1904:: I was brought here, like many others by Wiggins2, or as he wants to be called, "Wiggie". I think we shouldn't be so quick to shoot him down, as I, & probably many others, are grateful for his post to draw our attention to this subject. I wouldn't mind if the other "side" did the same. But we cannot ignore the fact that this is defintely going to open wikipedia into two halves; Those who want to keep. Those who don't. I.E. Christians, & others. However, this should not be about religion. I would be ashamed of the christians on here if they only voted to keep the articles because they were christian orientated. This should strictly be business as usual, even though it does seem strange an editor would nominate so many christian articles. Maybe a hidden agenda? If an article's crap, then it should be deleted. Being an inclusionist, I will probably keep the most mundane article. However, the list of notable people list is like many others, & should not be here. To do so would be obvious bias. I ask everyone to not be drawn in with a strict "You're wrong, I'm right" situation, but be open & find a way to keep peaceful....
418:
it's a short article that the writer intends to come back to, later. For example, I intend to start adding articles on some writers of history and some scientists that I think should get some coverage, but if I were to do that and only add as a "stub," I think I'd make it a point to get the notability in there--something other than "is a professor and author." Neither of those things is good enough and it would serve me right if someone came along an deleted it because it contained insufficient information. We all have time issues and we can all understand that one might want to start an article and add to it, later. That's cool. Get whatever makes that person or institution notable in there, first. Then, if you have to come back to it later (maybe even much later), it'll probably still be there, even if still a "stub." Sorry...I have no sympathy for lazy writers. I'm a tad "old school" that way. -
805:
758:
630:
251:
955:. I read the article very carefully and did not see a single reference to anything notable that he did. He went to this school and that (I went to schools too), he's had this job and that (I've had jobs too)...but no mention of anything he did that made some kind of difference, or gained him noteriety. So he's the president of an unaccredited institution...what did he do that makes him interesting to the public at large?
1266:
78:
1696:, reaching an estimated 100,000 people. The latter writes about him: "An interim editor, Mike Randall, was appointed and subsequently became permanent editor in May" (1995).... "He is well known for his business acumen, ministry and publishing experience and has earned the respect of a broad cross-section of the Fellowship.". This article cannot be voted away if Delete voters do not even
269:: Everything above was posted to skew the voting and make people turn against me and bias their viewpoint of the nomination and the entry. It's a pretty sick tactic. It shows they care little about the actual strength of the entry; which should be the only thing considered. Since the "warnings" have been posted, some people have even said that they've voted
460:- it was initially (rightly) deleted, then eventually recreated with the necessary information it lacked the first time, reAfDed and kept. Admittedly there was a lot of unnecessary drama on the way and I could probably pick a better example, but then it was a Christian-related subject, so so much for the evil atheistic cabal. --
544:- for example, having written for a magazine with a circulation of at least 5,000 - then evidence for this needs to be clearly documented here. If this will be the case, I will change my vote. Until then, we've got a person who does not sound like he has done anything significant enough to be considered notable. --
1747:
Oh yes - "Every foreign missionary of the
Baptist Bible Fellowship International (currently almost 900) and all the students in our approved colleges receive a copy." So not only is it handed out free, but you don't even get a say in whether you get one or not. That means that 32,000 figure has to be
1459:
I noticed that you were listed as a
Christian Wikipedian. I am, too. I wanted to let you know that in the last 24 hours, someone has nominated 12 Christian biography entries for deletion. Not only does this seem like bad faith and an affront to a lot of hard work, but I'd like you to come and vote on
403:
I think the first priority is not to delete articles that don't seem up to snuff, but to make them better. Perhaps the accusation of laziness applies somewhere in this mess. Four seconds on google gets you the circulation numbers for the publications the subject edited. That's all it takes to know
1828:
non-notable in my book. His contributions to the magazine mentioned by AvB are just reports on what's happening at his school rather than significant articles. Would we have an article on the guy who puts together the weather report of a national newspaper? By the way, I, like
Stuffofinterest, would
1787:
Oh, I'm not saying the figure is a lie. I'm saying that sending a free magazine to 32,000 people who are automatically signed up when they enter college is not the same as 32,000 people actually going to a newsagent and buying it. Advertising is an extremely painful market and everyone involved has
417:
I can see your point, but I think that deleting articles that are not up to snuff should be some level of priority, if not the first. I would add that it's not up to the reader to do the research to see if the party or institution is notable--something in the article should indicate that, even if
1601:
Thats insinuating bullshit. There is nothing wrong with alerting users to the fact that a bunch of delete-wannabies are attacking articles and demanding they get deleted without having any good reasons at all for the delete except the POV rantings of a guy that for some reason got to be an admin.
445:
Well, there's a difference, too--a fine one, I'll grant--between what some might view as "notable" (Wiki's standards are a tad over-encompassing, after all) and what is "useful." These kinds of articles are not generally useful. They read like bios from corporate literature, and too often don't
431:
It's true that the reader shouldn't have to hunt for notability. But when, through the magic of
Knowledge, we become the editors, we have an obligation to make sure we're not deleting useful information. I guess that's what this process is all about, but I think the default position should be
1638:) only to have a couple of your friends delete them. For those who wish to see the truth about Mark Bilbo, I've compiled 11 or 12 links to his statements on Usenet where he swears at Christians, calls them names, and mocks Jesus and God. So, as I was saying, I don't judge you and I don't call
455:
Some think that deleting articles risks losing valuable information, just because that valuable information or proof of notability isn't there yet. It doesn't. The article can be recreated with those things without being speedily deleted, and articles have been recreated in this way. See
52:
DOES NOT PRECLUDE THE FORMATION OF CONSENSUS IN THE FUTURE. ANY DECISION TO MERGE/REDIRECT/WHATEVER SHOULD BE MADE BASED ON DISCUSSION ON THE TALK, NOT ON THIS AFD. DO NOT CITE THIS AFD'S RESULT IN FAVOUR OF KEEPING THE ARTICLE AS IS OR REDIRECTING IT IN THE EVENT OF A REVERT WAR.
643:
A guy who is the head of a university, but has no proper degrees from a proper university, would suggest that the "university" he leads is some tin-pot crackpot self-declared intellectual hotbed. Has this guy ever published any of his work in a respected research journal??
1633:
I never called you scum. If I did though, it would be only a fraction of the negative things you commonly say to
Christians. As you know very well, I've never cursed you, but I've summarized the things you've said, with cited quotations, for your Knowledge entry;(see
1721:"Dear Advertiser: Thank you for your interest in the Baptist Bible Tribune... The Tribune circulation is over 32,000, reaching over 100,000 people". So they claim to have a circulation of over 32,000 - to a prospective advertiser no less. That does not meet
1138:. As soon as this started turning into a Christian vs. everyone else debate I lost interest. Unfortunately, many of those voting keep are claiming that everyone else is anti-Christian. This wasn't so, but if it is repeated enough it may become truth. --
350:. "Published authors, editors, and photographers who have written books with an audience of 5,000 or more or in periodicals with a circulation of 5,000 or more." This subject meets the qualification with two of the publications he edited/wrote for.
1788:
finely-tuned bullshit detectors. When a free newspaper tells an advertiser they have 32,000 readers, they will automatically think in terms of how many people actually read it and don't just dump it straight in the bin. We need to do the same. --
1341:. Being the president of that school is the only thing for which he's notable that I've seen in the article, and to address Andrewa's concern, if he becomes notable for something else, then recreate the article and make sure to mention that. --
390:, perhaps passing on laziness (or an attempt to inflate contribution numbers by posting many small, largely substanceless articles instead of a few, good, informative articles) might better serve the purpose of Knowledge. What do you think? -
1172:
has made a great argument, which should be taken into account. Randall's obviously someone worthy to be included in an encyclopedia. He has experience and looks pretty damn intelligent. References and everything. What more do you want? -
1602:
Where do you get the facts to backup the claim that User Jason
Gastrich used multiple accounts to further his articles? Now this is going out hand. When you people turn to personal attacks and blatant lies and slandering, it gets personal.
287:
it is prohibited to use a sockpuppet to create a illusion of a broader support for your side of the argument. Your "campaigning" comes from you and your sockpuppet, and you even admitted that you use sockpuppetry to aid yourself in AfD.
722:
For what it's worth, I stumbled into this mess of my own accord, and was later encouraged to vote in other AFDs by the original contributor (The last link above). There were a handful of easy keeps among the indiscriminant AFD noms by
572:- As far as I can tell he's a pastor (hundreds of thousands of those) and he's the president of a diploma mill (don't want to guess how many presidents of diploma mills there have ever been). Nothing about any of this says "notable".
1623:
Oh, you'll get used to it. Opposing any opinion of
Gastrich is "bad faith," "harrassment," "persecution of Christians" and, anyway, you do it because you're an atheist who "hates Jesus." Why, I'm downright scum. It's a cross I bear.
1434:"Something very funny happened today. I got two identical emails from Jason Gastrich through Knowledge. You can make up your own mind as to whether this qualifies for meat-puppetry or stacking the vote. Here's the email. --
771:
I don't know what you're complaining about, Juzzy. You're at least
Christian and have eternal life, the rest of us have to mentally divide the minutes we spend trying to get rid of vanity articles into our mere 70-80 years ;-)
273:
because of the alleged misconduct. Consequently, they and the people who are engaging in this witchhunt should be ashamed of themselves. They've done irreparable damage to their integrity and to
Knowledge.
385:
there, as well as the record of the article writer for posting a number of articles about people of questionable notability. If there is information available that makes the person notable according to
1692:: chief editor of and regular contributor to magazines, one with a circulation of over 5000 copies and membership including some 3500 Baptist preachers, another one with a circulation of over
446:
qualify as encyclopedic. However, I certainly think that your opinion is well-considered and valid, even if I'm not convinced that anyone is really taking the latter "default position." -
1772:
If the figure is not correct, they are swindling their advertizers (at USD 1000 a page no less). Somehow I do not find the argument that we need third-party confirmation convincing.
1512:
1431:
608:
85:
907:(Strong) President of a very well known (albeit insanely conservative) school. He also is a published author. I think we can work on the article, but no reason to delete.
507:
we need evidence that people outside himself and his flock have paid him or his magazines any attention. Google searches on him and his magazines suggest that they haven't. --
1844:
which in MY book is sufficient qualification to warrant inclusion in WP. As far as I know this may well be one of the reasons for the very low cutoff point of 5,000 copies.
986:
662:- not notable enough on his own. He deserves mention, maybe, on the pages of the colleges that allegedly make him notable, but he's not notable enough on his own. -
342:
There seems to be some sort of purging of certain religious figures going on, and it is becoming difficult to stick to the assumption of good faith. This one is an
1338:
1310:
1278:
595:
233:
1693:
1749:
1611:
Gastrich is saying those who want to delete the articles have "bad faith." If that's not pressuring for ballot stuffing nothing is. No insinuation. Facts.
845:
as above, with the additional comment that this person is less notable than the average
British vice-chancellor, many of whom do not have articles. --
359:
1846:
However, The Baptist Bible Tribune is not online. How can you be sure that Randall only contributes "reports on what's happening at his school"?
727:
and I wanted to point that out. I'm not getting in to the marginal ones. All my votes/comments are legit and as disinterested as I can be. -
432:"let's see if this is appropriate" versus "AFD anything I'm not familiar with that doesn't make a bold claim for notability". My opinion. -
206:
503:, anyone can write religious magazines, every school has a leader, and apparently pretty much anyone can get a diploma from LBU. To meet
381:
There's no reason to doubt good faith if the complete information is not in the article and a deletion nomination is made based on what
578:
372:
94:
124:
1427:
Jason Gastrich wrote these series of 12 articles attends the school in question and has been known to used sock puppets, plus...
1374:
for example who it seems likely will). So, if we merge and redirect, we'll later be deleting the redirect. IMO, if he's notable
988:
which is the highest accreditation that the government can provide in the United States. Will this make you change your vote? --
17:
232:
As a result of the serial disruption of AfD and other questionable behaviour, I have raised a user RfC on Jason Gastrich, see
1358:: My concern wasn't what happens if and when he becomes notable in his own right, I think that's easy. The problem is with a
943:. The LBU stuff doesn't reflect well on him as a person, but doesn't really matter one way or the other for bio standards. -
220:
1460:
the entries. These nominations seem peculiar because some people are even presidents of universities and well known authors.
1642:
names. However, you frequently open your mouth and do reputable atheists a disservice by the things that come out of it. --
1612:
1513:
http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_Louisiana_Baptist_University_people_%28second_nomination%29
1432:
http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_Louisiana_Baptist_University_people_%28second_nomination%29
612:
110:
1253:
I dont think this guy is notable of his own right, but his work related to the school warrents him inclusion there.
590:
President of a diploma mill? It is these sorts of ignorant accusations that make me upset. He's the president of a
83:
If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
2005:
1793:
1760:
1738:
800:
777:
753:
625:
512:
465:
246:
36:
2004:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
1523:
200:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
1589:
1346:
1888:
Article is about unnotable with promotion links to his websites/ministry. This is basically a spam article.
1789:
1753:
1734:
969:: Edits two magazines with circulation greater than 5,000, which certainly seems to satisfy the spirit of
773:
508:
461:
156:
1342:
1305:. His only claim to fame seems to be that he's president of an (accredited) institution once attended by
1987:
1965:
1961:
1948:
1936:
1921:
1908:
1892:
1880:
1866:
1833:
1812:
1797:
1782:
1764:
1742:
1714:
1680:
1668:
1646:
1635:
1628:
1618:
1606:
1545:
1440:
1419:
1386:
1350:
1329:
1317:
1297:
1285:
1269:
1245:
1233:
1221:
1209:
1197:
1185:
1160:
1142:
1129:
1116:
1100:
1084:
1063:
1022:
1006:
992:
977:
959:
947:
930:
911:
899:
880:
849:
837:
813:
781:
766:
731:
717:
690:
678:
666:
648:
638:
602:
583:
564:
548:
528:
516:
495:
469:
450:
436:
422:
408:
394:
368:
337:
325:
311:
294:
278:
259:
61:
1578:
1567:
1534:
1556:
1139:
1126:
1080:
347:
140:
114:
1976:
1957:
1933:
1643:
1072:
1050:
989:
974:
944:
872:
714:
687:
645:
599:
334:
275:
196:
99:
58:
1829:
like to think that semi-notable atheist figures would be given the same respect... and deleted. --
1482:). If you’d like to join a network of Christians with a purpose on Knowledge, please see our site!
809:
762:
634:
255:
1371:
1326:
1206:
663:
447:
419:
391:
322:
214:
146:
77:
1407:: compact, but short, I think not only scientists, but teachers and priests too can be notable.
1366:
president he deserves a mention on the article on the college, he probably won't merit one as a
1830:
1282:
1261:
1194:
1125:. I would like to think that semi-notable atheist figures would be given the same respect. --
557:
545:
525:
292:
283:
Very untrue. The comments posted above were to question the strength of your argument, as per
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
1980:
1945:
1230:
1174:
1169:
1109:
1038:
1015:
804:
757:
728:
629:
433:
405:
364:
250:
918:
Published by whom? Read by whom? Nothing's stopping YOU from making it better and relevant.
1625:
1294:
1076:
1056:
908:
896:
675:
1930:
1905:
1840:
Even if this were so, that would leave The Baptist Preacher. Which means he is notable
1218:
1157:
858:
492:
284:
192:
54:
227:: they consist almost solely of soliciting others to come to these AfDs and vote keep.
224:
1889:
1861:
1853:
1807:
1777:
1722:
1709:
1701:
1689:
1677:
1665:
1615:
1416:
1306:
1153:
1093:
970:
940:
846:
834:
541:
504:
387:
210:
1265:
1984:
1918:
1408:
1383:
1314:
1254:
1113:
1019:
927:
289:
174:
162:
130:
67:
1613:
http://en.wikipedia.org/Category:Knowledge:Suspected_sockpuppets_of_Jason_Gastrich
1277:
for the reasons expressed by Colin Kimbrell. Failing that, merge and redirect to
674:
president of a college with all of 700 students? I don't see the notablitiy here.
1911:. BTW, I hope my vote isn't discounted, I count myself as a influencial editor...
1856:
limit, I'll be happy to come over and vote and argue for that article to be kept.
109:
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to
1877:
1730:
1242:
1097:
1003:
743:
like the rest Gastrich has wasted yet more irreplaceable minutes of our lives.
724:
561:
308:
1469:
Below are some of the links that need attention. Thanks for your consideration.
540:
in the article that suggests notability. If he falls under some criterion from
1603:
1182:
1044:
956:
893:
457:
1748:
taken with an even bigger grain of salt (several grains of salt?) We deleted
985:: Is I said before, he's the president of a regionally accredited university;
1435:
705:
574:
707:
699:
333:. his qualifications are from a diploma mill. self-styled religious leader.
711:
598:, you would have known this. Will you consider changing your vote, now? --
1857:
1803:
1773:
1705:
1524:
http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/J._Otis_Ledbetter
791:
744:
616:
237:
1590:
http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Daniel_Dorim_Kim
1478:
By the way, I recently started an organization called Wiki4Christ (see
686:. Obviously notable president of a regionally accredited university. --
1802:
Are there anywhere near 31,100 students enrolled in Baptist colleges?
1382:
notable after he leaves the college. Any clearer? No change of vote.
1546:
http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Mike_Randall
709:
701:
1579:
http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Neal_Weaver
1568:
http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/James_Combs
1535:
http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Ron_Moseley
703:
404:
this is a keep. Not to mention his position at his institution. -
1557:
http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Thomas_Ice
1241:
Keep. I see little reason to delete this article. Salva veritate!
1205:
NPOV, published with large readership, President of a University.
1998:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
1729:
claim to have over 32,000 readers, but there is no third-party
72:
303:
The school he's president of might be notable, but he isn't.
103:(agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments,
191:
This AfD process has been further disrupted by a suspected
1479:
1400:. Soon we'll be seeing bios on every almuna and alumnus.
1848:
Oh, and if you can point me to an atheist's (or indeed
1752:, the Bath University fish wrapper, for this reason. --
1852:) bio article being AfD'd while having met the 5,000
609:
List of unaccredited institutions of higher learning
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
2008:). No further edits should be made to this page.
1876:per nom. Serious meatpuppetry in progress here.
1900:. Little known, but would be great if merged.
1229:I see little reason to delete this article. --
1339:Baptist Bible College - Springfield, Missouri
1311:Baptist Bible College - Springfield, Missouri
1279:Baptist Bible College - Springfield, Missouri
938:. Edits two magazines with circulation : -->
596:Baptist_Bible_College_-_Springfield,_Missouri
234:Knowledge:Requests for comment/Jason Gastrich
123:Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected
93:among Knowledge contributors. Knowledge has
8:
1018:opinions. He makes a good argument, IMO.--
97:regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
46:no consensus to delete, defaulting to keep
1956:Ought to be speedied as nn-bio, really.
1041:. This article seems to satisfy WP:BIO.
888:per discussion above, seems to be quite
117:on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.
1944:, existing is not valid keep critereon.
926:university-related topics are notable.
829:is replaced with the more appropriate
594:If you would have bothered to look at
790:purgatory, not experience it here! -
7:
1313:, what then happens when he leaves?
1309:. Even if we merge and redirect to
1378:, it means we're expecting him to
24:
1325:per above. Seems notable enough.
592:regionally accredited university.
1898:Abstain with preference to merge
1264:
803:
756:
628:
249:
76:
1917:The individual clearly exists
491:. Subject is notable enough.
48:. STANDARD SPIEL: NO CONSENSUS
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
1636:Talk:Mark K. Bilbo#Controversy
1:
113:on the part of others and to
44:The result of the debate was
1988:00:22, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
1966:18:55, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
1949:08:28, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
1937:04:15, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
1922:17:10, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
1909:04:23, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
1893:02:42, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
1881:00:30, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
1867:20:35, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
1834:19:41, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
1813:01:46, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
1798:00:44, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
1783:21:25, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
1765:20:45, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
1743:20:43, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
1715:17:05, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
1681:03:48, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
1669:02:03, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
1647:05:28, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
1629:03:55, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
1619:03:48, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
1607:01:13, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
1441:16:32, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1420:02:08, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
1387:23:49, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1351:22:21, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1330:22:19, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1318:21:42, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1298:21:15, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1286:18:46, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1270:18:41, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1246:18:04, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1234:17:45, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1222:17:41, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1210:17:31, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1198:16:21, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1186:15:03, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1161:13:24, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1143:16:18, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
1130:12:32, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1117:10:46, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1101:07:43, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1085:07:26, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1064:07:13, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
1023:23:36, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
1007:22:52, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
993:02:01, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
978:00:11, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
960:22:12, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
948:21:57, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
931:21:48, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
912:20:55, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
900:16:34, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
881:02:21, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
850:00:45, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
838:23:38, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
814:23:18, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
786:Listen, mate, I'm trying to
782:23:16, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
767:23:04, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
732:08:42, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
718:02:08, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
691:21:20, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
679:19:22, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
667:17:18, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
649:23:55, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
639:23:22, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
613:Louisiana Baptist University
603:21:20, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
584:16:52, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
565:14:31, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
549:11:31, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
529:02:51, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
517:09:24, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
496:07:31, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
470:11:44, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
451:12:09, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
437:08:00, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
423:07:40, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
409:07:10, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
395:07:00, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
338:06:38, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
326:06:35, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
312:05:54, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
295:05:46, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
279:00:59, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
260:12:02, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
62:11:19, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
698:Potential branchstacking :
2025:
939:5,000 and thus satisfies
2001:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
155:; accounts blocked for
125:single-purpose accounts
95:policies and guidelines
1480:http://wiki4christ.com
1029:What argument is that?
1704:would not apply here.
560:. I detest nn-bio's.
825:per Gastrich, where
362:comment was added by
348:Knowledge:Notability
1073:User:Colin Kimbrell
107:by counting votes.
86:not a majority vote
1370:president (unlike
1360:merge and redirect
1092:, appears to meet
539:
1964:
1864:
1810:
1796:
1780:
1763:
1741:
1712:
1664:notable enough --
1217:same as above. --
780:
537:
515:
468:
376:
188:
187:
184:
111:assume good faith
2016:
2003:
1960:
1862:
1842:amongst Baptists
1808:
1792:
1778:
1759:
1737:
1710:
1438:
1268:
1259:
1175:The Great Gavini
1170:User:Jaysuschris
1059:
1053:
1047:
1039:User:Jaysuschris
1016:User:Jaysuschris
878:
875:
870:
867:
864:
861:
807:
795:
776:
760:
748:
632:
620:
581:
511:
464:
355:
253:
241:
182:
170:
154:
138:
119:
89:, but instead a
80:
73:
34:
2024:
2023:
2019:
2018:
2017:
2015:
2014:
2013:
2012:
2006:deletion review
1999:
1931:Walter Siegmund
1700:to explain why
1436:
1255:
1140:StuffOfInterest
1127:StuffOfInterest
1057:
1051:
1045:
876:
873:
868:
865:
862:
859:
802:
793:
755:
746:
627:
618:
579:
248:
239:
172:
160:
144:
128:
115:sign your posts
71:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
2022:
2020:
2011:
2010:
1993:
1991:
1990:
1977:Colin Kimbrell
1969:
1968:
1951:
1939:
1924:
1912:
1895:
1883:
1870:
1869:
1837:
1836:
1822:
1821:
1820:
1819:
1818:
1817:
1816:
1815:
1757:
1756:
1745:
1718:
1717:
1683:
1671:
1658:
1657:
1656:
1655:
1654:
1653:
1652:
1651:
1650:
1649:
1644:Jason Gastrich
1596:
1595:
1594:
1593:
1592:
1584:
1583:
1582:
1581:
1573:
1572:
1571:
1570:
1562:
1561:
1560:
1559:
1551:
1550:
1549:
1548:
1540:
1539:
1538:
1537:
1529:
1528:
1527:
1526:
1518:
1517:
1516:
1515:
1506:
1504:
1503:
1502:
1501:
1500:Jason Gastrich
1495:
1494:
1493:
1492:
1486:
1485:
1484:
1483:
1473:
1472:
1471:
1470:
1464:
1463:
1462:
1461:
1454:
1453:
1452:
1451:
1445:
1429:
1428:
1422:
1411:
1401:
1391:
1390:
1389:
1343:Idont Havaname
1332:
1320:
1300:
1288:
1272:
1248:
1236:
1224:
1212:
1200:
1188:
1177:
1163:
1147:
1146:
1145:
1119:
1103:
1087:
1066:
1031:
1030:
1026:
1025:
1009:
996:
995:
990:Jason Gastrich
980:
975:Colin Kimbrell
963:
962:
950:
945:Colin Kimbrell
933:
920:
919:
915:
914:
902:
883:
857:as per nom.
852:
840:
820:
819:
818:
817:
816:
799:
752:
738:
737:
736:
735:
734:
688:Jason Gastrich
681:
669:
656:
655:
654:
653:
652:
651:
624:
600:Jason Gastrich
587:
586:
567:
551:
531:
519:
498:
485:
484:
483:
482:
481:
480:
479:
478:
477:
476:
475:
474:
473:
472:
453:
440:
439:
426:
425:
412:
411:
398:
397:
358:The preceding
352:
351:
340:
328:
315:
301:
300:
299:
298:
297:
276:Jason Gastrich
263:
245:
230:
197:Jason Gastrich
186:
185:
81:
70:
65:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
2021:
2009:
2007:
2002:
1996:
1995:
1994:
1989:
1986:
1982:
1978:
1974:
1971:
1970:
1967:
1963:
1959:
1955:
1952:
1950:
1947:
1943:
1940:
1938:
1935:
1932:
1928:
1925:
1923:
1920:
1916:
1913:
1910:
1907:
1903:
1899:
1896:
1894:
1891:
1887:
1886:Strong Delete
1884:
1882:
1879:
1875:
1872:
1871:
1868:
1865:
1859:
1855:
1851:
1847:
1843:
1839:
1838:
1835:
1832:
1827:
1824:
1823:
1814:
1811:
1805:
1801:
1800:
1799:
1795:
1791:
1786:
1785:
1784:
1781:
1775:
1771:
1770:
1769:
1768:
1767:
1766:
1762:
1755:
1751:
1746:
1744:
1740:
1736:
1732:
1728:
1724:
1720:
1719:
1716:
1713:
1707:
1703:
1699:
1695:
1694:32,000 copies
1691:
1688:—notable per
1687:
1684:
1682:
1679:
1676:not notable.
1675:
1672:
1670:
1667:
1663:
1660:
1659:
1648:
1645:
1641:
1637:
1632:
1631:
1630:
1627:
1626:Mark K. Bilbo
1622:
1621:
1620:
1617:
1614:
1610:
1609:
1608:
1605:
1600:
1599:
1598:
1597:
1591:
1588:
1587:
1586:
1585:
1580:
1577:
1576:
1575:
1574:
1569:
1566:
1565:
1564:
1563:
1558:
1555:
1554:
1553:
1552:
1547:
1544:
1543:
1542:
1541:
1536:
1533:
1532:
1531:
1530:
1525:
1522:
1521:
1520:
1519:
1514:
1511:
1510:
1509:
1508:
1507:
1499:
1498:
1497:
1496:
1490:
1489:
1488:
1487:
1481:
1477:
1476:
1475:
1474:
1468:
1467:
1466:
1465:
1458:
1457:
1456:
1455:
1449:
1448:
1447:
1446:
1444:
1442:
1439:
1433:
1426:
1423:
1421:
1418:
1415:
1412:
1410:
1406:
1402:
1399:
1395:
1392:
1388:
1385:
1381:
1377:
1373:
1369:
1365:
1362:. Even if as
1361:
1357:
1354:
1353:
1352:
1348:
1344:
1340:
1336:
1333:
1331:
1328:
1327:the1physicist
1324:
1321:
1319:
1316:
1312:
1308:
1307:Jerry Falwell
1304:
1301:
1299:
1296:
1292:
1289:
1287:
1284:
1280:
1276:
1273:
1271:
1267:
1263:
1260:
1258:
1252:
1249:
1247:
1244:
1240:
1237:
1235:
1232:
1228:
1225:
1223:
1220:
1216:
1213:
1211:
1208:
1204:
1201:
1199:
1196:
1193:Non-notable.
1192:
1189:
1187:
1184:
1181:
1178:
1176:
1171:
1167:
1164:
1162:
1159:
1155:
1151:
1148:
1144:
1141:
1137:
1134:
1133:
1132:
1131:
1128:
1124:
1120:
1118:
1115:
1111:
1107:
1104:
1102:
1099:
1095:
1091:
1088:
1086:
1082:
1078:
1074:
1070:
1067:
1065:
1062:
1061:
1060:
1054:
1049:
1048:
1040:
1036:
1033:
1032:
1028:
1027:
1024:
1021:
1017:
1013:
1010:
1008:
1005:
1001:
998:
997:
994:
991:
987:
984:
981:
979:
976:
972:
968:
965:
964:
961:
958:
954:
951:
949:
946:
942:
937:
934:
932:
929:
925:
922:
921:
917:
916:
913:
910:
906:
903:
901:
898:
895:
891:
887:
884:
882:
879:
871:
856:
853:
851:
848:
844:
841:
839:
836:
832:
828:
824:
821:
815:
812:
811:
806:
801:
797:
789:
785:
784:
783:
779:
775:
770:
769:
768:
765:
764:
759:
754:
750:
742:
739:
733:
730:
726:
721:
720:
719:
716:
712:
710:
708:
706:
704:
702:
700:
697:
694:
693:
692:
689:
685:
682:
680:
677:
676:Mark K. Bilbo
673:
670:
668:
665:
664:Harvestdancer
661:
658:
657:
650:
647:
642:
641:
640:
637:
636:
631:
626:
622:
614:
610:
606:
605:
604:
601:
597:
593:
589:
588:
585:
582:
577:
576:
571:
568:
566:
563:
559:
555:
552:
550:
547:
543:
535:
532:
530:
527:
523:
520:
518:
514:
510:
506:
502:
499:
497:
494:
490:
487:
486:
471:
467:
463:
459:
454:
452:
449:
448:WarriorScribe
444:
443:
442:
441:
438:
435:
430:
429:
428:
427:
424:
421:
420:WarriorScribe
416:
415:
414:
413:
410:
407:
402:
401:
400:
399:
396:
393:
392:WarriorScribe
389:
384:
380:
379:
378:
377:
374:
370:
366:
363:
361:
354:
353:
349:
345:
341:
339:
336:
332:
329:
327:
324:
323:WarriorScribe
320:
317:
316:
314:
313:
310:
306:
296:
293:
291:
286:
282:
281:
280:
277:
272:
268:
265:
264:
262:
261:
258:
257:
252:
247:
243:
235:
229:
228:
226:
225:contributions
222:
219:
216:
212:
208:
205:
202:
198:
194:
180:
176:
168:
164:
158:
152:
148:
142:
136:
132:
126:
122:
118:
116:
112:
106:
102:
101:
96:
92:
88:
87:
82:
79:
75:
74:
69:
66:
64:
63:
60:
56:
51:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
2000:
1997:
1992:
1981:Jaysus Chris
1972:
1953:
1941:
1926:
1914:
1902:Further Note
1901:
1897:
1885:
1873:
1849:
1845:
1841:
1831:Spondoolicks
1825:
1758:
1731:verification
1726:
1697:
1685:
1673:
1661:
1639:
1505:
1430:
1424:
1413:
1404:
1397:
1393:
1379:
1375:
1367:
1363:
1359:
1355:
1334:
1322:
1302:
1290:
1283:Hall Monitor
1274:
1256:
1250:
1238:
1226:
1214:
1202:
1195:Justin Eiler
1190:
1179:
1168:per above.
1165:
1149:
1135:
1122:
1121:
1110:Jaysus Chris
1105:
1089:
1068:
1055:
1043:
1042:
1034:
1011:
999:
982:
966:
952:
935:
923:
904:
889:
885:
854:
842:
830:
826:
822:
808:
787:
761:
740:
729:Jaysus Chris
695:
683:
671:
659:
633:
591:
573:
569:
558:Pierremenard
553:
546:Pierremenard
533:
526:California12
521:
500:
488:
434:Jaysus Chris
406:Jaysus Chris
382:
357:
343:
330:
318:
304:
302:
270:
266:
254:
231:
223:). See his
217:
203:
190:
189:
178:
166:
157:sockpuppetry
150:
139:; suspected
134:
120:
108:
104:
98:
90:
84:
68:Mike Randall
49:
45:
43:
31:
28:
1946:Gateman1997
1750:Bath Impact
1686:Strong Keep
1372:Neal Weaver
1291:Strong Keep
1231:Shanedidona
1180:Strong Keep
1166:Strong keep
1002:per nom. --
924:Strong Keep
890:non-notable
831:non-notable
725:User:A.J.A.
684:Strong keep
536:- there is
365:Jaysuschris
1919:Kurt Weber
1790:Malthusian
1754:Malthusian
1735:Malthusian
1491:Sincerely,
1398:Weak Merge
909:Brokenfrog
774:Malthusian
509:Malthusian
462:Malthusian
458:Godcasting
193:sockpuppet
91:discussion
1929:per nom.
1906:Spawn Man
1437:Cyde Weys
1425:ATTENTION
1219:Yonghokim
1158:Kerobaros
1152:, as per
796:you know?
792:Just zis
749:you know?
745:Just zis
696:Watch Out
621:you know?
617:Just zis
607:Yes, see
575:Cyde Weys
524:Notable.
493:Logophile
344:Easy Keep
242:you know?
238:Just zis
147:canvassed
141:canvassed
100:consensus
55:Johnleemk
1958:Ashibaka
1890:Arbustoo
1850:anyone's
1733:here. --
1678:Arbustoo
1666:Vizcarra
1616:Arbustoo
1417:Jim62sch
894:David D.
847:kingboyk
835:Eusebeus
715:Blnguyen
646:Blnguyen
611:and the
373:contribs
360:unsigned
335:Blnguyen
267:Rebuttal
221:contribs
211:Wiggins2
207:contribs
179:username
173:{{subst:
167:username
161:{{subst:
151:username
145:{{subst:
135:username
129:{{subst:
1985:Irmgard
1409:Gubbubu
1384:Andrewa
1364:current
1356:Comment
1315:Andrewa
1257:ALKIVAR
1191:Delete:
1136:Abstain
1114:Rogue 9
1020:Azathar
983:Comment
967:Comment
928:Cynical
827:notable
580:2M-VOTE
538:nothing
290:Sycthos
285:WP:SOCK
143:users:
1954:Delete
1942:Delete
1934:(talk)
1927:Delete
1878:Stifle
1874:Delete
1854:WP:BIO
1826:Delete
1794:(talk)
1761:(talk)
1739:(talk)
1723:WP:BIO
1702:WP:BIO
1690:WP:BIO
1674:Delete
1450:Hello,
1414:Delete
1394:Delete
1380:remain
1303:Delete
1295:Hayson
1243:Lerner
1207:Wynler
1154:WP:BIO
1098:Alphax
1094:WP:BIO
1037:, per
1014:, per
1004:Devein
1000:Delete
971:WP:BIO
953:Delete
941:WP:BIO
897:(Talk)
886:Delete
855:Delete
843:Delete
823:Delete
778:(talk)
741:Delete
672:Delete
660:Delete
570:Delete
562:Zunaid
554:Delete
542:WP:BIO
534:Delete
513:(talk)
505:WP:BIO
501:Delete
466:(talk)
388:WP:BIO
346:, via
331:Delete
319:Delete
309:A.J.A.
305:Delete
1725:, as
1604:Itake
1403:weak
1337:into
1335:Merge
1251:Merge
1183:Itake
957:bcatt
788:avoid
321:. -
121:Note:
16:<
1979:and
1975:per
1973:Keep
1962:tock
1915:Keep
1863:talk
1809:talk
1779:talk
1727:they
1711:talk
1662:Keep
1405:keep
1368:past
1347:Talk
1323:Keep
1275:Keep
1239:Keep
1227:Keep
1215:Keep
1203:Keep
1150:Keep
1123:Keep
1108:per
1106:Keep
1090:Keep
1083:···
1081:Talk
1075:···
1071:per
1069:Keep
1035:Keep
1012:Keep
936:Keep
905:Keep
810:AfD?
794:Guy,
763:AfD?
747:Guy,
635:AfD?
619:Guy,
615:. -
556:per
522:Keep
489:Keep
369:talk
271:only
256:AfD?
240:Guy,
236:. -
215:talk
201:talk
59:Talk
1858:AvB
1804:AvB
1774:AvB
1706:AvB
1698:try
1640:you
1396:or
1376:now
1281:.
1112:.
1077:rWd
1046:Ban
973:. -
869:493
833:.
375:) .
209:),
195:of
175:csp
171:or
163:csm
131:spa
105:not
50:NOW
1983:--
1860:÷
1806:÷
1776:÷
1708:÷
1443:"
1349:)
1293:--
1156:.
1096:.
1079:·
892:.
877:lk
874:Ta
866:ns
863:yo
860:Dl
772:--
383:is
371:•
307:.
274:--
181:}}
169:}}
159::
153:}}
137:}}
127::
57:|
1345:(
1262:™
1058:s
1052:e
798:/
751:/
713:.
623:/
367:(
356:—
244:/
218:·
213:(
204:·
199:(
183:.
177:|
165:|
149:|
133:|
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
