1585:" in that it is an activity that occurs in the schoolyard... However NUGGETTING isn't quite as... gross... as Kancho. I'm not trying to cause any trouble here, I am simply telling the truth. If you people can't accept that, then I don't care... Flame me all you want, but it does not change your maturity (or lack thereof). Also, if what we were saying was indeed "Do not delete! Nuggeting is awesome d00dz!" I would see why you would want it delete it. As anyone who uses a "0" in place of an "o" or a "z" in place of a "s" is automatically able to be considered a complete and utter idiot. My vote of "Do not Delete" stands.
1463:
contributing to
Knowledge, and it's not from a member of our community. It's just a random, off-the-wall comment. On the other hand, if someone who has been here for a few days or weeks, preferably months, and has made valid edits to many articles, writes "Delete. This is a neologism that is not widespread enough." then it's a much more valued opinion. If we just counted all votes and didn't pay attention to who they are by, we'd be no better than some poor webpage's guestbook with 200 pages full of "HOT 18-YEAR-OLD TEENS LIVE!!!" written over and over again.
533:. The claim that it is nonsense might just as well be said about God, but there's an article on Him. Herodotus never referenced anything and he's called the Father of History. This is a work based on living memory and does not therefore require references. Those who want to delete this page are contributing to the destruction of the memory of a cultural phenomenon. It's the ugly side of globalistion. Comparable to the loss of a little-spoken African language. What richness it may hold for historians of the future! Do not delete this page, vikings!
1443:
who I know and interact with on a daily basis. I can recognise each of them with ease. (As people can do when they've known other people for six years...) Why all the hating on the NUGGET? I think it's because you're all a bunch of malicious conservative fools who feel as if anything you have never heard of must be destroyed... I must say, Knowledge is a place of knowledge, and this article is to inform people of "NUGGETS" and that's exactly what it does.
1144:"Nuggeting" is a term which dates back to the late 18th century. The imperial powers who colonised this nation used the term "Nuggeting" when they referred to the action of inversing somebodys sack. Nuggeting is genuine, informative and factual. It is an important aspect of Australian venacular. Moreover it is a common practice in Australian society. These reasons alone make the term "Nuggeting" encyclopedic.
1261:
tell them to furiously defend my shit when it comes up for deletion. These people are not interested in
Knowledge, they're just doing me a favour, for the wrong reasons. Because people try to pull stuff like this, it is a general guideline to discount the opinions of those with a minimum of edits to Knowledge, especially when the come in screaming complete bullshit like some here are.
1581:
has been no recruiting what-so-ever. All of our comments are our own separate opinion. I believe that this article belongs here as it contains factual information on a current occurence. I know there are people who want this article deleted and that's ok... But you can't go claiming something "Bullshit" when there are actual occurences. "NUGGETING" is similar to "
540:
average conventional encyclopedia; Knowledge is a site made by the people, for the people, which is perhaps the best system for an up-to-date reference. It is for these reasons that i feel the term should stand. I am also puzzled as to how the creator would go about collecting citations? picture evidence has been given, what other sources would be available?
2009:
arguements. Furthermore, if your going to leave a comment make sure it is a COMMENT and not "reasons given above". If thats all you have to contribute to this debate keep your uninformed opinions to yourself you unoriginal fool. At least write a valid reason as to why you should think it should be deleted instead of "dido".
1955:
also, of course the method section is all original research, the only websites you would accept as a source are just as conservative as yourself. maybe if you would accept this article then others would see it as acceptible too. please someone help me out here, tell me how that anecdote isn't written
1951:
as for us all being sockpuppets this website states "Suspicion of such sock puppets is often harder to verify though, as there are often people who naturally behave in such a manner with the same effects." is it too hard to believe that there are more than one person who agree with the same argument,
1761:
Unfortunately due to the extrmely large amount of OLD FARTS who use wikipedia, it is neccessary to get other people who know the term to support it. I believe a post on here was even made by a school teacher who has had to deal with the issue. Just because the majority of admins and users are 47 year
1300:
sweeping the nation, let alone the world. Sockpuppets, silly arguments (age bias? ignorance = delete? What?) and so on don't help it. None of the 'do not delete' votes justify themselves through policy or even sense. Ultimately unverifiable and pointless; it amounts to either a definition or original
1260:
The problem here is the suspicion that most of these people are just drummed up to ramraid this article into
Knowledge. It's a justifiable position to hold, considering people contributing here come from all over this rock. I could write up a load of complete shit, and then get ten mates together and
157:
to the idiots who call it Un-encyclopedic. this very website defines an encyclopedia as: An encyclopedia (alternatively encyclopaedia/encyclopædia) is a written compendium of knowledge. A compendium of knowledge, basically, a compile of knowledge. Without this article, people will be left in the dark
1625:
As to the reasons why John
Howards would declare a war against NUGGETING, I'm yet to be convinced. The lack of a national study does not detract from the credence of the NUGGETING process. There is only one way to determine the staying power of this article, and indeed the concept of the NUGGET. Let
1442:
Now then... I must say, being a Year 11 student in the start of his HSC year, that I have been in school long enough to see hundreds of NUGGETS... Also, what is with the constant claiming that everyone that says "Do not Delete" is a 'sock puppet'? I know for a fact that they're all individual people
2016:
Wikipeida - A website of close-minded, conservative, narrow-minded, rigid and discrimminatory users (hopefully just the minority i have been exposed to) who enjoy attacking articles in a subjective and personalised way and in doing so contradicting themselves in their criticisms of other supporters
1917:
Why are all of you ignorant people making such knee-jerk comments. The fact is that
Nuggeting is a legitimate term which derives from ancient roots. It is a term which is very apt in our society. Your arguments are creating a host of paradox's. You all claim to be such highly intellectual Knowledge
1596:
Well, there's a difference between Kancho and
Nuggeting. Kancho is a widely known aspect of young Japanese kids' culture. It has been well documented by a number of sources, a quick Google search can show you that. However, this Nuggeting phenomena has yet to be picked up by any larger publications
1580:
I'll admit that I have never edited a single article here on
Knowledge... (Although I probably could fix up a few of the sub par ones which are in my areas of interest...) But I'm not just some "Random Person" who was "recruited to save NUGGETS". I love this site dearly and visit it often and there
1557:
It is not bullshit. What is bullshit is the childish behaviour and aggression coming from wikipedia users who maintain their autocratic sense of self superiority under the delusion of their own false intellect! Grow up! Your responses have been more hostile, aggrivated and issue causing than any of
2012:
I totally agree with the previous comment, sockpuppetry is an excuse thrown around to destroy this credible article and if that is the strongst arguement you have then your in trouble. Sockpuppetry is an arguement against a small number of the supporters not the article itself, it is irrelevant to
1462:
The thing is, Knowledge is a community that works on consensus. Consensus is made up from the opinions of the people who actually contribute to
Knowledge. If just any random guy pops in here and writes "Do not delete! Nuggeting is awesome d00dz!" as his only edit, and then leaves forever, it's not
1391:(and, indeed, specifically espouses its purpose of being a repository for made up stuff), the unsupported word of a pseudonymous Knowledge editor, and the words of a load of drive-by editors who appear not to understand our policies or what it is to be an encyclopaedist. That is simply not enough.
1214:
They don't want to see nuggeted bags, they want newspaper articles, preferably from the Hearld or
Telegraph, saying something along the lines of "Nuggeting Menace - John Howard Declares War On Nuggeting". They want speeches by well-known shrinks about nuggeting. They want to be able to confidently
652:
Uncle G has let me know that we have proof that the term exists and that what the article discusses actually happens. However, my original feelings remain β there's not enough evidence that this idea needs its own page. There's not a significant amount of media coverage; right now there's only one
188:
This is an excellent article and should not be deleted because this is really happening in schools today. Just because it isnt effecting you doesnt mean it isnt an important issue to the youth of today. They also deserve the right to publish their definitions so please do not delete this excellent
1963:
BTW you have suggested we look at "testosterone poisoning" as an example. here is a quote from that page: "The earliest printed reference appears to be the 1985 book A Feminist
Dictionary. It is unclear whether this refers to existing slang or is the editors' humorous neologism." need i point out
1611:
As a student at a Sydney school, NUGGETING is part and parcel of daily life. Whether or not the Knowledge literati deem this article 'non-encyclopaedic' is irrelevant. It is a reference to today's changing social scene, and is the essence of what Knowledge stands for. If we want a free, web-based
1020:
Third, notability. Assuming you manage to meet the first two criteria, how can you prove that this is widespread and significant? Now I hope the "nugget" phenomenon never reaches this level, but I'd probably vote to keep if this became a political issue in Australia and New Zealand. If leading
539:
This is obviously a new slang term developing in 'adolescent society'. The secondary definition for nugget according to www.dictionary.com is: A small compact portion or unit. It is clear that an inverted case fits this description quite well. As the creator points out, wikipedia is not just your
1918:
nerds, yet all you do is display an array of contradictions and a low level of common sense. Nuggeting will remain and will grow in understanding with the fullness of time. And at the appropriate juncture you will all claim to have first cited the meaning of the word. Nuggeting is encyclopedic!
2008:
Delete, unverifiable was a comment left by one of the disgruntled users of wikipedia. If we were to define "contradiction" there would be this caption next to it, how about you VERIFY your opinion with evidence, you accuse them of using unverified information and then you dont even verify your
1021:
newspapers carried stories about a "nugget" epidemic, if concerned parents stormed town council meetings, if local laws were passed to ban "nuggets". Obviously it stops being fun long before that point. So move your content over to a Geocities. It's amusing. It just isn't encyclopedic.
79:
I believe that "nuggeting" should stay on this site as its information proves useful to my thesis which i have recently coompleted at university. I find that Nuggeting is much more interesting then the studies of Newton's Law and his good mate Kepler. DO NOT DELETE for the sake of science
414:
This is an extremely common occurence in highschools throughout Australia (and quite possibly even the world). This site is all about informing individuals who are curious enough to find the definition of things they dont know. "nuggeting" is real, and hence deserves a proper defenition!
1967:
im sick and tired of people saying its unencyclopedic, at least our arguments have substance! we are saying why it should stay and we are giving damn good reasons too. "unencyclopedic" is not an argument without some sort of elaboration and sockpuppetry is an opinion NO FACT whatsoever.
1357:
been through a process of fact checking and peer review and been accepted into the corpus of human knowledge by people other than its creator(s). Knowledge isn't for documenting new things. It isn't a publisher of first instance for human knowledge that has never been recorded before.
638:. You can get anything into Urban Dictionary. If, sometime in the future, someone offers conclusive evidence showing that this term exists, I would support including a note about it in a list of the regional slang of the area, but that's all. Part of me does want to BJAODN this, though.
1466:
About the terminology: A sock puppet is an account used by a person who already has an account, to create the impression that he's two people. A meat puppet is an account used by a different person, but only because someone asked him to get an account and vote in a deletion debate. β
1959:
if you're going to delete this article for it being a neologism may i direct you to delete also the terms "wikipedia", "Wiktionary", "Wikibooks", and "Wikinews". These terms make even less sense, have no origin and no sources that could be deemed verifiable by your standards!
1453:"all individual people who you know and interact with" equals meatpuppets. Just because you've managed to convince lots of your friends in your high school to go and vote on Knowledge doesn't mean the rest of us are going to regard all of them as independent votes.--
1502:
and page protect, and recreate the article in the future when we have the documentation to prove this. All we have at the moment is the word of one ex-Normo boy and a whole bunch of St Pats kids with nothing better to do until term ends, and that just isn't enough.
1279:
would people please stop SHOUTING their votes, and however emotional you may feel, keep your arguments (for or against) coherent. Oh yes, I know its too late now, but the conventional term is "Keep", not "Do not delete". It would have made reading so much easier.
321:
As i posted under discussion, this article is what wikipedia is all about. Nugget is a serious and common term in adolescent society. If users wanted and encyclopaedia which was restricted to terms and events found in britannica, they would go to britannica.com
505:
Im sorry but the only sock puppeting and vandalising occurring is coming from those of you who wish to delete the article simply becuase you do not understand/know of the concept. Please do not act like children, the article is not nonsense but an actual term.
1037:, Just because all the old people out there want this deleted because they have missed out on this fad that is sweeping the nation, and probably sweeping the globe soon enough. Get over it!!! DO NOT DELETE!!!!!!!!! P.s. Ching got nuggeted, HAHAHAHAHA
344:
I totally disagree with the non-encyclopedic and nonsense comments, do not judge articles so harshly. Just because you are not aware of something does not mean it is a false article. It is factual in my opinion and informative. It deserves to stay
1971:
you know what, you all seem to know so much that we know longer need "wikipedia - an encyclopedia by the people for the peple" i think "wikipedia - by conservative autocratic fools who know everything to tell everyone else what is and what isnt."
963:
article certainly requires some alteration, however it is a well written and realistic article about a true fallice. Sock puppeting? The sock puppeting is coming from people like Randwicked. I dont understand the problem with the article
1817:
You are wasting your time. As new editors that are not contributors to wikipedia, we simply can't give as much stock to these comments otherwise the AfD process would break down. You may not be sockpuppets, but you are at least
464:- Everything needs a definition even if itβs the strangest term more the reason for it to be defined, therefore it is encyclopaedic and seeing that its popularity is increasing people should be made more aware of what it is.
1626:
the article enter the common lexicon through its inclusion into the Knowledge collection. Deleting at such a premature stage sets a precedent which jeopardises the relevance of Knowledge to today's youth culture.
1204:
How many inside out objects must we show you people that it is a real term? Why delete it, the person who wrote this has put a lot of effort into it, although I agree is should have some things removed.
815:
Excellent article and extremely relevant to adolescent society. Deletion would shame Knowledge. What on earth is this "Sock puppeting", people who express positive views?! - 8:58 November 2005 (UTC)
762:
this article. All verifiable sources consist of one mention in one newspaper article. I don't take UrbanDictionary or word-of-mouth reports as verifiable sources. I change my vote to
932:, Australia, (between Berowra and Meadowbank stations) I can safely say that a year ago, nuggeting was a menace, and has probaly increased in the year since I've left high school.
1215:
say "Hey, someone other than students from St Pats, someone a lot more important than these students, they're talking about nuggeting". It's one of Knowledge's core principles -
158:
to the act of NUGGETING, just because it was done by a group of school students doesn't stop it from being educational, not matter how obscure the content. This must stay.
1368:
demonstrating that multiple people who independent of the creator(s) of the concept have published works of their own about it, in the same manner as was done for the
1233:
you guys are calling it sockpuppeting but infact you just can't face the fact that more people want this page not deleted then deleted 5:59 , 21 November 2005 (UTC)
928:, Asquith Boys High School, Cheltenham Girls High School and several others. I hate to have to agree with the sockpuppets, but amongst the school-age teenagers of the
853:
1571:
as it is a neologism. This phenomena is not encyclopedic; it has not established any notability in high school culture. As other fads before it, it too shall pass. --
1373:
836:
Keep thanks to rewrite from Uncle G, no thanks to socks. Phrase more common than I thought in Sydney. If not kept as a seperate article, should be merged.
1700:
with extreme prejudice, echoing the reasons cited by those above me who have also voted to delete, and also because if it were notable, it wouldn't
334:
This is a legitimate article, nuggetting exists and i've encountered it. It is a truthful and good article, deleting this is unreasonable and wrong
127:
i nuggeting is happening in every where i work for a builder and ive seen nuggeting going round on building sites this page should not be deleted
951:
I wasn't even going to bother voting on this one as consensuh clearly has been formed, but all the sockpuppeteering going on has aroused my ire.
1670:
In the old days, people were on TV because they were members of the parliament. Now people are members of the parliament because they are on TV.
1314:
At least, when I close AfDs, I ignore every vote by a user who has only edited the AfD debate (or the AfD debate and the article it's about). β
1723:
882:. NUGGETING is real and this page informs other people of NUGGETING and also helps define adolescence culture 10:27, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
2033:
1778:
1633:
1615:
1561:
1359:
1249:
1130:
1057:
980:
898:
205:
143:
96:
1975:
ill finish (for now) by saying this. you're all rather misinformed. the term you're looking for is not "sockpuppet" its "minority group"
1934:
1190:
1160:
174:
1991:
1114:
if Graffiti has a large article and is not deleted then why can't NUGGET's have a article on wikipedia 05:14, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
938:, move to a non-capitalised name, rewrite article to generalise the article's content, and remove 'Nuggeting Records' section.
17:
370:
just because you people are unaware doesnt mean it shouldnt be there, if u dont like its unencyclopaedianess then dont read it
1350:
1014:
290:
1597:(the reference cited is just one school district). Therefore, if for that reason alone, this article should be deleted. --
929:
592:
1305:
help us all) then it needs a huge rewrite, but I hope that won't happen. I assume those sock puppets will be discounted?
1017:. Has anyone published your concept in a reputable venue such as an academic study of teen culture or a major newspaper?
1832:
1654:
1417:
917:
1762:
old virgins with nothing better to do doesnt mean we deserve to be slandered and titled as ridiculous "sock-puppets"
653:
article listed. I would support a merge to a list of pranks or somesuch, but we don't need this much material there.
603:- nonsense, inluding 'half a mars bar was eaten from someones bag during the process.' BJAODN? I am still chortling.
910:"Neologism popular amongst sockpuppets and students at one Sydney Catholic school St Patricks College Strathfield.
834:
Neologism popular amongst sockpuppets and students at one Sydney Catholic school St Patricks College Strathfield.
2117:
1535:
1388:
925:
924:
and Marsden High School and Marist College (Eastwood). I've also seen or directly heard of isolated incidents at
36:
1292:
Agree with all delete votes so far. I'm a schoolboy in Perth and I have never, ever come across the term. Ever.
2116:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
2029:
1774:
1053:
976:
894:
92:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
1245:
1126:
201:
139:
1930:
1808:
1156:
2053:
1987:
1338:
1216:
1186:
921:
911:
859:
837:
170:
52:
440:
as non-encyclopaedic. Both this page and the article talk page are getting sock-puppeted and vandalised. --
1365:
1302:
2025:
1791:
1770:
1241:
1122:
1049:
972:
890:
511:
488:
484:
469:
197:
135:
109:
88:
1926:
1182:
1152:
166:
1983:
1411:- Appears to be vaugley verifiable, but does not appear to be noteworthy. Meat/SockPuppet supported. --
49:
1013:
Second, in the event that you could upgrade this article beyond a dictionary definition, you run into
2021:
1979:
1922:
1766:
1705:
1528:
1237:
1206:
1178:
1148:
1118:
1045:
991:
968:
886:
822:
804:
766:
as I still feel this is a neologism, and the ever-increasing number of sock puppets isn't helping. β
492:
416:
323:
193:
162:
131:
84:
1666:
Things aren't notable because they're on Knowledge. Things are on Knowledge because they're notable.
1353:
policy that editors provide sources so that it is demonstrable that the concept being described has
732:
without even looking at the article. Anything gathering this many sock puppets has to be deleted. β
346:
2094:
1893:
1750:
1542:
719:
2013:
the legitmacy of the article and therefore an arguement which mentions it should be disregarded.
1345:
of those areas can verify that what is asserted from firsthand experience is in fact the case and
335:
2049:
1848:
1823:
1640:
This is almost funny. Things don't become notable because they are on wikipedia. They must first
659:
645:
310:
282:
2097:
2084:
2068:
2056:
2037:
1995:
1938:
1908:
1896:
1875:
1863:
1851:
1837:
1798:
1782:
1753:
1741:
1729:
1688:
1659:
1601:
1575:
1549:
1519:
1507:
1483:
1457:
1434:
1422:
1402:
1330:
1309:
1284:
1265:
1253:
1223:
1209:
1194:
1164:
1134:
1106:
1095:
1079:
1061:
1038:
1025:
998:
984:
955:
943:
902:
874:
862:
840:
825:
807:
791:
782:
748:
722:
710:
690:
661:
647:
629:
607:
595:
575:
554:
518:
476:
456:
444:
429:
419:
406:
394:
359:
349:
326:
313:
298:
265:
253:
241:
229:
209:
178:
147:
116:
100:
70:
54:
1860:
1306:
821:
this is absurd. Neologism supported by sockpuppetry who don't even bother reading how to vote.
2065:
1103:
584:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
238:
567:, non-encyclopedic neologism, unsourced, idiosyncratic. Note also the sockpuppettry above.
2081:
1558:
the supporting posts. Take a long hard look at yourselves and how you spend your time. --
1380:
995:
568:
551:
515:
473:
453:
426:
356:
1964:
that the origin of this is also shady AND it is a neologism - you've said it yourself!
1889:
1819:
1612:
encyclopedia which deals with the real issues, then NUGGETING surely must be included.
1092:
1091:. The rash of sock puppets defending this article only highlights its dubiousness. --
672:
572:
250:
1685:
1504:
1498:, but I'm actually starting to think that the best thing to do would be to perform a
1491:
1490:
Its widespread in Sydney, but I personally have no way to prove it that doesn't blow
1480:
1454:
1431:
1369:
1327:
1262:
1220:
1075:
I graduated high school in 2003... am I really an old person now? But I'm only 20! --
1007:
940:
779:
745:
654:
640:
626:
307:
274:
1738:
1598:
1572:
1495:
1399:
1076:
788:
755:
604:
587:
1952:
or should we accuse all the "delete" arguments as being sock puppetry as well???
1646:
Let the article enter the common lexicon through its inclusion into the Knowledge
1003:
I'll explain the problem because some genuine effort has gone into this article.
219:
Nuggets are an aspect of every day life for a school student. This needs to stay.
1905:
1827:
1649:
1412:
1281:
1022:
1010:
dictionary definitions are not encyclopedic. This is especially true for slang.
707:
391:
383:
1795:
1516:
441:
382:. If this article had any legitimacy it would come with links and citations.
226:
113:
2080:
the socks. And if the socks don't stop, RfD their school as well. Regards,
952:
871:
67:
249:. This is real (it's happened to me, in fact), but it is not encyclopedic.
1872:
1673:
1468:
1315:
767:
733:
403:
262:
1944:
This users only edits have been to this discussion and it's talk page.
1582:
487:
only edited this entry to alter the format for ease of viewing, User
60:
1749:. Insufficient evidence of notability as a widespread phenomenon. -
1871:, unencyclopedic, unverifiable. Wow, biggest puppetfest in months!
1847:
as per nom (and the rubbish above didn't help the cause either).
2110:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
1430:- Hordes of sockpuppets and meatpuppets don't make it better. --
529:
Only the people who don't want this page to be deleted have any
758:'s relentless insistence, I have actually taken the trouble to
625:
nn sophomoric high school pranking, with sockpuppetry to boot.
615:"unsourced"? I should like to point out that there are now
1341:
policy that editors provide sources so that readers from
1364:
If the editors who do not want this article deleted can
1668:(Reminds me of something I read in a Finnish magazine:
2093:
What good would that do? Don't make it personal... -
702:
with all the puppets. This one's like an episode of
2001:
This users only edits have been to this discussion.
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
671:neologism, and sockpuppets are never a good sign.
1888:, as per MCB. The meatpuppets don't help either.
1807:P.S many references on the wikipedia article on
1644:noteworthy before they can be included here. So,
718:per The Anome. Plus, no claim to notability. --
2120:). No further edits should be made to this page.
1859:as per nomininator, and thwack sockpuppeteers.
1811:come from blogs and internet slang definitions
8:
1379:However, all that readers have right now is
571:should also be deleted at the same time. --
48:. I'm putting an end to this nonsense. --
852:: This debate has been included in the
2048:- Knowledge is not a slang dictionary.
1494:to all hells. Thanks for your efforts
7:
1904:for the reasons mentioned above. -
1664:I agree. This can be summed up by:
854:list of Australia-related deletions
24:
1275:Completely unencyclopedic. And a
1822:. Sorry. Oh, and please observe
1376:), then that would be excellent.
1347:has been documented as being so
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
1794:'s sixth vote on this page. --
1041:13:37, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
1015:Knowledge:No original research
386:11:13, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
1:
2098:18:10, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
2085:12:33, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
2069:17:03, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
2057:13:55, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
2038:09:25, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
1996:11:07, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
1939:09:25, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
1909:07:00, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
1897:06:56, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
1876:06:05, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
1864:04:55, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
1852:03:02, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
1838:01:00, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
1799:00:59, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
1783:00:39, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
1754:19:22, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
1742:15:35, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
1730:15:24, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
1689:13:45, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
1660:12:57, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
1602:16:02, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
1576:05:15, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
1550:23:40, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
1520:23:34, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
1515:No sources, non encyclopedic
1508:20:44, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
1484:21:22, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
1458:20:34, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
1435:15:30, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
1423:15:14, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
1403:14:26, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
1331:12:50, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
1310:11:51, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
1285:09:36, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
1266:07:37, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
1254:06:59, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
1224:07:37, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
1210:06:50, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
1195:06:43, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
1165:06:37, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
1135:06:13, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
1107:05:14, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
1096:04:53, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
1080:16:14, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
1062:02:39, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
1026:03:53, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
999:03:09, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
985:02:39, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
956:01:50, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
944:23:54, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
934:It pains me to say this, but
930:Northern railway line, Sydney
903:23:28, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
875:23:25, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
863:23:04, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
841:22:56, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
826:22:27, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
808:19:30, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
792:11:50, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
783:17:36, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
749:18:15, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
723:17:05, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
711:16:44, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
691:16:05, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
662:15:32, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
648:14:56, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
630:14:23, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
608:13:11, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
596:12:58, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
576:12:56, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
555:13:54, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
519:12:13, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
477:12:13, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
457:12:04, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
445:12:02, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
430:12:10, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
420:10:45, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
407:11:21, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
395:19:37, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
390:for persistent sockpuppetry.
360:12:10, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
350:10:01, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
327:09:28, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
314:10:23, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
299:07:45, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
266:06:42, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
254:05:59, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
242:05:58, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
230:05:45, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
210:07:03, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
179:10:13, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
148:12:06, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
117:22:58, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
112:'s fifth vote on this page --
101:22:35, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
71:05:31, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
55:20:17, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
44:The result of the debate was
1704:sockpuppets to defend it. β
918:Normanhurst Boys High School
338:9:56, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
1174:its a freaking work of art
495:7:42 21 November 2005 (UTC)
2138:
1360:Knowledge is not a soapbox
994:. Please to be reading. -
1349:. It is required by our
1301:research. If it is kept (
926:Hornsby Girls High School
2113:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
1809:internet sock puppeting
1217:Knowledge:Verifiability
922:Epping Boys High School
787:Excellent. Thank you.
491:did not compose entry.
1394:I've started you off.
1337:It is required by our
273:non-encyclopedic... --
1614:-- Unsigned vote by
1560:Unsigned comment by
1351:no original research
992:Internet sock puppet
583:as per The Anome. β¨
355:User has 2 edits. -
2064:Non-encyclopedic.
1636:2005-11-22 09:57:03
1618:2005-11-22 09:57:03
1564:2005-11-22 03:34:55
550:User has 1 edit. -
425:User has 1 edit. -
306:per nom and Zocky.
2054:Talk to the driver
1824:Knowledge:Civility
1648:is wayyyyy off. --
912:Capitalistroadster
860:Capitalistroadster
838:Capitalistroadster
619:on the term NUGGET
2124:
2041:
2024:comment added by
2002:
1999:
1982:comment added by
1945:
1942:
1925:comment added by
1801:
1786:
1769:comment added by
1735:Delete and BJAODN
1632:unsigned vote by
1257:
1240:comment added by
1198:
1181:comment added by
1168:
1151:comment added by
1138:
1121:comment added by
1065:
1048:comment added by
988:
971:comment added by
906:
889:comment added by
857:
557:
542:
521:
496:
479:
432:
362:
213:
196:comment added by
182:
165:comment added by
151:
134:comment added by
119:
104:
87:comment added by
2129:
2115:
2040:
2018:
2000:
1998:
1976:
1943:
1941:
1919:
1789:
1785:
1763:
1727:
1720:
1715:
1712:
1682:
1679:
1676:
1547:
1540:
1533:
1477:
1474:
1471:
1324:
1321:
1318:
1256:
1234:
1197:
1175:
1167:
1145:
1137:
1115:
1064:
1042:
987:
965:
905:
883:
848:
776:
773:
770:
742:
739:
736:
688:
685:
682:
679:
657:
643:
569:Image:Nugget.jpg
549:
544:
509:
500:
482:
467:
424:
354:
296:
288:
280:
212:
190:
181:
159:
150:
128:
107:
103:
81:
34:
2137:
2136:
2132:
2131:
2130:
2128:
2127:
2126:
2125:
2118:deletion review
2111:
2019:
1977:
1920:
1884:
1835:
1764:
1737:. Hilarious. -
1726:
1721:
1718:
1713:
1706:
1680:
1677:
1674:
1657:
1543:
1536:
1529:
1475:
1472:
1469:
1420:
1389:reliable source
1381:UrbanDictionary
1322:
1319:
1316:
1235:
1176:
1146:
1116:
1043:
966:
884:
823:KillerChihuahua
805:Cynicism addict
774:
771:
768:
740:
737:
734:
686:
683:
680:
677:
655:
641:
514:has 3 edits. -
472:has 3 edits. -
452:as nonsense. -
417:User:Matt.Booth
297:
294:
289:
286:
281:
278:
261:per all above.
191:
160:
129:
82:
64:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
2135:
2133:
2123:
2122:
2105:
2103:
2102:
2101:
2100:
2095:Colin Kimbrell
2088:
2087:
2071:
2059:
2026:141.168.18.208
1912:
1911:
1899:
1880:
1878:
1866:
1854:
1842:
1841:
1840:
1831:
1805:
1804:
1803:
1802:
1792:210.215.116.19
1771:210.215.116.19
1756:
1751:Colin Kimbrell
1744:
1732:
1722:
1695:
1694:
1693:
1692:
1691:
1653:
1634:138.130.60.157
1620:
1616:138.130.60.157
1605:
1604:
1587:
1586:
1578:
1566:
1562:210.215.116.19
1552:
1527:its bullshit.
1522:
1510:
1488:
1487:
1486:
1464:
1460:
1445:
1444:
1437:
1425:
1416:
1406:
1374:AfD discussion
1335:
1334:
1333:
1287:
1270:
1269:
1268:
1242:203.45.116.154
1228:
1227:
1226:
1199:
1169:
1139:
1123:203.45.116.154
1109:
1098:
1085:
1084:
1083:
1082:
1067:
1066:
1050:210.215.116.19
1032:
1031:
1030:
1029:
1028:
1018:
1011:
1001:
973:210.215.116.19
958:
946:
907:
891:210.215.116.19
877:
865:
846:
843:
828:
816:
810:
798:
797:
796:
795:
794:
725:
720:A D Monroe III
713:
693:
673:Andrew Lenahan
666:
665:
664:
632:
620:
610:
598:
578:
561:
560:
559:
558:
543:
541:
534:
524:
523:
522:
512:211.30.207.157
499:
498:
497:
489:211.30.207.157
485:211.30.207.157
480:
470:211.30.207.157
459:
447:
435:
434:
433:
409:
397:
371:
365:
364:
363:
339:
329:
316:
301:
293:
285:
277:
268:
256:
244:
232:
220:
214:
198:138.130.83.157
183:
152:
136:220.233.106.20
122:
121:
120:
110:210.215.116.19
89:210.215.116.19
63:
58:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
2134:
2121:
2119:
2114:
2108:
2107:
2106:
2099:
2096:
2092:
2091:
2090:
2089:
2086:
2083:
2079:
2075:
2072:
2070:
2067:
2063:
2060:
2058:
2055:
2051:
2050:OpenToppedBus
2047:
2044:
2043:
2042:
2039:
2035:
2031:
2027:
2023:
2014:
2010:
2007:
2006:DO NOT DELETE
2003:
1997:
1993:
1989:
1985:
1981:
1973:
1969:
1965:
1961:
1957:
1953:
1950:
1946:
1940:
1936:
1932:
1928:
1927:211.30.107.19
1924:
1916:
1910:
1907:
1903:
1900:
1898:
1895:
1891:
1887:
1886:strong delete
1883:
1879:
1877:
1874:
1870:
1867:
1865:
1862:
1858:
1855:
1853:
1850:
1846:
1843:
1839:
1834:
1829:
1825:
1821:
1816:
1815:
1814:
1813:
1812:
1810:
1800:
1797:
1793:
1788:
1787:
1784:
1780:
1776:
1772:
1768:
1760:
1759:Do not delete
1757:
1755:
1752:
1748:
1745:
1743:
1740:
1736:
1733:
1731:
1725:
1716:
1711:
1710:
1703:
1699:
1696:
1690:
1687:
1683:
1671:
1667:
1663:
1662:
1661:
1656:
1651:
1647:
1643:
1639:
1638:
1637:
1635:
1631:
1624:
1623:Do not delete
1621:
1619:
1617:
1610:
1609:Do not delete
1607:
1606:
1603:
1600:
1595:
1592:
1591:
1590:
1584:
1579:
1577:
1574:
1570:
1567:
1565:
1563:
1556:
1553:
1551:
1548:
1546:
1541:
1539:
1534:
1532:
1526:
1523:
1521:
1518:
1514:
1511:
1509:
1506:
1501:
1497:
1493:
1489:
1485:
1482:
1478:
1465:
1461:
1459:
1456:
1452:
1451:
1450:
1449:
1448:
1441:
1440:Do not Delete
1438:
1436:
1433:
1429:
1426:
1424:
1419:
1414:
1410:
1407:
1405:
1404:
1401:
1397:
1392:
1390:
1386:
1382:
1377:
1375:
1371:
1370:Walk of shame
1367:
1361:
1356:
1352:
1348:
1344:
1340:
1339:verifiability
1336:
1332:
1329:
1325:
1313:
1312:
1311:
1308:
1304:
1299:
1295:
1291:
1288:
1286:
1283:
1278:
1274:
1271:
1267:
1264:
1259:
1258:
1255:
1251:
1247:
1243:
1239:
1232:
1231:DO NOT DELETE
1229:
1225:
1222:
1218:
1213:
1212:
1211:
1208:
1203:
1202:DO NOT DELETE
1200:
1196:
1192:
1188:
1184:
1183:211.30.129.11
1180:
1173:
1172:DO NOT DELETE
1170:
1166:
1162:
1158:
1154:
1153:211.30.107.19
1150:
1143:
1142:DO NOT DELETE
1140:
1136:
1132:
1128:
1124:
1120:
1113:
1112:DO NOT DELETE
1110:
1108:
1105:
1102:
1099:
1097:
1094:
1090:
1087:
1086:
1081:
1078:
1074:
1071:
1070:
1069:
1068:
1063:
1059:
1055:
1051:
1047:
1040:
1036:
1035:DO NOT DELETE
1033:
1027:
1024:
1019:
1016:
1012:
1009:
1005:
1004:
1002:
1000:
997:
993:
990:
989:
986:
982:
978:
974:
970:
962:
961:Do not delete
959:
957:
954:
950:
947:
945:
942:
939:
937:
931:
927:
923:
919:
915:
913:
908:
904:
900:
896:
892:
888:
881:
880:DO NOT DELETE
878:
876:
873:
870:. Neologism.
869:
866:
864:
861:
855:
851:
847:
844:
842:
839:
835:
833:
829:
827:
824:
820:
817:
814:
813:Do not delete
811:
809:
806:
802:
799:
793:
790:
786:
785:
784:
781:
777:
765:
761:
757:
753:
752:
751:
750:
747:
743:
731:
726:
724:
721:
717:
714:
712:
709:
705:
701:
700:Strong delete
697:
694:
692:
689:
674:
670:
667:
663:
660:
658:
651:
650:
649:
646:
644:
639:
637:
633:
631:
628:
624:
621:
618:
614:
613:Do not Delete
611:
609:
606:
602:
599:
597:
594:
591:
590:
586:
582:
579:
577:
574:
570:
566:
563:
562:
556:
553:
548:
547:
546:
545:
538:
537:Do not Delete
535:
532:
528:
527:Do not Delete
525:
520:
517:
513:
508:
507:
504:
503:Do not Delete
501:
494:
490:
486:
481:
478:
475:
471:
466:
465:
463:
462:Do not Delete
460:
458:
455:
451:
448:
446:
443:
439:
436:
431:
428:
423:
422:
421:
418:
413:
412:Do not delete
410:
408:
405:
401:
398:
396:
393:
389:
388:Strong delete
385:
381:
378:and hush the
377:
376:
372:
369:
368:DO NOT DELETE
366:
361:
358:
353:
352:
351:
348:
343:
342:Do not delete
340:
337:
333:
332:Do not delete
330:
328:
325:
320:
319:Do not delete
317:
315:
312:
309:
305:
302:
300:
292:
284:
276:
272:
269:
267:
264:
260:
257:
255:
252:
248:
245:
243:
240:
236:
233:
231:
228:
224:
221:
218:
217:Do not delete
215:
211:
207:
203:
199:
195:
187:
186:Do not delete
184:
180:
176:
172:
168:
167:211.30.129.11
164:
156:
155:Do not delete
153:
149:
145:
141:
137:
133:
126:
125:Do not delete
123:
118:
115:
111:
106:
105:
102:
98:
94:
90:
86:
78:
77:Do not delete
75:
74:
73:
72:
69:
62:
59:
57:
56:
53:
51:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
2112:
2109:
2104:
2077:
2073:
2061:
2045:
2020:β Preceding
2015:
2011:
2005:
2004:
1984:203.45.127.4
1978:β Preceding
1974:
1970:
1966:
1962:
1958:
1954:
1948:
1947:
1921:β Preceding
1914:
1913:
1901:
1885:
1881:
1868:
1856:
1844:
1806:
1765:β Preceding
1758:
1746:
1734:
1708:
1707:
1701:
1697:
1669:
1665:
1645:
1641:
1629:
1627:
1622:
1613:
1608:
1593:
1588:
1568:
1559:
1554:
1544:
1537:
1530:
1524:
1512:
1500:mercy delete
1499:
1446:
1439:
1427:
1408:
1395:
1393:
1384:
1378:
1366:cite sources
1363:
1354:
1346:
1342:
1297:
1293:
1289:
1276:
1272:
1236:β Preceding
1230:
1201:
1177:β Preceding
1171:
1147:β Preceding
1141:
1117:β Preceding
1111:
1104:pfctdayelise
1100:
1088:
1072:
1044:β Preceding
1034:
967:β Preceding
960:
948:
935:
933:
909:
885:β Preceding
879:
867:
849:
831:
830:
818:
812:
800:
763:
759:
756:User:Uncle G
729:
727:
715:
703:
699:
695:
676:
668:
635:
634:
622:
616:
612:
600:
588:
580:
564:
536:
531:valid reason
530:
526:
502:
461:
449:
437:
411:
399:
387:
379:
374:
373:
367:
341:
331:
318:
303:
270:
258:
246:
237:, agreed. --
234:
225:, nonsense.
222:
216:
192:β Preceding
185:
161:β Preceding
154:
130:β Preceding
124:
83:β Preceding
76:
65:
50:Ryan Delaney
45:
43:
31:
28:
2082:Ben Aveling
2076:the page.
1949:DONT DELETE
1915:DONT DELETE
1849:Sarah Ewart
1820:Meatpuppets
1383:, which is
1006:First, per
764:weak delete
704:The Muppets
617:two sources
402:nonsense --
380:sockpuppets
239:Intimidated
1956:from NPOV
1589:M.A. Sato
1531:Fahrenheit
1447:M.A. Sato
1207:Bmw lurker
996:Randwicked
803:Neologism
728:As usual,
552:Randwicked
516:Randwicked
493:sparks_333
474:Randwicked
454:Randwicked
427:Randwicked
357:Randwicked
324:sparks_333
66:neolagism
1890:Kimchi.sg
1790:This was
1396:Weak keep
1385:in no way
1093:Roisterer
936:Weak Keep
573:The Anome
347:lynchical
251:NatusRoma
189:article!
108:This was
2034:contribs
2022:unsigned
1992:contribs
1980:unsigned
1935:contribs
1923:unsigned
1779:contribs
1767:unsigned
1505:Saberwyn
1455:Pmetzger
1432:Pmetzger
1296:. It is
1277:comment:
1263:Saberwyn
1250:contribs
1238:unsigned
1221:Saberwyn
1191:contribs
1179:unsigned
1161:contribs
1149:unsigned
1131:contribs
1119:unsigned
1058:contribs
1046:unsigned
981:contribs
969:unsigned
941:Saberwyn
916:... and
899:contribs
887:unsigned
698:becomes
627:Eusebeus
308:Blackcap
275:VileRage
206:contribs
194:unsigned
175:contribs
163:unsigned
144:contribs
132:unsigned
97:contribs
85:unsigned
1833:Contrib
1739:Marcika
1714:Unction
1709:Ξxtreme
1655:Contrib
1599:mdd4696
1594:Comment
1573:mdd4696
1496:Uncle G
1418:Contrib
1400:Uncle G
1355:already
1343:outside
1077:mdd4696
1073:Comment
789:Uncle G
605:Squiddy
589:REDVERS
336:P.duffy
2074:Delete
2066:Jasmol
2062:Delete
2046:Delete
1906:Akamad
1902:Delete
1882:Delete
1869:Delete
1857:Delete
1845:Delete
1828:JiFish
1747:Delete
1698:Delete
1650:JiFish
1642:become
1630:second
1583:Kancho
1569:Delete
1525:Delete
1513:Delete
1492:WP:NOR
1428:Delete
1413:JiFish
1409:Delete
1290:Delete
1282:Zunaid
1273:Delete
1101:BJAODN
1089:Delete
1023:Durova
1008:WP:NOT
949:Delete
868:Delete
832:Delete
819:Delete
801:Delete
730:delete
716:Delete
708:Ifnord
696:Delete
669:Delete
656:Jacqui
642:Jacqui
636:Delete
623:Delete
601:Delete
581:Delete
565:Delete
450:Delete
438:Delete
400:Delete
392:Durova
384:Durova
375:Delete
311:(talk)
304:Delete
271:Delete
259:Delete
247:Delete
235:Delete
223:Delete
61:NUGGET
46:Delete
1796:BillC
1628:-- A
1538:Royal
1517:Agnte
1039:Tommo
510:User
483:User
468:User
442:BillC
227:Zocky
114:BillC
16:<
2078:Burn
2030:talk
1988:talk
1931:talk
1894:Talk
1861:Ambi
1826:. --
1775:talk
1724:blah
1702:need
1686:Talk
1672:) β
1555:Keep
1481:Talk
1328:Talk
1307:Tolo
1294:Ever
1246:talk
1187:talk
1157:talk
1127:talk
1054:talk
977:talk
953:Reyk
920:and
895:talk
872:Cnwb
850:Note
780:Talk
760:read
754:Per
746:Talk
291:Cont
283:Talk
202:talk
171:talk
140:talk
93:talk
68:Geni
1873:MCB
1303:God
1298:not
856:.
684:bli
404:pgk
263:PJM
2052:-
2036:)
2032:β’
1994:)
1990:β’
1937:)
1933:β’
1892:|
1836:)
1830:(/
1781:)
1777:β’
1728:}
1684:|
1658:)
1652:(/
1479:|
1421:)
1415:(/
1398:.
1387:a
1326:|
1252:)
1248:β’
1219:.
1205:--
1193:)
1189:β’
1163:)
1159:β’
1133:)
1129:β’
1060:)
1056:β’
983:)
979:β’
901:)
897:β’
858:.
778:|
744:|
706:.
687:nd
681:ar
678:St
675:-
208:)
204:β’
177:)
173:β’
146:)
142:β’
99:)
95:β’
2028:(
1986:(
1929:(
1773:(
1719:Ε
1717:{
1681:P
1678:I
1675:J
1545:e
1476:P
1473:I
1470:J
1372:(
1362:.
1323:P
1320:I
1317:J
1244:(
1185:(
1155:(
1125:(
1052:(
975:(
914:"
893:(
845:"
775:P
772:I
769:J
741:P
738:I
735:J
593:β
585:β
295:)
287:|
279:(
200:(
169:(
138:(
91:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.