990:-The first thing that strikes me is the inconsistency caste ≈ Hinduism so I am not getting where Sikhism enters the picture. If the title suggest that the people had a certain caste before changing over to Sikhism even then it does not merit mentioning. Also General caste is a generalization at its best which seeks to encompass all castes major or minor which do not fall into any of the governments benefit schemes. There is no formal definition of this
475:
should remain, ie: Andrew. So how about you put up or shut up on this occasion? The issue of the caste system in
Sikhism is already covered at various articles but trying to create a list of General Castes in Sikhism simply is not feasible and he hasn't shown it to be so either at the last AfD or at any time since. We've got to get a grip on such extreme inclusionism achieved through misplaced and/or misguided wikilawyering. -
447:
to issues of identifying the numerous names used for the same castes and because sometimes the same name is used for very different castes. Andrew, we've been through this time and again across numerous AfDs and you still do not get it. Either please take the trouble to listen and learn or don't bother disrupting with ill-advised thoughts. -
1360:, you !voted "keep" but then when presented with the evidence decided to unilaterally delete everything in the article, rename it, change its focus to somehing completely different, and then pretended the article had always been about that while never withdrawing your initial !vote apparently on principle.
1354:, you !voted based on a nonsense equation of Shakespeare's "Dark Lady" with the "Dark Lord" of modern fantasy fiction, then tried to justify yourself by doing a Google News search and linking the first source you found that used the two words in sequence, apparently without reading the source yourself;
1299:
Re-read my comment. I never said you had !voted "keep" in this AFD, and in fact in two out of three of my comments I specifically stated that there had only been one explicit "keep" !vote (not yours). What I said about you was that you tend to auto-!vote "keep" in a lot of AFDs, as can be seen in the
777:
Well, I've never seen PRESERVE either but, regardless, the bit of common sense that was needed here was for you to take aboard the comments of people who actually know something about the subject matter rather than fudge a no consensus outcome and then walk away from the mess you created. For what it
1523:
Won't work. In fact, the proposed merge target should be deleted also for the reasons I gave in my early responses to AD. There is an infinite number of communities (ca. 1800 identified by the
British, now over 3200 because anyone can "create" a caste simply by calling themselves one; some only last
1194:
If that is what they do then they should be banned from AfD because they're disrupting to make a point. Caste AfDs often attract little attention and that makes such actions particularly disruptive, as evidenced in the prior AfD for this list: it is too easy to get a no consensus outcome, regardless
446:
caste could contain at least one person who is Sikh; government preferment is not a constant across the country (ie: a caste can be preferred in one area, preferred differently in another; and not preferred at all in a third). The rules of preferment change regularly and are themselves ambiguous due
405:
Mr
Davidson doesn't appear to have improved his understanding of caste. Which of those sources refer to General Castes? The article is not about OBCs or SCs/STs, which are the other two government classifications, and the government provides no list of castes that it considers to be General/Forward.
1472:
exist and that the topic as exemplified in the page title must not be inherently biased/flawed to the point where nothing in the page history is worth preserving. Based on the apparent lack of sources, I'm working under the assumption that the India-focused editors, who have so far all commented in
1363:
That's just the last month: while looking around to see if you had ever gotten in trouble for copyright violation before, I noticed that your user page is linked to from well over 10,000 WP:-namespace pages, many of them AFDs; I checked a few (nowhere near them all, mind) to see if you had defended
864:
That is because you do not have a clue. There was a (correct) reason given for why it would not work, Cesdeva didn't respond, and in any event it is irrelevant to this AfD. Someone would have to start a new article under a new title. The other article is verifiable (although pointless) but this one
1144:
It doesn't. How many more times must I say this? You're just demonstrating some weird sort of systemic bias, making assumptions about how India should do things. If all you can do is speculate or produce irrelevant sources, as AD has done, then you're just wasting your own time and, worse, that of
968:
that you've pigeonholed yourself with your narrow article scope (and title). You've identified that there is a disparity between the teachings in
Sikhism and the reality of the caste system. Maybe that's a starting point for a prose article instead of a list, i don't know. All i'm seeing is a dead
474:
In fact, I am going to go further because I think Andrew is becoming a real problem with his contrarian positions in AfDs and RfAs. Despite the gap of umpteen years since the last discussion for this list, it has still not been sourced and least of all by the one person who really insisted that it
1233:
Total nonsense. I thought I was being helpful here, pointing where people who wanted to spend more time searching about could find information if it existed. I did not say "Keep" at all. I do not auto-vote Keep, ever. Most of the articles tagged for ARS I never participate in at all. Kindly
309:
I noticed this AFD a few days ago when a comment showed up on a user talk page I was watching. I refrained from commenting because I don't know enough about the topic to say one way or another whether the nominator's rationale is valid (although it seems clear that the same is true for the only
322:. When someone blanks unsourced content rather than simply tagging, it is assumed that the blanker has read other sources that appear to contradict the content, or just knows from personal experience that the content is wrong, and both are valid reasons for blanking unsourced content. (
1056:
You can download documents to search through if you wish. That'll prove which caste exists. I see" Population by
Religious Community for Scheduled Caste (Each Caste Separately)". Different caste I know, but searching around might find the right one with the information required.
1170:
Both the explicit keep !vote and the user to whom you are replying do have a systemic bias, but it's not the one you seem to think; they auto-vote "keep" in AFDs. Best just ignore them or this will be closed as "no consensus; default to keep" because the back-and-forth became too
1364:
any of the articles against copyvio claims, and while I didn't find any of that, I did notice that you hadn't !voted "delete" in a single one of them. You know your own record better than I do: can you link to any from the last ten years in which you were in favour of deletion?
1111:
It wasn't tagged for
Article Rescue, that not why I'm here. And I simply assumed if they list some caste and their religion, they'd surely list the others somewhere as well. That's not being clueless, just common sense, their census should record this data somewhere.
275:- Right after the last AFD that was closed as no consensus the article was blanked of content with just a no verification comment. I have restored the content that was there at the point of the AFD closure. No comment on the quality of the content.
750:
WP:BLANK is commonsense. If you don't see much mention of it, I suppose that's most editors know better than to do something so obviously disruptive and the ones that persist tend not to last long. You will also find similar guidance in our policy
1408:
Anyway, here you may not have explicitly !voted, but a comment that does not say "keep", "delete", "merge", "redirect" or "userfy" but does essentially amount to "Sources probably exist" could easily be read as "Keep", especially given how you
77:
1528:(which lies dormant in AD's userspace ever since the AfD). An utterly pointless, impossible to maintain list that will merely serve as a honeypot for warring that, frankly, about three experienced contributors will be expected to manage. -
727:
are the one who was disruptive. For what it is worth, despite all my years here, your mention of BLANK above is the first time ever I have seen it, which also suggests that you may be lawyering to an extreme, citing a very obscure
178:
310:"keep" !vote so far, who only !voted based on a keepist principle rather than any specialist understanding that led to the conclusion that the OP has misunderstood or deliberately misrepresented the topic). But I gotta say,
933:
And yet again you lie. Your sources do not discuss the matter at hand and you forget that N, OR and V are being rolled out against you. Disagree with me? Start using the sources, then: you've had several years already. -
523:
So improve it. You have a week and I will only be fixing your mistakes. I will drop you the standard caste sanctions alert in a few hours because your lack of competence in the subject area is well documented. -
72:
424:
That's a detail. The sensible way forward is to list all the notable castes within the Sikh community. The ones which get government preferment can be marked and the others are then implicit.
1468:
I don't know anything about this topic, but the same is clearly true of others, and that has apparently not stopped them from !voting "keep" based on the principle that sources discussing this
723:? Answer: nothing. The items have been unsourced for years and the only reason we are in this mess is because of your objections in the last AfD causing a "no consensus" outcome. If anything,
1145:
others. Please also note that the Indian reservation system is not, in the strictest sense, based on caste anyway. There are plenty of communities with reserved status who are not castes. -
1093:. I am getting really fed up of the Article Rescue Squadron people here: clueless, as at every past caste-related discussion. See my first two threaded replies to Andrew Davidson above. -
172:
1524:
a few years and then give up), not all communities affected by the reservation system are castes, anyone in any community can profess any religion they choose, and we've already deleted
234:
131:
104:
99:
138:
108:
834:
who suggested broadening the scope by making the topic cover all "Castes in
Sikkhism". Note that we have another relevant page which nobody else seems to have noticed:
91:
254:
1636:
1619:
1596:
1570:
1537:
1514:
1487:
1442:
1257:
1204:
1189:
1154:
1135:
1102:
1080:
1043:
1003:
978:
943:
924:
906:
874:
855:
817:
791:
768:
741:
710:
664:
642:
593:
547:
533:
514:
484:
456:
433:
415:
373:
340:
304:
279:
266:
246:
226:
56:
1553:
677:. This is a blue link and that's usually considered enough for most lists. If further sourcing seems needed then it is better to tag the entry with
1422:. I have never lied a single time in my interactions wih you; accusations without evidence (ditto your completely off-topic "hounding" accusation
994:
caste making the scope of this article truly ambiguous and thus gives a scope for pov warriors to exploit this article and add incorrect stuff —
193:
160:
673:
Blanking the page is disruptive because it doesn't leave any kind of framework for development. Consider the first entry in the list –
1473:
favour of deletion, know more about Indian topics than the AFD-focused editors, who have so far all commented in favour of keeping.
687:
than to blank it because then readers can see what improvement is wanted. Finding a source in this case seems easy. For example,
154:
1495:
915:
I have brought several good sources to this discussion whereas other editors just seem to be giving us their personal opinion.
835:
17:
1565:
1482:
1437:
1184:
838:. These topics should obviously be considered as a set and brought together and doing so by merger would be consistent with
335:
150:
95:
865:
is not even verifiable. Stop trying to squirm out of this mess you have created, admit you are wrong and let's move on. -
898:
656:
585:
314:, that restoring unsourced content that has been blanked, just because the only complaint was that it was unsourced, is
296:
258:
238:
218:
200:
87:
62:
1655:
920:
851:
764:
706:
638:
510:
500:
429:
369:
40:
406:
Since the government provide no such list, we would have to employ deduction and that is original research. -
326:
unsourced content based on one's personal experience is obviously a violation, but that's not what happened.)
166:
889:
Coming back to the most-important issue at hand, how do you equate "Important Sikh occupational castes" with
505:" I'm not volunteering my effort if Sitush is going to engage in blatant disruption and edit warring again.
999:
697:". So, that source lists several such Sikh castes, and describes them as important. The topic thus passes
1525:
701:
and improvement is just a matter of doing the legwork. Blanking is neither necessary nor helpful in this.
1651:
36:
1500:
1413:
to read "behind" your comments to establish whether you supported or opposed another content proposal.
1632:
965:
916:
847:
760:
702:
634:
554:
506:
425:
365:
291:--Hmm...In absence of any reliable source, there is no prohibition on pruning even to the extent of
186:
1562:
1479:
1434:
1181:
1015:
996:
839:
827:
800:. Umpteen regular contributors over a three year period blanked the thing, presumably because of
779:
752:
719:
And yet again you show your lack of knowledge. What does being "important" have to do with being
469:
332:
689:
383:
1592:
1510:
974:
579:
397:
390:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
1650:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
1615:
1533:
1294:
1235:
1200:
1150:
1113:
1098:
1058:
1039:
1025:
939:
870:
813:
801:
787:
737:
652:
573:
543:
529:
493:
I was thinking of improving the page this time around. But first we require enforcement of
480:
452:
411:
319:
276:
364:
and here's a selection of sources from the pervious AfD. There are plenty more out there.
1628:
698:
494:
361:
357:
796:
And you've been economical with the truth regarding the diffs provided above, as I noted
1587:, then, as this debate seems to have been settled in the AFD for list of Indian Castes.
1172:
1020:
Did you mean delete? Your rationale for keeping looks like a rationale for deletion. -
560:
1557:
1474:
1429:
1176:
890:
843:
720:
327:
1234:
assume good faith and stop spreading the same ridiculous lies every chance you get.
695:
Important Sikh occupational castes are Jat, Saini, Labana, Kamboj, Khatri, Arora,...
1588:
1506:
970:
894:
831:
53:
125:
1611:
1529:
1196:
1165:
1146:
1094:
1035:
1021:
935:
866:
809:
805:
783:
733:
681:
539:
525:
476:
448:
407:
311:
286:
1052:
The official government website for India should have this information on it.
1053:
78:
Articles for deletion/List of
General Caste in Sikhism (2nd nomination)
782:
a few days before it was nominated here. Don't suggest I don't try. -
360:, blanking the page was disruption. The topic is clearly notable per
213:
source discussing the topic.General caste=Forward castes i.e. castes
674:
538:
There hasn't been any repeated unnecessary page blanking, btw. -
1644:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
217:
for the special-affirmative-action-schemes by Govt. of India.
1419:
stop spreading the same ridiculous lies every chance you get
628:
The blanking was reverted again and that's where we are now
1556:, Colonel Warden being an alt-account of Andrew Davidson.
1416:
As an aside, please retract your baseless personal attack
830:
was promising. I've been thinking along similar lines to
757:
Instead of removing content from an article, consider: ...
1552:(In case anyone is unfamiliar, the page is currently at
613:
5 mins later, Sitush blanks the page, leaving no content
1426:) are personal attacks and are completely unacceptable.
1423:
1410:
1357:
1351:
1031:
797:
627:
622:
617:
612:
607:
121:
117:
113:
185:
73:
Articles for deletion/List of
General Caste in Sikhism
499:Repeated, unnecessary page blanking may get a user
235:
list of Social science-related deletion discussions
618:another editor reverts this blanking as vandalism
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
1658:). No further edits should be made to this page.
969:horse getting beaten here though. Kind regards,
778:is worth, I raised the state of this article on
253:Note: This discussion has been included in the
233:Note: This discussion has been included in the
1610:for the numerous reasons stated by me above. -
1505:Also I'd like to remind everyone to be civil.
199:
8:
1054:https://data.gov.in/search/site?query=caste
1320:
255:list of India-related deletion discussions
252:
232:
1554:User:Colonel Warden/List of Indian castes
1496:List of Other Backward Classes in Sikhism
836:List of Other Backward Classes in Sikhism
1323:
964:Thanks for the ping. It's pretty clear
398:Routledge Handbook of Religions in Asia
70:
1417:
577:
564:
7:
1325:Evidence requested; evidence given.
690:The Oxford Handbook of Sikh Studies
608:The AfD is closed as "no consensus"
384:The Oxford Handbook of Sikh Studies
69:
1175:for outside commenters to bother.
24:
623:Sitush repeats the page blanking
88:List of General Caste in Sikhism
63:List of General Caste in Sikhism
1028:) 14:52, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
651:, unless you choose to reject
1:
1004:14:49, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
907:12:00, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
792:09:55, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
769:09:49, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
742:09:32, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
711:08:27, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
665:16:21, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
643:16:06, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
594:12:26, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
548:11:08, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
534:23:07, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
515:22:55, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
485:22:50, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
457:22:54, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
434:22:49, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
416:22:30, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
374:22:11, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
305:16:16, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
280:16:12, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
267:16:12, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
247:16:12, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
227:15:15, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
584:or retract your accusations.
1499:to form an article called "
1677:
1637:23:51, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
1620:17:05, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
1597:17:13, 3 March 2018 (UTC)
1571:22:51, 3 March 2018 (UTC)
1538:14:26, 3 March 2018 (UTC)
1515:14:05, 3 March 2018 (UTC)
1488:21:01, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
1443:22:33, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
1258:21:11, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
1205:21:05, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
1190:21:01, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
1155:20:50, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
1136:20:23, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
1103:19:51, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
1081:18:30, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
1044:00:53, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
979:03:05, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
944:09:27, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
925:15:07, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
875:18:08, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
856:15:07, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
818:01:05, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
602:The sequence of events is
341:19:57, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
57:05:57, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
1647:Please do not modify it.
844:alternatives to deletion
32:Please do not modify it.
1195:of how much I write. -
68:AfDs for this article:
1526:List of Indian castes
1411:recently told editors
442:It is not a detail.
826:The discussion at
1575:
1574:
1568:
1501:Castes in Sikhism
1485:
1440:
1388:
1387:
1187:
895:Original research
842:which lists such
647:None seems to be
473:
338:
318:out of line with
269:
249:
1668:
1649:
1561:
1551:
1550:
1478:
1433:
1321:
1298:
1254:
1251:
1248:
1245:
1242:
1239:
1180:
1169:
1132:
1129:
1126:
1123:
1120:
1117:
1091:There is no list
1077:
1074:
1071:
1068:
1065:
1062:
1019:
904:
686:
680:
662:
591:
559:-Please provide
558:
467:
391:Sikhs in Britain
331:
320:Knowledge policy
302:
290:
264:
244:
224:
204:
203:
189:
141:
129:
111:
34:
1676:
1675:
1671:
1670:
1669:
1667:
1666:
1665:
1664:
1656:deletion review
1645:
1389:
1326:
1300:evidence below:
1292:
1252:
1249:
1246:
1243:
1240:
1237:
1163:
1130:
1127:
1124:
1121:
1118:
1115:
1075:
1072:
1069:
1066:
1063:
1060:
1013:
966:Andrew Davidson
899:
684:
678:
657:
586:
555:Andrew Davidson
552:
297:
284:
259:
239:
219:
146:
137:
102:
86:
83:
66:
48:The result was
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
1674:
1672:
1663:
1662:
1640:
1639:
1622:
1604:
1603:
1602:
1601:
1600:
1599:
1581:
1580:
1579:
1578:
1577:
1576:
1541:
1540:
1518:
1517:
1490:
1462:
1461:
1460:
1459:
1458:
1457:
1456:
1455:
1454:
1453:
1452:
1451:
1450:
1449:
1448:
1447:
1446:
1445:
1427:
1414:
1386:
1385:
1384:
1383:
1382:
1381:
1380:
1379:
1378:
1377:
1376:
1375:
1374:
1373:
1372:
1371:
1370:
1369:
1368:
1367:
1366:
1365:
1361:
1355:
1328:
1327:
1324:
1319:
1318:
1317:
1316:
1315:
1314:
1313:
1312:
1311:
1310:
1309:
1308:
1307:
1306:
1305:
1304:
1303:
1302:
1301:
1273:
1272:
1271:
1270:
1269:
1268:
1267:
1266:
1265:
1264:
1263:
1262:
1261:
1260:
1218:
1217:
1216:
1215:
1214:
1213:
1212:
1211:
1210:
1209:
1208:
1207:
1158:
1157:
1139:
1138:
1106:
1105:
1084:
1083:
1049:
1048:
1047:
1046:
1007:
1006:
984:
983:
982:
981:
962:
961:
960:
959:
958:
957:
956:
955:
954:
953:
952:
951:
950:
949:
948:
947:
946:
928:
927:
910:
909:
886:
885:
884:
883:
882:
881:
880:
879:
878:
877:
859:
858:
821:
820:
794:
772:
771:
745:
744:
714:
713:
668:
667:
631:
630:
625:
620:
615:
610:
604:
603:
597:
596:
572:, in light of
550:
536:
518:
517:
497:which states "
488:
487:
464:
463:
462:
461:
460:
459:
437:
436:
419:
418:
402:
401:
394:
387:
377:
376:
350:
349:
348:
347:
346:
345:
344:
343:
250:
207:
206:
143:
82:
81:
80:
75:
67:
65:
60:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1673:
1661:
1659:
1657:
1653:
1648:
1642:
1641:
1638:
1634:
1630:
1626:
1623:
1621:
1617:
1613:
1609:
1606:
1605:
1598:
1594:
1590:
1586:
1583:
1582:
1572:
1567:
1564:
1559:
1555:
1549:
1548:
1547:
1546:
1545:
1544:
1543:
1542:
1539:
1535:
1531:
1527:
1522:
1521:
1520:
1519:
1516:
1512:
1508:
1504:
1502:
1498:
1497:
1491:
1489:
1484:
1481:
1476:
1471:
1467:
1464:
1463:
1444:
1439:
1436:
1431:
1428:
1425:
1421:
1420:
1415:
1412:
1407:
1406:
1405:
1404:
1403:
1402:
1401:
1400:
1399:
1398:
1397:
1396:
1395:
1394:
1393:
1392:
1391:
1390:
1362:
1359:
1356:
1353:
1350:
1349:
1348:
1347:
1346:
1345:
1344:
1343:
1342:
1341:
1340:
1339:
1338:
1337:
1336:
1335:
1334:
1333:
1332:
1331:
1330:
1329:
1322:
1296:
1291:
1290:
1289:
1288:
1287:
1286:
1285:
1284:
1283:
1282:
1281:
1280:
1279:
1278:
1277:
1276:
1275:
1274:
1259:
1256:
1255:
1232:
1231:
1230:
1229:
1228:
1227:
1226:
1225:
1224:
1223:
1222:
1221:
1220:
1219:
1206:
1202:
1198:
1193:
1192:
1191:
1186:
1183:
1178:
1174:
1167:
1162:
1161:
1160:
1159:
1156:
1152:
1148:
1143:
1142:
1141:
1140:
1137:
1134:
1133:
1110:
1109:
1108:
1107:
1104:
1100:
1096:
1092:
1088:
1087:
1086:
1085:
1082:
1079:
1078:
1055:
1051:
1050:
1045:
1041:
1037:
1033:
1029:
1027:
1023:
1017:
1016:Force Radical
1011:
1010:
1009:
1008:
1005:
1002:
1001:
998:
993:
989:
986:
985:
980:
976:
972:
967:
963:
945:
941:
937:
932:
931:
930:
929:
926:
922:
918:
914:
913:
912:
911:
908:
905:
903:
902:Winged Blades
896:
892:
891:General Caste
888:
887:
876:
872:
868:
863:
862:
861:
860:
857:
853:
849:
845:
841:
837:
833:
829:
825:
824:
823:
822:
819:
815:
811:
807:
803:
799:
795:
793:
789:
785:
781:
776:
775:
774:
773:
770:
766:
762:
758:
754:
749:
748:
747:
746:
743:
739:
735:
731:
726:
722:
721:General Caste
718:
717:
716:
715:
712:
708:
704:
700:
696:
692:
691:
683:
676:
672:
671:
670:
669:
666:
663:
661:
660:Winged Blades
654:
650:
646:
645:
644:
640:
636:
633:
632:
629:
626:
624:
621:
619:
616:
614:
611:
609:
606:
605:
601:
600:
599:
598:
595:
592:
590:
589:Winged Blades
583:
582:
581:
575:
571:
570:
569:page blanking
568:
562:
556:
551:
549:
545:
541:
537:
535:
531:
527:
522:
521:
520:
519:
516:
512:
508:
504:
503:indefinitely.
502:
496:
492:
491:
490:
489:
486:
482:
478:
471:
470:edit conflict
466:
465:
458:
454:
450:
445:
441:
440:
439:
438:
435:
431:
427:
423:
422:
421:
420:
417:
413:
409:
404:
403:
400:
399:
395:
393:
392:
388:
386:
385:
381:
380:
379:
378:
375:
371:
367:
363:
359:
355:
352:
351:
342:
337:
334:
329:
325:
321:
317:
313:
308:
307:
306:
303:
301:
300:Winged Blades
294:
288:
283:
282:
281:
278:
274:
271:
270:
268:
265:
263:
262:Winged Blades
256:
251:
248:
245:
243:
242:Winged Blades
236:
231:
230:
229:
228:
225:
223:
222:Winged Blades
216:
212:
202:
198:
195:
192:
188:
184:
180:
177:
174:
171:
168:
165:
162:
159:
156:
152:
149:
148:Find sources:
144:
140:
136:
133:
127:
123:
119:
115:
110:
106:
101:
97:
93:
89:
85:
84:
79:
76:
74:
71:
64:
61:
59:
58:
55:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
1660:
1646:
1643:
1627:per Sitush.
1624:
1607:
1584:
1493:
1492:
1469:
1465:
1418:
1236:
1114:
1090:
1089:It doesn't.
1059:
1012:
995:
991:
987:
901:
756:
755:which says "
729:
724:
694:
688:
659:
648:
588:
580:edit-warring
578:
566:
565:
498:
443:
396:
389:
382:
353:
323:
315:
299:
292:
272:
261:
241:
221:
215:not eligible
214:
210:
209:I don't see
208:
196:
190:
182:
175:
169:
163:
157:
147:
134:
49:
47:
31:
28:
1494:Merge with
1295:Dream Focus
1030:FR has now
840:WP:PRESERVE
753:WP:PRESERVE
653:this policy
649:unnecessary
574:this policy
567:unnecessary
312:User:GB fan
173:free images
1629:PhilKnight
1652:talk page
1558:Hijiri 88
1475:Hijiri 88
1430:Hijiri 88
1177:Hijiri 88
1032:corrected
917:Andrew D.
848:Andrew D.
802:WP:BURDEN
761:Andrew D.
730:guideline
703:Andrew D.
635:Andrew D.
507:Andrew D.
426:Andrew D.
366:Andrew D.
328:Hijiri 88
37:talk page
1654:or in a
1470:probably
699:WP:LISTN
495:WP:BLANK
362:WP:LISTN
358:WP:BLANK
293:blanking
277:~ GB fan
132:View log
39:or in a
1589:Acebulf
1507:Acebulf
1173:WP:TLDR
992:General
971:Cesdeva
832:Cesdeva
501:blocked
273:Comment
179:WP refs
167:scholar
105:protect
100:history
54:Spartaz
1625:Delete
1612:Sitush
1608:Delete
1585:Delete
1530:Sitush
1466:Delete
1197:Sitush
1166:Sitush
1147:Sitush
1095:Sitush
1036:Sitush
1022:Sitush
988:Delete
936:Sitush
867:Sitush
828:WT:INB
810:Sitush
784:Sitush
780:WT:INB
734:Sitush
693:says "
540:Sitush
526:Sitush
477:Sitush
449:Sitush
408:Sitush
324:Adding
287:GB fan
151:Google
109:delete
50:delete
1253:Focus
1131:Focus
1076:Focus
675:Arora
561:diffs
194:JSTOR
155:books
139:Stats
126:views
118:watch
114:links
16:<
1633:talk
1616:talk
1593:talk
1534:talk
1511:talk
1424:here
1358:here
1352:here
1201:talk
1151:talk
1099:talk
1040:talk
1034:. -
1026:talk
975:talk
940:talk
921:talk
871:talk
852:talk
814:talk
808:. -
806:WP:V
798:here
788:talk
765:talk
738:talk
732:. -
707:talk
639:talk
576:and
544:talk
530:talk
511:talk
481:talk
453:talk
430:talk
412:talk
370:talk
356:Per
354:Keep
187:FENS
161:news
122:logs
96:talk
92:edit
1000:Rdl
997:Frc
725:you
563:of
444:Any
316:way
211:any
201:TWL
130:– (
1635:)
1618:)
1595:)
1569:)
1566:やや
1536:)
1513:)
1503:".
1486:)
1483:やや
1441:)
1438:やや
1203:)
1188:)
1185:やや
1153:)
1101:)
1042:)
977:)
942:)
923:)
900:~
897:?!
893:?
873:)
854:)
846:.
816:)
790:)
767:)
759:"
740:)
709:)
685:}}
682:cn
679:{{
658:~
641:)
587:~
546:)
532:)
513:)
483:)
455:)
432:)
414:)
372:)
339:)
336:やや
298:~
260:~
257:.
240:~
237:.
220:~
181:)
124:|
120:|
116:|
112:|
107:|
103:|
98:|
94:|
52:.
1631:(
1614:(
1591:(
1573:)
1563:聖
1560:(
1532:(
1509:(
1480:聖
1477:(
1435:聖
1432:(
1297::
1293:@
1250:m
1247:a
1244:e
1241:r
1238:D
1199:(
1182:聖
1179:(
1168::
1164:@
1149:(
1128:m
1125:a
1122:e
1119:r
1116:D
1097:(
1073:m
1070:a
1067:e
1064:r
1061:D
1038:(
1024:(
1018::
1014:@
973:(
938:(
919:(
869:(
850:(
812:(
804:/
786:(
763:(
736:(
705:(
655:.
637:(
557::
553:@
542:(
528:(
509:(
479:(
472:)
468:(
451:(
428:(
410:(
368:(
333:聖
330:(
295:.
289::
285:@
205:)
197:·
191:·
183:·
176:·
170:·
164:·
158:·
153:(
145:(
142:)
135:·
128:)
90:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.