1600:, let me take a moment to try and address some of the points you made. The previous two AfDs closed as "no consensus" and it's hard to find fault with that--they are terrible AfDs without many valid arguments on either side (except "POV fork", which, I guess, is an easy accusation to make in many such cases). Besides, both discussions took place in 2006--nine years ago. On the other hand, I understand that one might think that we're trying to delete "positive" content here, but I think we will be better served with a better article, better title, better sourcing, better selection. Until we have a significant amount of material supported by secondary sources, I think we should make this article a redirect to the appropriate section in
1583:. I also think that this seemingly arbitrary (!) collection of quotes is inappropriate, and Knowledge (XXG) editors should not go around dividing opinions into positive and negative. Without secondary sourcing there is no topic; the only acceptable kind of source I see in the article is an article called "A Critical Survey of Modern Studies of Muhammad", but that's from 1963, it's not about Ali (directly), and the only thing it is used for is a critique of a Jesuit of the 19th/20th century who apparently had a holy contempt for Islam and said something about Ali.
876:: The main issue for me is that the topic of the article seems to be made up. The quotations are selected without any seeming rhyme or reason. Who selected the authors and quotes? Is "non-Muslim view of Ali" an object of scholarly study, rather than simply a hodgepodge of views of Ali by non-Muslims? There should be a scholarly review article which does the selecting and quoting, not random wikipedia editors. As it stands, the article is a virtual copy of the section
382:(which you also publicized on ANI). At ANI I mistook your tag-teaming with the other editor as three deletions by you when only two were by you, and I noted that. I'm not ignoring the fact that this article in part duplicates some material contained in part of another article, I'm pointing up the fact that instead of trying to resolve that situation you have been insisting that the material be removed from both locations.
555:. Fully sourced and notable topic. Has already passed two AfDs. This is feeling like a bad-faith nomination to me for reasons stated above. I'm actually trying to AGF as much as possible despite the edit-warring and tag-teaming on both articles, but the worst-case scenario is that for some reason the user is trying to suppress positive viewpoints on Ali or Islam.
295:(I'm not saying it all should be deleted), but that is a matter for later discussion. My point here is that we currently have one article that is identical to a section in another article, making it an unnecessary duplicate. Non-Muslim views on Ali is notable, and should be found on Knowledge (XXG), but I think the article on
1547:
says "A point of view (POV) fork is a content fork deliberately created to avoid neutral point of view guidelines, often to avoid or highlight negative or positive viewpoints or facts. All POV forks are undesirable on
Knowledge (XXG), as they avoid consensus building and therefore violate one of our
1641:
is non-muslim? how did that happen? Also, what kind of non-muslim opinions are we going to put here? Can I put in the opinion of Herr Geert Wilder? OR Bill Maher? I would think that many obstacles would be raised on such an inclusion. To be frank this article survives AFD's because people huff and
347:
has been stalking me across several pages and repeatedly misrepresented my comments. At ANI she claimed I had not notified a user, which I had. She claimed I had reverted an article three times, which I had not, and now she's here assuming bad faith about the nomination, ignoring that the
1047:, something the user refuses to even acknowledge or discuss, instead insisting on discussing me. I would hope the AfD-discussion could be about this duplicate, and those who state keep could explain the rationale for having the same content in several places, instead of just saying
1565:
Forky POV-filled article on a subject that does not appear noteworthy and which consists almost entirely of OR-selected primary source quotes (mostly from 19thC works), quotes whose significance, given their lack of interpretation or context, it is impossible to assess.
1709:
to "Depiction of Ali" or "Portrayal of Ali", regarding the current state of affairs. But let's face it, unlike a pronounced Shia or Sunni view, there just isn't a "non-Muslim view" (opinion) which has received significant coverage (read: discussion), so still a
105:
1731:
has totally changed the article (which is totally OK by me - the new version is much improved). But I still think that this should not be a separate article. This could perhaps be included in the main article, it is not too long.
1636:
This should be settled once and for all, perhaps even SALT. from the previous discussions I cans see that many of the keep votes just arbitrarily throw around words without linking any sources covering this in depth. Furthermore
100:
94:
59:. Consensus is that this doesn't need a separate article. The current material (some paragraphs about his portrayal in literature) could perhaps later be restored and merged to another article if there's consensus for that.
207:
1616:
is so notable is not clear. The bigger question is still, as far as I'm concerned, what "non-Muslim" means: I am not convinced that this is a simple matter. (The governor of my home state no doubt disagrees.) Thanks,
1094:
can and should keep whatever relevant content about the non-Muslim views on him there is (but I'm not suggesting to merge this article there, because this is nowhere near what any of that content should look like
88:
160:
201:
1766:. The main article is too long and the current article can expand with this new title so that it includes Ali's depiction in Arabic, Persian, Hindi, Turkish, ... literature. --
745:
I'm the main champions because other users are not patrolling the article enough to point out their reasons. Previous attempt had garnered 5 or more people in the consensus.
167:
1204:
856:
694:. They are there for a reason, they are sourced content and Jeppiz is on a crusade against Ali for some unknown reasons and willing to cut lots of source content.
839:
500:
Of course, my apologies. I was a bit exasperated that day when a user I don't remember ever having interacted with suddenly appeared in a number of talk pages to
1207:
and it deserves to have a stand alone article. Reading the comments, I saw that some users have questioned the title and I should say in response that some
466:) and in proper format. You consistently misrepresent my concerns about the format as wanting to remove it all, even though I've exlained it repeatedly.
133:
128:
1067:
Are you talking about me? Sir enough with the spreading of misinformation about me, I'm actually assuming you have good faith in deleting this article?
137:
120:
1425:, i.e. the views themselves. Without some secondary source that actually discusses various non-Muslim perceptions of Ali, the whole thing is
23:
1815:
1781:
1742:
1723:
1701:
1651:
1626:
1592:
1575:
1557:
1533:
1509:
1484:
1458:
1438:
1404:
1380:
1358:
1298:
1274:
1256:
1242:
1224:
1193:
1170:
1149:
1108:
1076:
1060:
1023:
1001:
967:
941:
890:
865:
848:
822:
808:
794:
780:
754:
736:
714:
678:
648:
634:
610:
588:
564:
527:
513:
492:
475:
445:
415:
391:
365:
338:
312:
277:
255:
71:
454:
from Ali, then realized that that article was the proper place for it, not this one. As my talk page edits show, I've repeatedly stated we
246:. The intro makes no sense, and also seems to have been copied. If we remove the duplicate material, we're down to one or two sentences.
710:
1612:, and it's actually not that terrible. There's plenty of problems: that ] is "non-Muslim" isn't all that clear, and why the opinion of
1449:
The current article is notable and sourced with valid references. If the quotations is main issue, It is better move them to
Wikiquote.
222:
17:
1776:
1739:
1696:
1399:
1353:
887:
189:
1811:
1571:
1806:
factual accounts or opinions about his historical importance, which are the sort of things that should be in the main article.
1385:
At present, it is a poor article. however, we can the current situation is not enough reason to delete the article based on
1184:
are appropriate, separating the views of scholars and historians according to whether they were Muslim or non-Muslim is not.
926:
Why? These random editors is what helped create and made these pages flourish. That is the beauty of
Knowledge (XXG).: -->
1495:
916:
Is "non-Muslim view of Ali" an object of scholarly study, rather than simply a hodgepodge of views of Ali by non-Muslims?
1647:
379:
264:: The content needs to stay in an article somwhere. Either in this article, which has already survived two AfDs, or the
183:
1836:
1544:
593:
I'm pointing up the fact that instead of trying to resolve that situation you have been insisting that the material be
47:
1807:
1669:
1567:
242:, so this article is an unnecessary duplicate. More than 80% just consist of block quotes, all of them also found at
179:
919:
It doesn't have to be an object of scholarly study to be featured in
Knowledge (XXG) with references and sources.
124:
1096:
1790:
That still risks being OR Synthesis, just like the current one (before it was stripped of its quotes). We have
763:. Perhaps it was not a duplicate back then? This nomination is for the situation in 2015, not 2006. If you and
371:
1279:
If you expect books or articles entirely devoted to this subject I think there are few! but I could find some
923:
There should be a scholarly review article which does the selecting and quoting, not random wikipedia editors.
229:
1471:
keep? Because you know, Wikiquote is a separate site from
Knowledge (XXG). It would mean it's not being kept
1661:
1643:
1166:
1125:
1072:
997:
937:
818:
790:
750:
706:
644:
378:
on this AfD nomination. And you're ignoring the fact that I have consistently agreed with your viewpoint on
116:
77:
1791:
1521:
698:
1803:
954:, of course. Knowledge (XXG) makes articles about topics that exist, not topic it creates itself based on
674:
606:
560:
441:
387:
334:
273:
1686:
I replaced irrelevant and improper information with the more suitable one. Please reconsider the issue.--
1832:
1772:
1736:
1719:
1692:
1434:
1395:
1349:
1337:
Talk:Ali/Archive 6#Suggestion for moving some content on views out of the article for the sake of length
1189:
1181:
1145:
1043:, I emphasize once again that I nominate this article because it's a complete duplicate of a section at
884:
861:
844:
43:
1368:
1129:
1763:
195:
1294:
1252:
1220:
215:
1609:
1529:
1336:
1280:
1233:
Which is why you're trying to show it's notable by linking to the exact phrase on Google Search?
1162:
1068:
993:
933:
814:
786:
746:
702:
640:
1426:
1283:
1212:
1208:
1087:
986:
955:
1799:
1597:
1454:
1010:
did. I mean the one
Knowledge (XXG) with its policies and guidelines, such as the above-cited
764:
723:
The above user is the main champion of the article, but again does not address that this is a
670:
602:
556:
437:
383:
344:
330:
284:
269:
268:
article, or both. The nominator is currently trying to delete the content from both articles.
36:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
1831:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
1386:
985:
Knowledge (XXG) makes articles about topics that exist, not topic it creates itself based on
288:
42:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
1795:
1768:
1753:
1749:
1733:
1728:
1715:
1688:
1681:
1677:
1622:
1588:
1553:
1430:
1391:
1345:
1326:
1185:
1158:
1141:
1056:
881:
804:
776:
732:
630:
584:
523:
509:
488:
471:
411:
361:
308:
251:
1040:
1011:
975:
951:
912:
They are selected based on the notability and knwoeldge of the author to Ali ibn Abi Talib.
768:
575:. It's not about suppressing positive viewpoints, it's about not having an article that is
501:
292:
1340:
785:
And you are assuming good faith to us???? Please you are hurting my stomach from laughing
1286:
1262:
1290:
1248:
1216:
639:
And we have told you we are using all quotes, so can you stop disrupting the articles.
352:. Anyone can check the talk page at Ali, where I discuss how to best use the material,
62:
1638:
1613:
1604:. BTW, I just looked at that section (after looking at the back-and-forthing between
1525:
1506:
1480:
1376:
1270:
1238:
1104:
1019:
963:
1099:. I would suggest other similar AfDs for various "Non-Muslim view of ..." articles.
303:, so this AfD is simply about deleting a duplicate, not about deleting any content.
1450:
1335:
should move to this sub-article. This is the result of the former discussions like
1086:- this is basically just a gluing-together of quotations and constitutes a blatant
1642:
puff, but give no valid reasons for their keep votes. That should change. Regards
154:
356:
to keep it out. We should have this section, and we should have it in one place.
1673:
1665:
1618:
1605:
1584:
1550:
1318:
1052:
800:
772:
728:
626:
580:
519:
505:
497:
484:
480:
467:
407:
357:
304:
247:
1211:
are descriptive and so you can't find the exactly similar term in sources (see
1389:. Therefor, we can move the quotations to wikiquote and improve the article.--
799:
I'm asking you to explain why we should have a duplicate article, that's all.
24:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Non-Muslim view of Ali (2nd nomination)
771:
against me and instead explain why we should have a duplicate article here?
902:
The main issue for me is that the topic of the article seems to be made up.
1476:
1372:
1322:
1266:
1247:
The results show how the the article have been the discussed in sources.
1234:
1100:
1015:
959:
658:
425:
326:
759:
Actually, the last nomination results in no consensus, the first one is
299:
is the right place for that. And once again, it's all there already in
1802:- that should be sufficient since almost all other views will be non-
238:
At least 90% of the content here is identical to content found at
1161:, maybe what you are saying is true. We can move it to Wikiquote
571:
The above does not address the topic. As I explained, at length,
1825:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
909:
The quotations are selected without any seeming rhyme or reason.
106:
Articles for deletion/Non-Muslim view of Ali (second nomination)
1367:
The same goes for that subsection as for this article: a clear
287:
is correct I think the content needs to be edited to adhere to
1601:
1332:
1121:
1091:
1044:
877:
463:
375:
322:
300:
296:
265:
243:
239:
1543:
There are far too many of these POV-fork articles on Islam.
1498:
to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
101:
Articles for deletion/Non-Muslim view of Ali (3rd nomination)
95:
Articles for deletion/Non-Muslim view of Ali (2nd nomination)
1124:. In the current situation however, the article is merely a
1128:
followed by a list of loosely associated quotations, which
727:. I'm not suggesting deleting the original, just the copy.
483:, please don't use the word "stalking" lightly. Thank you.
1419:. In its current situation, the article is fully based on
929:
As it stands, the article is a virtual copy of the section
396:
Not accurate. I have tried to initiate a discussion about
1090:. It's not an article and, per title, shouldn't even be.
1014:. Please stick to the topic of this article's deletion.
667:
with a POV tag and tagged the section with an UNDUE tag
662:
654:
623:
620:
434:
with a POV tag and tagged the section with an UNDUE tag
429:
421:
404:
401:
318:
150:
146:
142:
214:
329:, I am not finding that statement to be convincing.
1505:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
615:Again, I have tried to initiate a discussion about
228:
504:, but I should have expressed myself differently.
370:Jeppiz, I am not stalking you. This is an article
1265:) "random websites including Knowledge (XXG)"...
50:). No further edits should be made to this page.
1839:). No further edits should be made to this page.
1039:: As a user follows me around several articles
932:Actually it's not you can look it by yourself.
659:started a talk page discussion to keep it out
426:started a talk page discussion to keep it out
8:
855:Note: This debate has been included in the
838:Note: This debate has been included in the
89:Articles for deletion/Non-Muslim view of Ali
1051:and then make the whole argument about me.
905:Yes made up of the non-Muslim views of Ali.
857:list of People-related deletion discussions
854:
840:list of Islam-related deletion discussions
837:
325:article 8 hours ago, and your subsequent
1180:While an articles with a topic such as
502:repeatedly ascribed me sinister motives
86:
1261:If by "sources" you mean (rather than
327:talk page insistence on keeping it out
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
981:I never said that, nor implied that
84:
450:Yes, I removed duplicate material
31:
1714:for "Non-Muslim view of Ali". -
1132:. This quotation list should be
319:wholesale removal of the content
1545:Knowledge (XXG):Content forking
1006:Of course you didn't say that,
1:
1816:15:14, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
1782:13:30, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
1743:12:36, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
1724:09:56, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
1702:08:33, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
1652:13:56, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
1627:17:34, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
1593:15:20, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
1576:01:18, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
1558:23:35, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
1534:16:04, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
1510:02:13, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
1485:14:44, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
1459:07:45, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
1439:09:19, 11 November 2015 (UTC)
1405:05:02, 11 November 2015 (UTC)
1381:14:06, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
1359:05:20, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
1299:05:52, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
1275:15:55, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
1257:15:49, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
1243:14:02, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
1225:04:23, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
813:It's not a duplicate article
528:15:14, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
514:09:57, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
493:05:54, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
72:17:37, 22 November 2015 (UTC)
1194:22:05, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
1171:20:29, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
1150:16:11, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
1109:00:44, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
1077:06:40, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
1061:13:22, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
1024:21:09, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
1002:20:29, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
968:16:21, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
942:06:39, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
891:05:03, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
866:13:00, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
849:13:00, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
823:23:45, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
809:11:18, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
795:02:47, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
781:02:37, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
755:02:34, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
737:02:30, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
715:02:27, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
679:03:12, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
655:deleted the section entirely
649:02:57, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
635:02:49, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
611:02:46, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
589:02:14, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
565:02:12, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
476:13:14, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
446:03:12, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
422:deleted the section entirely
416:02:49, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
392:02:46, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
366:02:17, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
339:02:12, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
313:01:51, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
278:00:50, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
256:00:03, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
1548:most important policies."--
1114:At first I would have said
380:Muhammad's views on slavery
1856:
1120:whatever is salvagable to
573:the article is a duplicate
992:You mean your wikipedia?
958:, except for some lists.
1828:Please do not modify it.
880:, and should not exist.
767:would stop your regular
39:Please do not modify it.
1157:Thanks for the comment
989:, except for some lists
898:Response to allegations
1808:Tiptoethrutheminefield
1670:Tiptoethrutheminefield
1568:Tiptoethrutheminefield
1130:Knowledge (XXG) is not
350:article is a duplicate
117:Non-Muslim view of Ali
83:AfDs for this article:
78:Non-Muslim view of Ali
1792:Ali in Muslim culture
1126:warning to the reader
374:, and you publicized
372:you publicized on ANI
1333:Ali#Non-Muslim views
878:Ali#Non-Muslim_views
518:Thank you, Jeppiz.
458:have this material
1662:FreeatlastChitchat
1644:FreeatlastChitchat
1182:Historicity of Ali
1134:moved to Wikiquote
1041:assuming bad faith
1800:Sunni view of Ali
1512:
1203:: The subject is
868:
851:
725:duplicate article
718:
701:comment added by
70:
22:(Redirected from
1847:
1830:
1796:Shia view of Ali
1780:
1764:Depiction of Ali
1757:
1700:
1685:
1556:
1504:
1501:
1499:
1403:
1357:
1330:
1097:encyclopedically
864:
847:
717:
695:
653:No, Jeppiz, you
579:to another one.
420:No, Jeppiz, you
343:Can I note that
233:
232:
218:
170:
158:
140:
69:
67:
60:
41:
27:
1855:
1854:
1850:
1849:
1848:
1846:
1845:
1844:
1843:
1837:deletion review
1826:
1767:
1762:the article to
1747:
1687:
1659:
1549:
1514:
1494:
1492:
1441:
1422:primary sources
1390:
1344:
1341:User:MezzoMezzo
1316:
1152:
1118:
974:"Why"? Because
950:"Why"? Because
860:
843:
696:
175:
166:
131:
115:
112:
110:
97:
81:
63:
61:
55:The result was
48:deletion review
37:
29:
28:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
1853:
1851:
1842:
1841:
1821:
1820:
1819:
1818:
1785:
1784:
1745:
1726:
1704:
1654:
1631:
1630:
1629:
1578:
1560:
1537:
1536:
1502:
1491:
1490:
1489:
1488:
1487:
1462:
1461:
1443:
1442:
1415:
1412:
1411:
1410:
1409:
1408:
1407:
1362:
1361:
1310:
1309:
1308:
1307:
1306:
1305:
1304:
1303:
1302:
1301:
1228:
1227:
1197:
1196:
1174:
1173:
1154:
1153:
1116:
1113:
1111:
1080:
1079:
1064:
1063:
1033:
1032:
1031:
1030:
1029:
1028:
1027:
1026:
991:
982:
980:
945:
944:
931:
927:
925:
920:
918:
913:
911:
906:
904:
894:
893:
870:
869:
852:
835:
834:
833:
832:
831:
830:
829:
828:
827:
826:
825:
740:
739:
720:
719:
688:
687:
686:
685:
684:
683:
682:
681:
665:entire article
651:
619:quotes to use
568:
567:
549:
548:
547:
546:
545:
544:
543:
542:
541:
540:
539:
538:
537:
536:
535:
534:
533:
532:
531:
530:
432:entire article
400:quotes to use
281:
280:
236:
235:
172:
111:
109:
108:
103:
98:
93:
91:
85:
82:
80:
75:
53:
52:
32:
30:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1852:
1840:
1838:
1834:
1829:
1823:
1822:
1817:
1813:
1809:
1805:
1801:
1797:
1793:
1789:
1788:
1787:
1786:
1783:
1778:
1774:
1770:
1765:
1761:
1755:
1751:
1746:
1744:
1741:
1738:
1735:
1730:
1727:
1725:
1721:
1717:
1713:
1708:
1705:
1703:
1698:
1694:
1690:
1683:
1679:
1675:
1671:
1667:
1663:
1658:
1655:
1653:
1649:
1645:
1640:
1639:Kahlil Gibran
1635:
1634:STRONG Delete
1632:
1628:
1624:
1620:
1615:
1614:George Jordac
1611:
1610:Alexis Ivanov
1607:
1603:
1599:
1596:
1595:
1594:
1590:
1586:
1582:
1579:
1577:
1573:
1569:
1564:
1561:
1559:
1555:
1552:
1546:
1542:
1539:
1538:
1535:
1531:
1527:
1523:
1522:WP:NOTEWORTHY
1519:
1516:
1515:
1513:
1511:
1508:
1500:
1497:
1486:
1482:
1478:
1474:
1470:
1466:
1465:
1464:
1463:
1460:
1456:
1452:
1448:
1445:
1444:
1440:
1436:
1432:
1428:
1424:
1423:
1418:
1414:
1413:
1406:
1401:
1397:
1393:
1388:
1384:
1383:
1382:
1378:
1374:
1370:
1366:
1365:
1364:
1363:
1360:
1355:
1351:
1347:
1342:
1338:
1334:
1328:
1324:
1320:
1315:
1312:
1311:
1300:
1296:
1292:
1288:
1285:
1282:
1278:
1277:
1276:
1272:
1268:
1264:
1260:
1259:
1258:
1254:
1250:
1246:
1245:
1244:
1240:
1236:
1232:
1231:
1230:
1229:
1226:
1222:
1218:
1214:
1210:
1206:
1202:
1199:
1198:
1195:
1191:
1187:
1183:
1179:
1176:
1175:
1172:
1168:
1164:
1163:Alexis Ivanov
1160:
1156:
1155:
1151:
1147:
1143:
1139:
1135:
1131:
1127:
1123:
1119:
1112:
1110:
1106:
1102:
1098:
1093:
1089:
1085:
1084:Strong delete
1082:
1081:
1078:
1074:
1070:
1069:Alexis Ivanov
1066:
1065:
1062:
1058:
1054:
1050:
1046:
1042:
1038:
1035:
1034:
1025:
1021:
1017:
1013:
1009:
1005:
1004:
1003:
999:
995:
994:Alexis Ivanov
990:
988:
979:
977:
971:
970:
969:
965:
961:
957:
953:
949:
948:
947:
946:
943:
939:
935:
934:Alexis Ivanov
930:
924:
917:
910:
903:
899:
896:
895:
892:
889:
886:
883:
879:
875:
872:
871:
867:
863:
862:North America
858:
853:
850:
846:
845:North America
841:
836:
824:
820:
816:
815:Alexis Ivanov
812:
811:
810:
806:
802:
798:
797:
796:
792:
788:
787:Alexis Ivanov
784:
783:
782:
778:
774:
770:
766:
762:
758:
757:
756:
752:
748:
747:Alexis Ivanov
744:
743:
742:
741:
738:
734:
730:
726:
722:
721:
716:
712:
708:
704:
703:Alexis Ivanov
700:
693:
690:
689:
680:
676:
672:
668:
666:
660:
656:
652:
650:
646:
642:
641:Alexis Ivanov
638:
637:
636:
632:
628:
624:
621:
618:
614:
613:
612:
608:
604:
600:
596:
592:
591:
590:
586:
582:
578:
574:
570:
569:
566:
562:
558:
554:
551:
550:
529:
525:
521:
517:
516:
515:
511:
507:
503:
499:
496:
495:
494:
490:
486:
482:
479:
478:
477:
473:
469:
465:
461:
457:
453:
449:
448:
447:
443:
439:
435:
433:
427:
423:
419:
418:
417:
413:
409:
405:
402:
399:
395:
394:
393:
389:
385:
381:
377:
373:
369:
368:
367:
363:
359:
355:
351:
346:
342:
341:
340:
336:
332:
328:
324:
320:
316:
315:
314:
310:
306:
302:
298:
294:
290:
286:
283:
282:
279:
275:
271:
267:
263:
260:
259:
258:
257:
253:
249:
245:
241:
231:
227:
224:
221:
217:
213:
209:
206:
203:
200:
197:
194:
191:
188:
185:
181:
178:
177:Find sources:
173:
169:
165:
162:
156:
152:
148:
144:
139:
135:
130:
126:
122:
118:
114:
113:
107:
104:
102:
99:
96:
92:
90:
87:
79:
76:
74:
73:
68:
66:
58:
51:
49:
45:
40:
34:
33:
25:
19:
1827:
1824:
1759:
1711:
1706:
1656:
1633:
1598:Softlavender
1580:
1562:
1540:
1517:
1503:
1493:
1472:
1468:
1467:Do you mean
1446:
1421:
1420:
1416:
1331:I think the
1313:
1200:
1177:
1137:
1133:
1115:
1083:
1048:
1036:
1007:
984:
978:, of course.
973:
928:
922:
915:
908:
901:
897:
873:
765:Softlavender
760:
724:
697:āĀ Preceding
691:
671:Softlavender
664:
616:
603:Softlavender
598:
594:
576:
572:
557:Softlavender
552:
460:in one place
459:
455:
451:
438:Softlavender
431:
397:
384:Softlavender
353:
349:
345:Softlavender
331:Softlavender
285:Softlavender
270:Softlavender
261:
237:
225:
219:
211:
204:
198:
192:
186:
176:
163:
64:
56:
54:
38:
35:
1804:faith based
1758:I agree to
1754:HyperGaruda
1750:Kingsindian
1734:Kingsindian
1729:Sa.vakilian
1716:HyperGaruda
1682:E.M.Gregory
1678:HyperGaruda
1431:HyperGaruda
1369:WP:NOTQUOTE
1327:E.M.Gregory
1186:E.M.Gregory
1159:HyperGaruda
1142:HyperGaruda
882:Kingsindian
761:9 years old
663:tagged the
601:locations.
430:tagged the
317:Given your
202:free images
1417:PS comment
65:Sandstein
1833:talk page
1291:Mhhossein
1249:Mhhossein
1217:Mhhossein
577:identical
321:from the
44:talk page
1835:or in a
1526:SpyButeo
1496:Relisted
1427:WP:SYNTH
1284:reliable
1213:WP:NDESC
1088:WP:CFORK
987:WP:SYNTH
956:WP:SYNTH
711:contribs
699:unsigned
161:View log
46:or in a
1680:, and
1657:Comment
1451:Saff V.
1387:WP:ARTN
1325:, and
1287:sources
1281:persian
1205:notable
1138:deleted
1037:Comment
900:: : -->
874:Comment
595:removed
289:WP:NPOV
262:Comment
208:WPĀ refs
196:scholar
134:protect
129:history
1769:Seyyed
1712:delete
1689:Seyyed
1674:Jeppiz
1666:Drmies
1619:Drmies
1606:Jeppiz
1585:Drmies
1581:Delete
1563:Delete
1554:(talk)
1551:Toddy1
1541:Delete
1518:Delete
1392:Seyyed
1371:(#1).
1346:Seyyed
1339:with @
1319:Jeppiz
1209:titles
1178:Delete
1136:or be
1053:Jeppiz
1049:"keep"
1012:WP:NOR
976:WP:NOR
952:WP:NOR
801:Jeppiz
773:Jeppiz
769:WP:ABF
729:Jeppiz
661:, and
627:Jeppiz
581:Jeppiz
520:Drmies
506:Jeppiz
498:Drmies
485:Drmies
481:Jeppiz
468:Jeppiz
456:should
428:, and
408:Jeppiz
358:Jeppiz
305:Jeppiz
293:WP:DUE
248:Jeppiz
180:Google
138:delete
57:delete
1469:don't
1263:WP:RS
1215:). --
1117:merge
983:: -->
972:: -->
921:: -->
914:: -->
907:: -->
617:which
597:from
398:which
223:JSTOR
184:books
168:Stats
155:views
147:watch
143:links
16:<
1812:talk
1798:and
1760:Move
1752:and
1720:talk
1707:Move
1648:talk
1623:talk
1608:and
1589:talk
1572:talk
1530:talk
1520:per
1507:sstā
1481:talk
1473:here
1455:talk
1447:Keep
1435:talk
1429:. -
1377:talk
1314:Keep
1295:talk
1271:talk
1253:talk
1239:talk
1221:talk
1201:Keep
1190:talk
1167:talk
1146:talk
1140:. -
1105:talk
1073:talk
1057:talk
1020:talk
998:talk
964:talk
938:talk
819:talk
805:talk
791:talk
777:talk
751:talk
733:talk
707:talk
692:Keep
675:talk
645:talk
631:talk
607:talk
599:both
585:talk
561:talk
553:Keep
524:talk
510:talk
489:talk
472:talk
462:(at
452:once
442:talk
412:talk
388:talk
362:talk
335:talk
309:talk
291:and
274:talk
252:talk
216:FENS
190:news
151:logs
125:talk
121:edit
1602:Ali
1477:LjL
1373:LjL
1343:.--
1323:LjL
1267:LjL
1235:LjL
1122:Ali
1101:LjL
1092:Ali
1045:Ali
1016:LjL
960:LjL
464:Ali
376:Ali
354:not
323:Ali
301:Ali
297:Ali
266:Ali
244:Ali
240:Ali
230:TWL
159:ā (
1814:)
1794:,
1722:)
1676:,
1672:,
1668:,
1664:,
1650:)
1625:)
1591:)
1574:)
1532:)
1524:.
1483:)
1475:.
1457:)
1437:)
1379:)
1321:,
1297:)
1289:.
1273:)
1255:)
1241:)
1223:)
1192:)
1169:)
1148:)
1107:)
1075:)
1059:)
1022:)
1000:)
966:)
940:)
859:.
842:.
821:)
807:)
793:)
779:)
753:)
735:)
713:)
709:ā¢
677:)
669:.
657:,
647:)
633:)
625:.
622:,
609:)
587:)
563:)
526:)
512:)
491:)
474:)
444:)
436:.
424:,
414:)
406:.
403:,
390:)
364:)
337:)
311:)
276:)
254:)
210:)
153:|
149:|
145:|
141:|
136:|
132:|
127:|
123:|
1810:(
1779:)
1777:c
1775:-
1773:t
1771:(
1756::
1748:@
1740:ā
1737:ā
1718:(
1699:)
1697:c
1695:-
1693:t
1691:(
1684::
1660:@
1646:(
1621:(
1587:(
1570:(
1528:(
1479:(
1453:(
1433:(
1402:)
1400:c
1398:-
1396:t
1394:(
1375:(
1356:)
1354:c
1352:-
1350:t
1348:(
1329::
1317:@
1293:(
1269:(
1251:(
1237:(
1219:(
1188:(
1165:(
1144:(
1103:(
1071:(
1055:(
1018:(
1008:I
996:(
962:(
936:(
888:ā
885:ā
817:(
803:(
789:(
775:(
749:(
731:(
705:(
673:(
643:(
629:(
605:(
583:(
559:(
522:(
508:(
487:(
470:(
440:(
410:(
386:(
360:(
333:(
307:(
272:(
250:(
234:)
226:Ā·
220:Ā·
212:Ā·
205:Ā·
199:Ā·
193:Ā·
187:Ā·
182:(
174:(
171:)
164:Ā·
157:)
119:(
26:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.