851:. People who convert to another religion have obviously left their former one. People who become irreligious are less obvious. I think for such individual it would be necessary to have a source where they specifically say: I am no longer an X. (& I believe there are some religions which consider you in their membership none the less) . In particular, there is the problem with people originally of religion X, where someone considered an authority says: So and so is no longer a X. Unless so and so aggrees and says so, how can we judge the validity of this? We could have another category for persons ejected from whatever--not just a religion--but that would be a particularly poor idea for something spiritual.
947:"The God Delusion". Such a person might wish to research people that became Atheists versus those that left Atheism for Agnosticism or even a full religion. Without a "list of ex-Athesits" such a researcher then has to carry out the research that has already gone into the production of this page and we're now discussing should be deleted. Ergo, pages of this type are in and of themselves useful. I think the title of this particular "Islam page" should be changed to move it in line with the other articles and it should be a
411:
purpose and if that's the case I will switch from weak to strong delete. Knowledge (XXG) lists are not the proper place to make "stands against terrorism" or push political agendas, even when they are agendas I agree with more or less. Perhaps these lists do provide valuable names when one is studying a valid cultural issue, but reasons like "the conversion lists stayed, so we need religion bashing lists for balance" or "we can't give in to terrorists/religious-zealots" strike me as invalid and prejudicial.--
421:
disliked elephants and said these lists should be deleted - well that would be a wrong reason for you to choose to delete the lists. The primary purpose as I said is: these lists are not redundant and there are no lists on the internet like these. If you say
Apostasy lists have a negative agenda, then Conversion lists have a positive agenda, do they not? The point is to look at these lists objevtively. Are they useful information? Yes. Are they redundant in any way? No.--
861:
about her being a Muslim, although is strongly critical and explicitly secular in her own words). People who are ejected would be a small quantity in number, these are generally few. Also people who are ejected also usually have left the religion already on their own will so they can still be included here. There could be a separate mention in this article for people who were also 'ejected'.--
689:'. you have not clarified my concerns above to a satisfactory degree. is pointing to the fact that there are 'lists of converts' the only justification you have for defending the lists in these noms? people don't bother with identification through negation, it's simply pointless. i don't see any encyclopaedic use for replicating names onto multiple lists when they provide no new information.
1195:
I did get an atheist who expressed annoyance. Several atheist sites that discuss atheists who convert to a theistic or deistic system go through efforts to say that the person is lying about ever being an atheist or when that fails they emphasize that the person in question had an "immature" or false
860:
Thats where references come in to prove how they left the religion. Also its probably obvious that if they're strongly critical of the religion, they have left it. For those who dont say it clearly, they are included in the
Secular category for example Wafa Sultan (she's given conflicting statements
708:
to yourself. They're irrelevant in this discussion. You keep linking to their forum in every 5th post of yours, yet believe the website is not notable. On to this AFD: The list of ex-members of a faith is just ANOTHER way of representing information. It is NOT duplication of information. Like I said
992:
one particular religious belief then they don't always move straight into another but may contemplate for a while pending the establishment of their new identity. It may be an instantaneous conversion or a slow understanding of where they want to be next. Thus they may reside on one list and not be
410:
I find your arguments a little too strident and out of proportion to what you're responding to. The user was concerned for people's safety, but concerns with privacy or safety occur on many kinds of AfD debates not just this one. In addition I fear your statements indicate this list has a political
946:
While I recognise the possible repetition of information in these articles and agree with earlier comments that the title "List of people who left Islam" contains a subtle prejudice, I think the concept of these lists is useful. Consider someone doing research on, for example, Richard
Dawkins book
640:
Its not redundant. People from different faiths join a certain faith. People from one faith can join many faiths. This is not being redundant. If you have one list, you should have the other one as well. When you have Lists of people who CONVERTED to Islam, WHAT is wrong with having List of people
467:
Lists are just ways of categorizing people. If they converted from one religion to another, they left the first and converted to the second. IMO, it's non-neutral to prefer only the "positive," lists of what they joined, rather than the "negative," lists of what they left, as one assumes someone
390:
If kept it needs to be verified and I'd be willing to put a "verify" deal on it. If people say they are ex-Muslims to the international press nothing we do here is likely to matter on the front you mean, but we should strongly avoid any "outing" or false reports on people. I think I'd mentioned at
1200:
would also irritate LDSers, etc. Conversion lists I think are only irritating if you find the religion in question repellent. If you don't care then people converting or leaving it is likely disinteresting. Otherwise conversion lists are of interesting as conversions have effected entire nations.
641:
who LEFT Islam? Can you tell me? If you're saying they're redudant, tell me why the first should not be deleted and the second kept. How are these lists are redundant? Do you see Ibn Warraq in "List of people who converted to Islam"? Where should he be included? List of
Athiests? My point is:
420:
Dont use my statements to change your nomination. Make your own judgement. The primary purpose of these lists is to classify information in another way. The lists are not redundant. I could claim that these lists should be kept because they help save the lives of
African elephants, but if you
1196:
atheism. Although in fairness I did come close to a point violation in creating it as most of the ex-lists struck me as religion bashing. (Back then they weren't so much about saying what a person later joined, the focus was almost solely on leaving a religion) Anyway in principle I think
1253:?). the only way I can fathom this to be unencyclopedic is through verifiability: and the solution is not to wipe out the articles to never exist again, it's to find sources, add fact tags, or remove certain submissions. Hope I don't come across too strong.
709:"List of people who converted to X", is one way of classifying information. Prove that these lists are redundant by showing me where these lists of names exist in another page together, classified in a similiar grouping way that brings them together. --
1179:
all these people are notable, and there is no reason to delete this. The only reason I can see for why this is nominated for deletition is because it shows that people actually do leave islam, and the fact that there are former muslims seems to bother
143:
the focus is inappropriately on negation, the title and entire purpose of such a list is implicitly loaded with a negative connotation against religion Y, and under the false premise discussed in point a) serves as a vehicle for propaganda/advocacy.
685:: it becomes extremely difficult to discuss with you if your interest is only in assuming bad faith: i think such accusations that other editors are attempting to "censor" material should be reserved for a medium other than wikipedia, '
112:
the general style of religious converts lists has always been "List of converts to X", because their conversion to X is what has been notable. a "List of people who left Islam" or "List of ex-A" is unnecessary and irrelevant because
785:
Also please see
Coricus's comments below which refute your arguments of redundancy for these lists. In summary, these are valuable research tools and in addition there is no other place on the internet which has these lists.
1248:
denominations have a list, and it's not duplication, as someone that wants to know "who left this religion" would have to scour several articles to find (left X for Y), and in fact might not find them (is there an article
400:
Are you going to give in to terrorists? Those people in the lists are in no bigger danger than they were before being included in these lists. Even if they were safe before, we cant give in to terrorists, sorry.
1222:. I asked them to let the list remain on the project page or I would take it to Mediation/Dispute resolution and they said that was fine. That list has everything to do with Islam. They already had a list there
288:
Actually I'm not opposed to deleting all these "ex-religionist" lists even if I created one. Although for sake of balance I'd prefer they all be deleted, if not immediately then eventually, if one is deleted.--
1201:
Leaving is only that significant when the person converts to something. (If Queen
Christina of Sweden quit going to Lutheran services, but didn't go anywhere else, I doubt it would've been as significant)--
880:
997:
applies and they have to have said in their own words what they are doing. The two mirror-lists (i.e. the ex- and the
Converts to- ) allow us to capture what they have said on the exit and the arrival.
585:
has a positive connotation. Why should negative connotation lists not be allowed? If positive ones are allowed, then negative ones should also be allowed. Using your arguement, I'll say that
445:
235:
485:
per KP Botany. I was going to say "delete all as meaningless point-scoring", but it's true that this style of list provides a kind of NPOV balance to the "converts to..." lists. —
316:. I think things like this have a worse tendency to be non-neutral than conversion lists. Conversion lists aren't focused on what a person's rejecting, these more are. We have a
577:: This is crazy. We just went through an AFD for this article. There is NO negative connotation to a "List of people who left X". Would you say there's a negative connotation to
175:
as unnecessary and irrelevant (previous AfD was no consensus, but it included all convert lists and not those exclusively associated with negatative identification like ex-A) --
1020:
anything, yet the fact that they were once part of that religion and are no longer is notable and serves as a thread that connects such people, and thus should not be deleted.
468:
left a religion for a negative reason, rather than joined another for a positive reason. Only a weak keep because it's rather a boring category, still, it is just a list.
83:
78:
883:. In a better world, a nominator who nominates an article soon after it has already gone through its first nomination, would be warned for disrupting Knowledge (XXG).--
87:
970:
to be more in line with other apostasy related lists. Even the nominator said above in his/her striked out comments that they would rather have that list renamed.--
196:
738:
i think your posts on FFI are relevant to your accusations of censorship, they are indicative of an inherent bad faith you assume of a certain class of editors. "
317:
70:
653:
and keep it under the carpet. By the way, the nonimator didnt even know that
Apostasy lists of other faiths exist before being pointed out that they did. --
1023:
1271:
1257:
1234:
1205:
1184:
1167:
1158:
1138:
1114:
1094:
1082:
1060:
1039:
1002:
974:
955:
932:
917:
904:
887:
865:
855:
829:
812:
790:
760:
713:
699:
675:
666:
657:
635:
622:
606:
593:
565:
503:
472:
459:
425:
415:
405:
395:
385:
373:
347:
328:
307:
292:
282:
261:
242:
210:
185:
52:
321:
922:
you haven't answered why you think i am disrupting the wiki, i explained in my nom statement the distinction between this and the previous AfD.
1191:
Muslims are more vocal, but I think "ex" lists are inherently focussed on the negative and can annoy any group being named. When I created
381:
But make sure to think about it, according to the extreme
Muslims leaving Islam justifies a death fatwa --- we might be endangering lives
74:
17:
521:
750:" .. i don't believe that attempting to meet such requirements is necessary to maintain that there is little value in such lists.
1111:
1244:- the included information is encyclopedic, it's obviously not non-notable, it isn't offensive to any tradition, as nearly
963:
841:. It is truly important that in maters of this sort we be truly neutral and treat all the similar groups exactly the same.
540:
127:
66:
58:
117:
it falsely assumes ex-Y became so because of Y, and not because of their conviction in something else (i.e. religion X);
1250:
1090:
them all. The people listed are all notable, and the fact that they have left Islam/Atheism/whatever is notable too. --
1035:
1286:
36:
705:
131:
520:", for example, you just realize one day that you're an agnostic and you have been for a while. And since there's no
135:
512:
There may be people who leave a religion and don't go to another one that is large enough for a list, or who become
649:
tell me that? As USUAL this AFD is yet another of the millions of attempts on Knowledge (XXG) to repeatedly censor
223:
166:
532:
686:
631:
No, nom is arguing that both "convert to abc" and "former abc" is redundant, nothing wrong with that argument. --
581:
as well? Lets delete that article as well. If you say "List of people who left X" has negative connotation, then
1285:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
1197:
1012:
528:
231:
161:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
825:? The people in these lists ARE notable. What are you talking about? How can these lists not be "notable"? --
1152:
615:
586:
582:
671:
My response is for anyone (including the nominator who you quoted) who thinks these lists are redundant. --
1227:
1211:
1148:
524:
227:
156:
121:
it consists of unnecessary duplication, by "leaving Y" they have automatically become a "convert to X"';
967:
589:
should not exist because its entire purpose is to give a positive connotation to the religion at hand.--
544:
536:
340:
254:
1108:
1010:. `The concept is distinct enough to warrant inclusion in addition to the "converts from X" concept.
1181:
250:
1192:
219:
151:
994:
527:, then I cannot support any move to fixate only on the conversion lists. I do support a rename of
650:
578:
555:
493:
382:
370:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
1144:
643:
If CONVERSION is a serious enough issue that a list must be made for it, why is not APOSTASY?
1031:
1223:
1202:
1105:
1091:
412:
392:
366:
325:
289:
258:
239:
49:
1266:
1254:
1075:
923:
895:
809:
751:
690:
469:
450:
298:
273:
201:
176:
1155:
1135:
1079:
548:
486:
984:. This article AfD is now being used to justify deleting all other similar purposed
999:
952:
663:
632:
603:
808:
Im sort of straggling between whether this is notable, but when in doubt... keep.
104:
1231:
1164:
1057:
1027:
971:
914:
884:
862:
826:
787:
710:
672:
654:
619:
590:
517:
422:
402:
344:
1130:
for consistency. There may also be some POV in the phrase List of people who
662:
Eeeh... you did write that to me, didn't you? Did you see what i "voted" ? --
513:
852:
618:
also 'serve as a vehicle for propaganda/advocacy', in your own words? --
238:, however it does give a context that you can interpret as you choose.--
1053:
Thanks, Porlob, for a very good reason. 21:20, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
297:
note: i have changed the nomination to include lists of all ex-ABC's.
598:
I would say "weak delete", but since i'm a inclusionist, ill remain
391:
the talk page that verification is unusually urgent in this case.--
1016:, for instance, contains people who may or may not have converted
894:
i already explained the distinction above. perhaps you missed it?
1151:. I chose former rather than ex for the sake of consistency with
962:
After this nomination is over, I'm considering renaming the list
849:
But there is a problem in the definition the article may be using
1279:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
988:
articles. When people change their philosophical worldview and
320:, people joining something namely the US, but we wouldn't do
249:
That said I'll add that if it's kept it should be renamed to
322:
List of politicians who renounced United States citizenship
236:
Knowledge (XXG):Inclusion is not an indicator of notability
740:
You keep linking to their forum in every 5th post of yours
1214:
was taken out of Wikiproject:Islam's main page first by
746:" and a non sequitur. yes, it is non-notable. so what? "
1219:
1215:
879:: Here's a link to the previous AFD for this article -
100:
96:
92:
993:
on another as a convert for many years, if at all as
126:
there is no precedence for this as we do not have a "
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
266:i think that renders argument c) as inapplicable.
272:to 'List of ex-Muslims' may be more appropriate.
234:. This does not justify this list, see the essay
1289:). No further edits should be made to this page.
147:i have also included the following in this nom:
318:List of foreign-born United States politicians
522:List of converts to Invisible Pink Unicornism
8:
516:or whatever. One doesn't really "convert to
446:list of Lists of people-related deletions
444:: This debate has been included in the
195:: This debate has been included in the
1226:but they could not tolerate to see the
748:Prove that these lists are redundant by
744:yet believe the website is not notable
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
128:List of people who left Christianity
1210:I agree. Can you beleive that the
24:
1163:Thanks, thats a good decision. --
913:, you would see my reply above.--
132:List of people who left Hinduism
645:Can you or anyone suggesting a
547:, for stylistic consistency. —
197:list of Islam-related deletions
136:List of people who left Athiesm
951:-- as should its compatriots.
1:
1272:15:28, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
1258:01:43, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
1235:04:44, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
1206:12:08, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
1185:03:12, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
1168:14:37, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
1159:06:56, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
1139:06:39, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
1115:04:56, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
1095:09:23, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
1083:02:14, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
1061:13:35, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
1040:13:40, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
1003:05:47, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
975:04:59, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
964:List of people who left Islam
956:04:41, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
933:06:27, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
918:04:33, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
905:04:13, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
888:04:06, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
866:14:27, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
856:02:27, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
830:23:03, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
813:22:34, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
791:04:49, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
761:06:27, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
714:04:26, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
700:01:46, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
676:01:19, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
667:00:33, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
658:23:03, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
636:22:04, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
623:20:15, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
607:20:08, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
594:19:50, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
566:23:21, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
541:List of people who left Islam
504:17:17, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
473:16:44, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
460:15:27, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
426:20:47, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
416:11:47, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
406:19:53, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
396:15:11, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
386:15:06, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
374:15:04, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
348:19:55, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
329:16:29, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
308:15:22, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
293:14:56, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
283:14:47, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
262:14:37, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
243:14:35, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
211:14:30, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
186:15:32, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
67:List of people who left Islam
59:List of people who left Islam
53:21:49, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
1251:List of converts to Buddhism
533:List of ex-Latter-day Saints
1056:Whoops. Forgot to sign. :)
742:".. a wild exaggeration.. "
706:Faith Freedom International
1306:
1074:, According to reasons of
704:Please keep your links to
224:List of ex-Roman Catholics
167:List of ex-Roman Catholics
909:If you just waited a few
1282:Please do not modify it.
1198:Former Latter-day Saints
1013:Former Latter-day Saints
529:Former Latter-day Saints
268:in the light of that, a
232:Former Latter-day Saints
162:Former Latter-day Saints
32:Please do not modify it.
1153:Category:Former Muslims
616:List of Muslim converts
587:List of Muslim converts
583:List of Muslim converts
365:the lists mentioned by
1228:List of former Muslims
1212:List of former Muslims
1149:List of former Muslims
1147:and moved the page to
1128:List of former muslims
982:Strong keep and rename
228:List of ex-Protestants
157:List of ex-Protestants
1265:per everyone else. --
1242:Extremely strong keep
1026:comment was added by
614:: Nominator, doesn't
138:", nor do we need it.
343:is a better name. --
1193:List of ex-atheists
220:List of ex-atheists
218:We do in fact have
152:List of ex-atheists
1126:the Islam list to
968:List of ex-Muslims
651:Criticism of Islam
579:Criticism of Islam
545:List of ex-Muslims
537:List of ex-Mormons
341:List of ex-Muslims
257:for consistency.--
255:List of ex-Muslims
1043:
930:
902:
821:What do you mean
758:
697:
457:
449:
305:
280:
208:
200:
183:
1297:
1284:
1269:
1143:I decided to be
1104:per Karl et al.
1021:
928:
924:
900:
896:
756:
752:
695:
691:
562:
558:
552:
500:
496:
490:
455:
451:
440:
303:
299:
278:
274:
206:
202:
191:
181:
177:
108:
90:
34:
1305:
1304:
1300:
1299:
1298:
1296:
1295:
1294:
1293:
1287:deletion review
1280:
1267:
1224:List of Muslims
1022:—The preceding
926:
898:
754:
693:
560:
556:
550:
498:
494:
488:
453:
324:or something.--
314:weak delete all
301:
276:
222:. We also have
204:
179:
81:
65:
62:
44:The result was
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
1303:
1301:
1292:
1291:
1275:
1274:
1260:
1238:
1237:
1208:
1188:
1187:
1174:
1173:
1172:
1171:
1170:
1117:
1098:
1097:
1085:
1076:user:Itaqallah
1068:
1067:
1066:
1065:
1064:
1063:
1045:
1044:
1005:
978:
977:
959:
958:
940:
939:
938:
937:
936:
935:
891:
890:
873:
872:
871:
870:
869:
868:
843:
842:
835:
834:
833:
832:
816:
815:
802:
801:
800:
799:
798:
797:
796:
795:
794:
793:
774:
773:
772:
771:
770:
769:
768:
767:
766:
765:
764:
763:
725:
724:
723:
722:
721:
720:
719:
718:
717:
716:
680:
679:
678:
626:
625:
609:
596:
571:
570:
569:
568:
507:
506:
476:
475:
462:
437:
436:
435:
434:
433:
432:
431:
430:
429:
428:
398:
353:
352:
351:
350:
337:
336:
335:
334:
333:
332:
331:
251:Former Muslims
246:
245:
213:
170:
169:
164:
159:
154:
110:
109:
61:
56:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1302:
1290:
1288:
1283:
1277:
1276:
1273:
1270:
1264:
1261:
1259:
1256:
1252:
1247:
1243:
1240:
1239:
1236:
1233:
1229:
1225:
1221:
1217:
1213:
1209:
1207:
1204:
1199:
1194:
1190:
1189:
1186:
1183:
1178:
1175:
1169:
1166:
1162:
1161:
1160:
1157:
1154:
1150:
1146:
1142:
1141:
1140:
1137:
1133:
1129:
1125:
1121:
1118:
1116:
1113:
1110:
1107:
1103:
1100:
1099:
1096:
1093:
1089:
1086:
1084:
1081:
1077:
1073:
1072:Strong Delete
1070:
1069:
1062:
1059:
1055:
1054:
1052:
1049:
1048:
1047:
1046:
1041:
1037:
1033:
1029:
1025:
1019:
1015:
1014:
1009:
1006:
1004:
1001:
996:
991:
987:
983:
980:
979:
976:
973:
969:
965:
961:
960:
957:
954:
950:
945:
942:
941:
934:
931:
929:
921:
920:
919:
916:
912:
908:
907:
906:
903:
901:
893:
892:
889:
886:
882:
878:
875:
874:
867:
864:
859:
858:
857:
854:
850:
847:
846:
845:
844:
840:
837:
836:
831:
828:
824:
820:
819:
818:
817:
814:
811:
807:
804:
803:
792:
789:
784:
783:
782:
781:
780:
779:
778:
777:
776:
775:
762:
759:
757:
749:
745:
741:
737:
736:
735:
734:
733:
732:
731:
730:
729:
728:
727:
726:
715:
712:
707:
703:
702:
701:
698:
696:
688:
684:
681:
677:
674:
670:
669:
668:
665:
661:
660:
659:
656:
652:
648:
644:
639:
638:
637:
634:
630:
629:
628:
627:
624:
621:
617:
613:
610:
608:
605:
601:
597:
595:
592:
588:
584:
580:
576:
573:
572:
567:
563:
554:
546:
542:
538:
534:
530:
526:
523:
519:
515:
511:
510:
509:
508:
505:
501:
492:
484:
482:
478:
477:
474:
471:
466:
463:
461:
458:
456:
447:
443:
439:
438:
427:
424:
419:
418:
417:
414:
409:
408:
407:
404:
399:
397:
394:
389:
388:
387:
384:
380:
379:
378:
377:
376:
375:
372:
368:
364:
361:
359:
349:
346:
342:
338:
330:
327:
323:
319:
315:
311:
310:
309:
306:
304:
296:
295:
294:
291:
287:
286:
285:
284:
281:
279:
271:
265:
264:
263:
260:
256:
252:
248:
247:
244:
241:
237:
233:
229:
225:
221:
217:
214:
212:
209:
207:
198:
194:
190:
189:
188:
187:
184:
182:
174:
168:
165:
163:
160:
158:
155:
153:
150:
149:
148:
145:
142:
139:
137:
133:
129:
125:
120:
116:
106:
102:
98:
94:
89:
85:
80:
76:
72:
68:
64:
63:
60:
57:
55:
54:
51:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
1281:
1278:
1262:
1245:
1241:
1218:and then by
1176:
1131:
1127:
1123:
1119:
1101:
1087:
1071:
1050:
1017:
1011:
1007:
989:
985:
981:
948:
944:Strong Keep.
943:
925:
910:
897:
876:
848:
838:
822:
805:
753:
747:
743:
739:
692:
682:
646:
642:
611:
599:
574:
480:
479:
464:
452:
441:
383:Alf photoman
371:Alf photoman
362:
357:
355:
354:
313:
300:
275:
269:
267:
215:
203:
192:
178:
172:
171:
146:
140:
123:
122:
118:
114:
111:
45:
43:
31:
28:
949:strong keep
687:Brave Steed
575:Speedy Keep
518:agnosticism
1203:T. Anthony
1180:muslims.--
1106:Briangotts
1092:Karl Meier
514:apatheists
413:T. Anthony
393:T. Anthony
367:T. Anthony
326:T. Anthony
312:Well then
290:T. Anthony
259:T. Anthony
240:T. Anthony
173:Delete all
50:Cbrown1023
1268:Wizardman
1255:Patstuart
1216:Itaqallah
1182:Sefringle
1122:possibly
1112:(Contrib)
1078:above. --
995:WP:LIVING
927:ITAQALLAH
899:ITAQALLAH
810:KazakhPol
806:week Keep
755:ITAQALLAH
694:ITAQALLAH
539:and from
470:KP Botany
465:Weak keep
454:ITAQALLAH
339:I agree,
302:ITAQALLAH
277:ITAQALLAH
205:ITAQALLAH
180:ITAQALLAH
1263:Keep all
1230:there.--
1177:Keep all
1156:GabrielF
1136:GabrielF
1080:Mak82hyd
1036:contribs
1024:unsigned
1008:Keep all
483:keep all
369:with it
1220:Striver
1051:comment
1000:Ttiotsw
953:Coricus
911:minutes
881:Deju Vu
877:Comment
823:notable
683:Comment
664:Striver
633:Striver
612:Comment
604:Striver
600:neutral
216:Comment
84:protect
79:history
1232:Matt57
1165:Matt57
1124:rename
1109:(Talk)
1058:Porlob
1028:Porlob
972:Matt57
915:Matt57
885:Matt57
863:Matt57
827:Matt57
788:Matt57
711:Matt57
673:Matt57
655:Matt57
647:Delete
620:Matt57
591:Matt57
525:(pbuh)
423:Matt57
403:Matt57
363:Delete
345:Matt57
270:Rename
230:, and
88:delete
990:leave
105:views
97:watch
93:links
16:<
1145:bold
1132:left
1120:Keep
1102:Keep
1088:Keep
1032:talk
839:Keep
602:. --
553:acan
491:acan
481:Weak
442:Note
358:Keep
193:Note
134:", "
130:", "
101:logs
75:talk
71:edit
46:Keep
1246:all
1134:x.
986:ex-
966:to
853:DGG
549:coe
543:to
535:or
531:to
487:coe
448:.
253:or
199:.
1038:)
1034:•
1018:to
786:--
564:—
561:lk
502:—
499:lk
401:--
360:or
226:,
141:d)
124:c)
119:b)
115:a)
103:|
99:|
95:|
91:|
86:|
82:|
77:|
73:|
48:.
1042:.
1030:(
559:a
557:t
551:l
497:a
495:t
489:l
356:*
107:)
69:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.