126:
122:
118:
113:
109:
104:
100:
96:
92:
88:
87:
84:
81:
79:
78:
73:
71:
63:
59:
55:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
1812:
1809:
1784:
1769:
1759:
1749:
1719:
1716:
1711:
1708:
1700:
1694:
1688:
1682:
1676:
1670:
1664:
1658:
1640:
1622:
1563:
1508:
1450:
1434:
1414:2012 section
1405:
1388:
1333:
1329:
1310:Kirk Hammett
1305:
1296:
1276:
1236:
1233:
1228:
1225:
1215:
1203:
1200:
1195:
1192:
1184:
1180:
1156:
1133:
1119:
1116:
1111:
1108:
1070:
1044:
1033:
1027:
1024:
1016:
1011:
1000:
994:
991:
982:
959:
947:
911:
903:
879:
877:
858:
853:
850:
816:
804:
789:(policy). --
782:
755:
672:
654:
649:
646:
615:WP:OTHERCRAP
604:
599:
596:
563:
558:
555:
551:
324:
316:
304:Clarityfiend
299:
277:
261:
240:
235:
234:
231:
211:
199:
193:
185:
178:
172:
166:
160:
150:
137:
91:Justin Knapp
83:Justin Knapp
69:
49:
47:
31:
28:
1794:‑Scottywong
1594:WP:NOT#NEWS
1586:WP:NOT#NEWS
1372:Mark Arsten
1216:low-profile
1186:exceptional
1136:a policy.
811:. Thanks. —
619:Mark Arsten
578:Mark Arsten
218:Mark Arsten
176:free images
1684:Daily Mail
1672:Daily Mail
1524:WP:ILIKEIT
882:PinkAmpers
791:j⚛e decker
768:j⚛e decker
70:Sandstein
1818:talk page
1733:Everyking
1712:The Clown
1690:Daily Dot
1645:Everyking
1350:MZMcBride
1229:The Clown
1196:The Clown
1189:BLP1E. ☯
1112:The Clown
1028:The Clown
995:The Clown
983:Side note
973:talk page
854:The Clown
738:• Gene93k
718:• Gene93k
698:• Gene93k
650:The Clown
600:The Clown
559:The Clown
37:talk page
1820:or in a
1799:| talk _
1789:WP:BLP1E
1754:WP:BLP1E
1590:WP:BLP1E
1522:form of
1462:WP:BLP1E
1422:Iselilja
1312:and me!
1220:WP:NTEMP
1161:WP:BLP1E
1072:Relisted
1051:Itemirus
956:a Beatle
952:WP:BLP1E
908:Justin (
813:Justin (
757:Relisted
631:Whereas
321:coverage
282:Iselilja
270:Iselilja
245:Iselilja
241:Redirect
214:WP:BLP1E
135:View log
54:WP:BLP1E
39:or in a
1717:\(^_^)/
1709:Bonkers
1696:gizmodo
1435:Comment
1410:merging
1408:As for
1406:Comment
1234:\(^_^)/
1226:Bonkers
1201:\(^_^)/
1193:Bonkers
1117:\(^_^)/
1109:Bonkers
1057:(talk)
1025:Bonkers
992:Bonkers
904:Exactly
851:Bonkers
805:Request
677:LlamaAl
647:Bonkers
641:ignored
597:Bonkers
556:Bonkers
518:(also:
182:WP refs
170:scholar
108:protect
103:history
1785:Delete
1750:Delete
1641:Delete
1598:Pburka
1578:WP:GNG
1564:(talk)
1547:WP:GNG
1528:Pburka
1509:(talk)
1466:Pburka
1451:(talk)
1330:Delete
1297:(talk)
1281:WP:IAR
1258:Pburka
1181:itself
1165:Pburka
1157:Delete
1096:Secret
1083:Secret
1019:E, now
637:WP:ATA
633:essays
300:delete
262:Update
232:Delete
154:Google
112:delete
62:WP:BLP
58:WP:IAR
50:delete
1348:). --
1334:merge
1316:Trevj
1012:A-ha!
887:&
635:like
236:Merge
197:JSTOR
158:books
142:Stats
129:views
121:watch
117:links
16:<
1787:per
1737:talk
1649:talk
1632:talk
1623:Keep
1602:talk
1592:and
1553:Luke
1532:talk
1498:Luke
1470:talk
1440:Luke
1426:talk
1397:talk
1389:Keep
1376:talk
1368:here
1354:talk
1332:(or
1321:talk
1306:Keep
1286:Luke
1277:Keep
1262:talk
1250:news
1222:! ☯
1169:talk
1159:per
1142:talk
1045:Keep
969:J04n
948:Keep
742:talk
722:talk
702:talk
681:talk
673:Keep
623:talk
582:talk
469:and
325:just
317:Keep
308:talk
286:talk
274:talk
249:talk
222:talk
190:FENS
164:news
125:logs
99:talk
95:edit
1760:Hex
1660:BBC
1338:IAR
1336:):
1314:--
960:BUT
345:via
239:or
204:TWL
133:– (
1775:❞)
1771:?!
1767:(❝
1752:.
1739:)
1724:☯
1699:,
1693:,
1687:,
1681:,
1675:,
1663:,
1651:)
1634:)
1604:)
1559:94
1556:no
1534:)
1504:94
1501:no
1472:)
1446:94
1443:no
1428:)
1399:)
1378:)
1370:.
1356:)
1323:)
1292:94
1289:no
1264:)
1256:?
1241:☯
1208:☯
1171:)
1144:)
1134:is
1124:☯
1048:--
1038:☯
1032:卐
1005:☯
999:卐
958:,
914:vf
910:ko
878:—
819:vf
815:ko
744:)
736:.
724:)
716:.
704:)
696:.
683:)
625:)
584:)
530:,
527:,
524:,
521:,
310:)
288:)
251:)
224:)
216:.
184:)
127:|
123:|
119:|
115:|
110:|
106:|
101:|
97:|
1735:(
1647:(
1630:(
1600:(
1530:(
1468:(
1424:(
1395:(
1374:(
1352:(
1319:(
1260:(
1167:(
1140:(
1017:2
975:)
971:(
931:☯
929:M
927:☺
925:C
923:☮
921:T
919:❤
916:)
912:a
876:.
836:☯
834:M
832:☺
830:C
828:☮
826:T
824:❤
821:)
817:a
740:(
720:(
700:(
679:(
621:(
580:(
533:)
347:)
343:(
306:(
284:(
272:(
247:(
220:(
208:)
200:·
194:·
186:·
179:·
173:·
167:·
161:·
156:(
148:(
145:)
138:·
131:)
93:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.