930:, because proving notability requires third party sourcing, whereas Press Releases are first party accounts. So, you can use them in articles (sparingly, as they're also usually quite promotional in tone/content) but not as a third party account to prove notability. But as Zetta states, being press releases is just one of three issues he found with the sources. The other crucial issue is that the sources say very little of the actual holiday. For example,
1345:- I had seen this AfD earlier but hadn't really taken the time to look into it.... then I got a newsletter from Nintendo themselves advertising MAR10 DAY, so I thought "okay, it's a thing now, let's look at it" -- and the biggest problem I can think of is that we don't know if it's just this year, or if it will become a yearly event. If it becomes recurrent we can spin it back out at a later time. Otherwise I would actually merge it to
1531:. There are very few sources that aren't extremely short or veer off into general discussion of the Mario franchise right away. There's very few sources that say very little about the actual subject. A "Merge" conclusion is a completely valid, policy-based conclusion to come to. You're free to disagree with that conclusion, but its outright wrong to say its not a policy based conclusion.
841:. Most of the sources are press releases, talk about Mario the character instead of the actual Mario Day Event, or organizations holding an event about the day which do not talk about the event so much as they are a promotion for the company. The sources left are not reliable for establishing separate notability. That said, I agree it is worth a mention in the Mario article.
1168:, and found it only advises those considering becoming nominators to do their own search for references, before they made a nomination for deletion. BEFORE doesn't explicitly advise those weighing in with an opinion at AFD to make sure it is an informed opinion. IMO it should, extend this advice to everyone considering weighing in.
1067:
typing in "National Mario Day" in the search box, and that will take them to the section on
National Mario Day in the Mario article. That section of the Mario article can then be edited and expanded. If enough reliable sources appear in the future for this article to stand on its own, then this article can be recreated.
1288:
The irony in all of this is all of your AGF lectures, when you haven't done the least for me. There's no bad faith here whatsoever. I'm very active in creating and maintaining Mario and
Nintendo related things on Knowledge (XXG). There's no ill-will or bias going on here. I just don't believe there's
1211:
I have no real dog in this fight. But when good faith contributors have worked hard on an article on a topic they feel strongly merits inclusion, it is best for the project if they are allowed a free hand to try to bear in mind the concerns voiced in the AFD, and work to address them, during the AFD
1219:
I don't have a dog in this fight, but I assure you, when I am making a strong effort to improve an article, during the AFD, and someone who voiced a "delete" is also still editing the article, it is a great strain to continue to AGF. Why would you put your fellow good faith contributors under this
534:
article instead of this short stub of an article. Also note that the "Mario" article is about the character itself, not the game series, so it would in fact make sense to put the information there. Also, while there are some reliable sources out there, almost every source you listed above would not
1051:
There are other sources; more have appeared today. I'm reluctant spend more hours on it though because, right now, it looks like it will be "merged" - which seems to me just as bad as deletion, because it'll end up as a single sentence in the other article. People won't be able to expand it, most
977:
I can't be sure, since ZettaComposer said it, not me, but I don't think he meant "Most of the sources are press releases" as a stand-alone idea. If you read his whole sentence, (it is rather long) he's saying that most of the sources fall into a number of issues, press releases being the first of
465:
I don't think it's fair in your AFD nom to say "The coverage is either self-published or passing mentions". Only one of the sources is
Nintendo; the others are respectable independent RS - magazines, newspapers, and so forth. I can't see how it is passing mentions, when it is the subject of the
1066:
No worries. Articles for
Deletion, like many areas of Knowledge (XXG), has a tendency to bring out the best in people. :) I would not worry though. As Sergecross mentioned earlier in the discussion, if this article is merged then a redirect can be created. People can reach the merged content by
1284:
Overall, the entire premise of your "You voted delete so keep your hands off the article" is ludicrous. My stance is Merge, not Delete, and there is no such rule. I'm free to make any good-faith edits to the article as the AFD goes on. I felt that the IP was bloating the article with off-topic
232:. That a couple of minor sources have reprinted a press release is not an indication of notability. There's absolutely no indication that this is getting any significant coverage even within the VG industry (even Nintendo themselves don't appear to do anything to mark it other than
1257:
I don't know why you'd lecture me about nominating and BEFORE. I did not nominate this article, or encourage anyone to do so. I've also made many comments about how weak the sourcing is, and how many/most proposed are either unreliable, or do not constitute significant
1683:
The subject of the article is
Nintendo's Mario Day, not "every holiday on March 10th" or "Every instance of people pointing out March 10th looks like Mario". If it's relevant, you should have no problem providing a source proving the connection to the actual subject.
214:. This is not a holiday, as claimed, it is just a publicity gimmick for the company which distributes this game. The coverage is either self-published or passing mentions in puff pieces: none of the in-depth coverage expected of an encyclopedic article.
1576:. Anyone who reads through the article can see that literally only the first 2 sentences of the source discuss the holiday. All of the rest of the article are just random generic Mario factoids. It's almost entirely about Mario itself, not the holiday.
1199:
By weighing in here, with a delete opinion, means you don't think the article can be improved by editing to the point of measuring up to our standards. You have voiced your concerns, here, that the article references fall short. So why would you be
1500:-- think a topic is worth writing about. Well, if you look, you see serious RS have written about this topic. That is all that is required. A delete based on a personal opinion the topic is trivial or silly is one of the arguments named in
598:. All are 1 sentence. I think that's fine, great, encyclopaedic, and one day someone might want to look up "Thiratoscirtus harpago". But I think it's a LOT more likely someone might hear about "National Mario Day", and want to look that up.
1215:
Unless you are excising actual slander, why, in heavens' name, would you edit an article you are on record is hopeless, and can't be improved. If it is really hopeless it will soon be deleted, and those weaknesses won't matter.
530:), subjects are often merged. To be clear, if we do a "merge/redirect", people will still be able to "read up on Mario Day", its just that, when people search it up, it'll take them to a little blurb about it in the main
1253:
I defended Zetta's comments because they were misinterpreted by the IP editor. This is something Zetta confirmed as true, and the IP now understands they misunderstood. What is wrong with this exchange? I helped solve a
1163:
Deletion is supposed to be based on the notability of the topic itself, meaning, we should keep and tag for improvement a weak article when the underlying topic measures up to our notability criteria. I just checked
179:
1047:
Look, we're all here to build an encyclopaedia, right? This article is, honestly, not "promotional". Nintendo didn't start this thing (but of course do not object to it!); it's fans of the games, having a bit of
472:
Please note, this day is not a promo thing by
Nintendo; it existed before they even knew about it. Nintendo are using it to give a bit of money to charity, and are discounting a few of their games - see
1081:
I understand about a 'redirect', but - apart from that not letting people expand it - it means the image will be deleted, and I think that does help explain it. Also, it'd not be in categories like
1265:
was made because they had nothing to do with the subject. It would also be more accurately described as "two unrelated sentences" than "a paragraph" as you suggested. When I was reverted, I did
497:
is. The article answers that, in a neutral, well-referenced way. I do not think it's better to 'merge' it into another article, because it's not about a specific game title, it doesn't fit well.
679:
may have started as cute notions, they (1) captured the imagination of lots of people; (2) and then reliable sources wrote about them in enough detail to measure up to our inclusion criteria.
469:
There's not *that* much to say about this event, but not all
Knowledge (XXG) articles need to be GA or FA. It's not a single line; it's encyclopaedic, very well-referenced facts, and neutral.
759:
I have no idea. I'm not knowledable with the Star Wars or marijuana fandom. I'd do research, but considering how it'd have no actual bearing on this AFD, I don't really have any interest.
326:
705:
Of course I proved him right, I was right to. Unless there's some documented proof that "Star Wars Day" has survived any sort of deletion discussion or merge discussion, its textbook
641:
Images, category use, what people are doing on social media. None of this has any bearings on deletion discussions. As you even seem to recognize yourself, your reasoning is based on
1281:
because I had expressed that it was an unreliable source, and the IP, addressing this, had already added another source to replace it, but forgotten to remove it. All valid actions.
268:
Unless this is speedy deleted this discussion will be opened 7 days meaning there will be more than enough time to add any potential coverage from news oulits before fhis closes.--
1489:
focussed an article around how Mario Day was an opportunity for parents to bond with their children, and named Mario Day events parents could take their children to -- in 2014.
286:
1107:
prominently viewed. The image...isn't really all that big of a deal either, but that being said, it could also be argued that it could be added to the "Legacy" section of the
462:
I saw it on "New Pages" - I didn't write it. I was about to CSD-tag it, but googled to discover it was a real thing with pretty good coverage, and decided to try to fix it up.
682:
When Mario Day grew popular enough that: (1) libraries and other institutions introduced programs to help parents bond with their children on Mario Day; (2) and RS, like the
1527:
Not a single person has made an IDONTLIKEIT argument. The clear consensus arising is that the subject does not receive enough dedicated coverage, dedicated specifically to
173:
132:
424:, which can adequately house whatever needs to be said on this topic. Please wait for an overabundance of coverage specific to the topic before starting separate articles.
377:
To clarify, since I wasn't initially so detailed due thinking this was a simple, open and shut case: The sourcing is very weak here.Very few say anything other than "
306:
627:
P.S. If merged, the non-free image would be deleted. I think that picture, with the MAR-10 calender, explains the concept to readers in a clearer way than text can.
493:
AAnyway - I don't think I will be participating in the AFC because yes, I'm disillusioned. Bottom line, it's an encyclopaedia, and I think people might wonder what
1052:
people won't even know about it. I'm convinced there is plenty for a short article; I'd be happy to remove anything that wasn't considered a reliable source.
594:
1346:
1386:
1193:, I have some additional advice for you. You are engaging in an activity here which can very highly erode other contributors ability to AGF. You are
139:
741:
snuck under the wire, while, Mario Day, which shares many elements with them, recently started, is still vulnerable to be strangled at its birth...
1632:
Thus, it would be entirely inappropriate on an article about the
Nintendo franchise, but entirely relevant to an article about the annual holiday.
1147:
someone put in here. I found it confusing, as it interfered with me putting my replies to earlier comments at the right level of indentation....
1223:
What happens if the AFD then closes as "delete"? Those who worked hard to take the concerns voiced in the AFD into account can't help thinking:
1175:. This topic itself is notable. RS make it notable. That shoule be all that is required for us to voice a "keep", not a "delete" or "merge".
1650:
to have in the article right now to begin with, unless you've got sources showing any connection towards the subject and these random factoids.
1629:
The part about "Italians in
Chicago" explains the term was used in the 80s for an an annual gala dinner. Absolutely nothing to do with Nintendo.
1739:. That page also says avoid merging if "topics are discrete subjects warranting their own articles, even though they might be short". It's not
931:
393:
franchise. With so little to be said, and its notability entirely entrenched with the franchise, I feel like its best covered as a part of the
386:
105:
100:
1496:
think a topic is trivial, or silly. We should base our opinion on whether the professional editors and professional authors we rely on -- at
1171:
I did my own web search, found additional references that weren't press releases, or articles published in publications devoted to
Nintendo,
960:
Thanks for the tutorial. I'm glad you conceed that "Most of the sources are press releases" is utterly incorrect; perhaps you could strike it?
236:
which got less than 200,000 views worldwide, chickenfeed to the press department of a global multinational), let alone in the wider world. ‑
109:
515:
479:
There's quite a lot of extra coverage like that, if you look around; but if I put that, I'll probably be accused of 'link spam'. Examples,
269:
1666:
The oh-so-subtle connection is that it's about an annual event, on March 10th, called "Mario Day", because of MAR-10 looking like Mario.
1787:. With like half of the already short current stub just being general Mario factoids, it'd be better covered in the main Mario article.
1744:
1670:
1633:
1559:
1391:
1090:
1053:
964:
909:
860:
797:
628:
614:
441:
92:
555:
It doesn't really fit into another article, it's a separate topic. It can be mentioned and linked in many - about the game series, etc.
526:
article. When there's very little to be said about something, and its entire claim to notability hinges on an obvious parent subject (
482:
1289:
enough here to warrant a standalone article. Which doesn't seem that crazy considering how many "Merge" !votes we've got going here.
17:
1573:
488:
608:
People around the world are having a bit of fun today, dressing as Mario, playing games, raising money for charity and so on, see
1551:
I don't understand how you can say there's not "enough dedicated coverage", when almost all the referenced articles are entirely
194:
1225:"Grrr. If SergeCross73 hadn't edit warred with me I could have improved the article enough that it would have closed as "keep".
480:
1082:
796:
It has "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent". Merge is inappropriate, because it is a distinct topic.
559:
161:
1501:
908:
What about all the others? The Escapist, 4players, Tristate Update, Star Tribune, Hardcore Gamer, Destructiod, Gamecubicle?
905:
As I said in the edit-summary, I copied that over from the Mario article - because you'd complained about another reference.
484:
938:
on Mario Day. Its extremely short and serves mostly as a setup to post a Youtube video created by Nintendo themselves. The
576:
There are literally hundreds of tiny articles made every day; for example, recently, I've seen lots on species of spiders,
486:
474:
500:
It's a real thing, it's notable, it has significant coverage in independent, reliable sources. It should have an article.
1388:
978:
many examples listed off. To paraphrase in a shorter, easier to understand manner, I think he meant something more like
939:
382:
1871:
40:
334:
314:
294:
1044:
Ah, that makes more sense; I'm sorry. I misunderstood or misread, I get it now: you meant like, "Most are X, Y or Z".
963:
I'm really not interested in arguing; I've made my points, and you seem to have already made up your mind about this.
605:
shows a large description from "nationaldaycalendar.com". Wouldn't it be better if that was the Knowledge (XXG) page?
155:
859:
Please forgive my stupidity, but I am very confused by "Most of the sources are press releases". None of them are.
1558:
There are hundreds of 1-line articles created every day with a single reference; why does this one need merging?
1485:
683:
1852:
1831:
1798:
1765:
thing or hashtag. It'd work good as part of Mario's impact and legacy, but it really should only have a page if
1752:
1695:
1678:
1661:
1641:
1620:
1587:
1567:
1542:
1517:
1473:
1456:
1429:
1399:
1369:
1335:
1300:
1238:
1184:
1122:
1098:
1076:
1061:
1015:
1001:
972:
953:
917:
900:
868:
850:
825:
805:
770:
750:
720:
695:
660:
636:
622:
550:
466:
articles in those publications - they're not just mentioning it in another article, the articles are *about* it.
453:
432:
408:
368:
338:
318:
298:
277:
259:
240:
223:
74:
1616:
589:
511:
273:
255:
151:
1736:
1505:
1748:
1674:
1637:
1563:
1483:
Sorry, but I have to wonder how many of those weighing in here actually took a look at the references. The
1395:
1094:
1072:
1057:
1011:
968:
913:
864:
846:
801:
632:
618:
585:
96:
1572:
No, they aren't significant coverage. They're either extremely short, or stray from the subject. Like your
642:
503:
1793:
1690:
1656:
1582:
1537:
1295:
1117:
1103:
I think you're overestimating the importance of categories here. They're really not that big of a deal or
996:
948:
895:
820:
765:
715:
655:
581:
577:
545:
403:
363:
330:
310:
290:
201:
507:
1867:
1777:
1725:
36:
250:- Until after MAR10 passes. Perhaps if some news outlets make reference to it we can rethink deletion.
814:
How is it distinct from the franchise? Its literally a celebration of the franchise and nothing else.
1818:. Doesn't yet seem to have had either the broad coverage or commercial exploitation described in the
1757:
One reason it should be merged is that it isn't an actual holiday; it seems to me to be some sort of
1451:
1331:
1848:
1612:
1423:
1363:
251:
187:
1165:
935:
1827:
1513:
1234:
1180:
1153:
1068:
1007:
942:
article is pretty much the same - extremely short, no substance lead up to Nintendo's own video.
842:
746:
691:
494:
449:
219:
88:
80:
167:
1843:. It has coverage in secondary sources, but not notability independent of the Mario franchise.
1277:. I did not edit war - I removed it once, and did not revert again. Additionally, I later made
1788:
1685:
1651:
1604:
1577:
1532:
1469:
1290:
1190:
1149:
1112:
991:
943:
890:
815:
760:
710:
650:
540:
398:
358:
353:. There's very little to be said here, but what can be said, can just be a small paragraph at
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
1866:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
926:
be used to cite basic, objective facts, like sales figures. They just can't be used to prove
58:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
1770:
1718:
1248:
I find your comments baffling for a number of reasons. Your criticisms don't make any sense:
1141:
706:
646:
611:
211:
1446:
1415:
1355:
1349:, even though the description of "a celebratory date" as "media" is kind of iffy I guess.
1327:
379:
March 10 is Mario day because Mar 10 looks like Mario. Do Mario related stuff to celebrate
237:
1647:
1497:
1156:, and I wonder whether it wouldn't be better if you based the opinion you voiced here on
536:
1844:
1380:
686:, wrote about it -- Mario Day was pushed over our notability criteria finishing line.
602:
426:
68:
1006:
Yes, that is what I meant. I could have written my original sentence above better. :)
927:
522:
Right, it exists, and there are sources to prove it, but that doesn't mean it needs a
1823:
1819:
1509:
1230:
1176:
742:
734:
687:
672:
570:
539:. Websites like "NintendoWire" and "Gamingbits" are all obscure blogs and fan pages.
445:
215:
1783:
Indeed, it's only claim to notability is tightly entrenched to the parent article -
1766:
1465:
609:
569:
I know someone will scream 'otherstuff', but honestly, why is this different from
126:
882:
1409:- Amending my position per the sustained coverage in RSes over multiple years.
233:
1762:
1270:
886:
381:." Sources are either very brief and don't offer significant coverage (like
63:
665:
86 predicted someone would call out OTHERSTUFF, and you proved him right.
1261:
I thought my edit summaries were quite clear, and expressed valid points.
1160:, not on your opinion on the current state of the article's references...
1086:
563:
1758:
444:
left The following comments on my Talk page, that might be relevant:--
1197:(1) weighing in here with delete opinions; (2) editing the article.
1481:-- there is sufficient RS coverage to meet our inclusion criteria.
1840:
1815:
1784:
1714:
1608:
1442:
1323:
1229:
So, please, if you voiced a "delete", hands-off the article, OK?
1108:
838:
601:
Please have a quick look on Google right now; I think you'll find
531:
421:
394:
390:
354:
350:
53:
1860:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
738:
676:
668:
1717:. This is notable, but it doesn't really need its own article.
1646:
No, we'd just remove that stuff on the merge process, which is
1492:
We are not supposed to weigh in on AFDs based on whether we
1743:
short. If it's notable, why force it into another article?
1464:- we don't need to fork every little PR event / fan stunt.
1769:
declares it a national holiday. I highly doubt he will...
389:) or instantly veer off into general discussion about the
1385:
Two of the references show that it's from at least 2014
1278:
1274:
1262:
1205:
1201:
1172:
874:
122:
118:
114:
1275:
despite being the one to suggest it in the first place
733:
answer? Are you saying OSE is just a crap shot -- so
186:
1326:. I think everyone above has pretty much covered it.
1273:, where the IP has refused to engage in discussion,
889:
is then? They're literally a press release company.
327:
list of Popular culture-related deletion discussions
200:
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
1874:). No further edits should be made to this page.
1735:It doesn't seem to meet any of the 'reasons' in
287:list of Video games-related deletion discussions
671:of cannabis culture is another example. While
934:is a reliable source. But it doesn't provide
558:If merged, it won't be in categories such as
8:
1347:List of non-video game media featuring Mario
325:Note: This debate has been included in the
305:Note: This debate has been included in the
285:Note: This debate has been included in the
307:list of Events-related deletion discussions
881:. I imagine you're not familiar with what
501:
324:
304:
284:
562:. It will most likely be de-linked from
1668:It is about the subject of this article
537:reliable in the Knowledge (XXG) sense
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
1285:content to avoid a merge conclusion.
234:a desultory YouTube video last year
984:stray off-topic from the subject,
210:There is no indication of meeting
24:
879:added a press release minutes ago
980:"Most sources are press releases
1083:Category:Unofficial observances
560:Category:Unofficial observances
1780:09:58 PM, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
1271:started a talk page discussion
1208:, as you did in these edits?
1:
1728:06:48 PM, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
1445:. Per other "Merge" reasons.
988:are of a promotional manner"
1158:the notability of the topic
1891:
1853:17:54, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
1832:18:11, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
1799:23:01, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
1753:21:35, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
1696:22:57, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
1679:17:56, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
1662:16:21, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
1642:23:29, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
1621:16:41, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
1588:16:23, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
1568:23:06, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
1543:16:02, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
1518:10:39, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
1474:06:45, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
1457:04:58, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
1430:15:53, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
1400:11:30, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
1370:04:14, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
1336:20:26, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
1301:15:57, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
1239:12:12, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
1185:11:28, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
1137:Forgive me for undoing an
1123:22:26, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
1099:21:27, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
1077:20:49, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
1062:19:09, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
1016:18:46, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
1002:18:36, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
973:18:17, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
954:18:07, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
918:17:50, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
901:17:44, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
869:17:35, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
851:16:07, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
826:15:34, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
806:15:06, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
771:00:52, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
751:00:25, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
721:16:04, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
696:12:30, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
661:15:34, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
637:15:12, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
623:14:36, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
551:14:03, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
454:05:14, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
409:16:13, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
75:18:25, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
1486:Christian Science Monitor
1206:removing whole paragraphs
684:Christian Science Monitor
433:20:30, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
369:13:44, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
339:13:15, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
319:13:15, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
299:13:15, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
278:17:23, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
260:13:07, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
241:08:22, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
224:08:06, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
1863:Please do not modify it.
1152:, I see your defence of
590:Thiratoscirtus mirabilis
32:Please do not modify it.
1390:. It's already annual.
586:Thiratoscirtus monstrum
1269:edit war, but rather,
729:Okay, but how about a
582:Thiratoscirtus gambari
578:Thiratoscirtus harpago
1502:WP:Arguments to avoid
1220:unnecessary strain?
936:significant coverage
603:"National Mario Day"
1202:removing references
932:Hardcore Gamer here
59:(non-admin closure)
647:arguments to avoid
495:National Mario Day
89:National Mario Day
81:National Mario Day
1648:original research
1605:Mario (franchise)
1254:misunderstanding.
1173:and included some
1085:, or linked from
597:
519:
506:comment added by
341:
331:Shawn in Montreal
321:
311:Shawn in Montreal
301:
291:Shawn in Montreal
61:
56:. Consensus met.
1882:
1865:
1796:
1791:
1775:
1774:
1723:
1722:
1693:
1688:
1659:
1654:
1585:
1580:
1540:
1535:
1449:
1428:
1426:
1420:
1419:
1384:
1368:
1366:
1360:
1359:
1298:
1293:
1146:
1140:
1120:
1115:
999:
994:
951:
946:
898:
893:
823:
818:
768:
763:
718:
713:
658:
653:
593:
548:
543:
431:
429:
406:
401:
366:
361:
205:
204:
190:
142:
130:
112:
71:
66:
57:
34:
1890:
1889:
1885:
1884:
1883:
1881:
1880:
1879:
1878:
1872:deletion review
1861:
1794:
1789:
1772:
1771:
1720:
1719:
1691:
1686:
1657:
1652:
1583:
1578:
1538:
1533:
1455:
1447:
1424:
1417:
1416:
1413:
1410:
1378:
1364:
1357:
1356:
1353:
1350:
1343:
1296:
1291:
1144:
1138:
1118:
1113:
997:
992:
949:
944:
922:Press Releases
896:
891:
821:
816:
766:
761:
716:
711:
656:
651:
546:
541:
427:
425:
404:
399:
364:
359:
147:
138:
103:
87:
84:
69:
64:
48:The result was
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
1888:
1886:
1877:
1876:
1856:
1855:
1834:
1808:
1807:
1806:
1805:
1804:
1803:
1802:
1801:
1737:WP:MERGEREASON
1730:
1729:
1707:
1706:
1705:
1704:
1703:
1702:
1701:
1700:
1699:
1698:
1630:
1624:
1623:
1613:UNSC Luke 1021
1597:
1596:
1595:
1594:
1593:
1592:
1591:
1590:
1556:
1546:
1545:
1522:
1521:
1506:WP:IDONTLIKEIT
1476:
1459:
1453:
1435:
1434:
1433:
1432:
1411:
1403:
1402:
1373:
1372:
1351:
1341:
1338:
1316:
1315:
1314:
1313:
1312:
1311:
1310:
1309:
1308:
1307:
1306:
1305:
1304:
1303:
1286:
1282:
1259:
1255:
1250:
1249:
1243:
1242:
1188:
1134:
1133:
1132:
1131:
1130:
1129:
1128:
1127:
1126:
1125:
1049:
1045:
1029:
1028:
1027:
1026:
1025:
1024:
1023:
1022:
1021:
1020:
1019:
1018:
961:
958:
957:
956:
906:
854:
853:
831:
830:
829:
828:
809:
808:
790:
789:
788:
787:
786:
785:
784:
783:
782:
781:
780:
779:
778:
777:
776:
775:
774:
773:
754:
753:
724:
723:
700:
699:
625:
606:
599:
574:
567:
556:
508:64.229.167.158
498:
491:
477:
470:
467:
463:
457:
456:
435:
414:
413:
412:
411:
372:
371:
343:
342:
322:
302:
282:
281:
280:
270:64.229.167.158
263:
262:
252:UNSC Luke 1021
243:
208:
207:
144:
83:
78:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1887:
1875:
1873:
1869:
1864:
1858:
1857:
1854:
1850:
1846:
1842:
1838:
1835:
1833:
1829:
1825:
1821:
1820:Star Wars Day
1817:
1813:
1810:
1809:
1800:
1797:
1792:
1786:
1782:
1781:
1779:
1776:
1768:
1767:the President
1764:
1760:
1756:
1755:
1754:
1750:
1746:
1745:86.20.193.222
1742:
1738:
1734:
1733:
1732:
1731:
1727:
1724:
1716:
1712:
1709:
1708:
1697:
1694:
1689:
1682:
1681:
1680:
1676:
1672:
1671:86.20.193.222
1669:
1665:
1664:
1663:
1660:
1655:
1649:
1645:
1644:
1643:
1639:
1635:
1634:86.20.193.222
1631:
1628:
1627:
1626:
1625:
1622:
1618:
1614:
1610:
1606:
1602:
1599:
1598:
1589:
1586:
1581:
1575:
1571:
1570:
1569:
1565:
1561:
1560:86.20.193.222
1557:
1554:
1550:
1549:
1548:
1547:
1544:
1541:
1536:
1530:
1526:
1525:
1524:
1523:
1520:
1519:
1515:
1511:
1507:
1503:
1499:
1495:
1490:
1488:
1487:
1480:
1477:
1475:
1471:
1467:
1463:
1460:
1458:
1452:
1450:
1444:
1440:
1437:
1436:
1431:
1427:
1421:
1408:
1405:
1404:
1401:
1397:
1393:
1392:86.20.193.222
1389:
1387:
1382:
1377:
1376:
1375:
1374:
1371:
1367:
1361:
1348:
1344:
1339:
1337:
1333:
1329:
1325:
1321:
1318:
1317:
1302:
1299:
1294:
1287:
1283:
1280:
1276:
1272:
1268:
1264:
1260:
1256:
1252:
1251:
1247:
1246:
1245:
1244:
1241:
1240:
1236:
1232:
1227:
1226:
1221:
1217:
1213:
1209:
1207:
1203:
1196:
1192:
1189:
1187:
1186:
1182:
1178:
1174:
1169:
1167:
1161:
1159:
1155:
1154:ZettaComposer
1151:
1143:
1136:
1135:
1124:
1121:
1116:
1111:article too.
1110:
1106:
1102:
1101:
1100:
1096:
1092:
1091:86.20.193.222
1088:
1084:
1080:
1079:
1078:
1074:
1070:
1069:ZettaComposer
1065:
1064:
1063:
1059:
1055:
1054:86.20.193.222
1050:
1046:
1043:
1042:
1041:
1040:
1039:
1038:
1037:
1036:
1035:
1034:
1033:
1032:
1031:
1030:
1017:
1013:
1009:
1008:ZettaComposer
1005:
1004:
1003:
1000:
995:
989:
987:
983:
976:
975:
974:
970:
966:
965:86.20.193.222
962:
959:
955:
952:
947:
941:
937:
933:
929:
925:
921:
920:
919:
915:
911:
910:86.20.193.222
907:
904:
903:
902:
899:
894:
888:
884:
880:
878:
872:
871:
870:
866:
862:
861:86.20.193.222
858:
857:
856:
855:
852:
848:
844:
843:ZettaComposer
840:
836:
833:
832:
827:
824:
819:
813:
812:
811:
810:
807:
803:
799:
798:86.20.193.222
795:
792:
791:
772:
769:
764:
758:
757:
756:
755:
752:
748:
744:
740:
736:
735:Star Wars Day
732:
728:
727:
726:
725:
722:
719:
714:
708:
704:
703:
702:
701:
698:
697:
693:
689:
685:
680:
678:
674:
673:Star Wars Day
670:
664:
663:
662:
659:
654:
648:
644:
643:WP:OTHERSTUFF
640:
639:
638:
634:
630:
629:86.20.193.222
626:
624:
620:
616:
615:86.20.193.222
612:
610:
607:
604:
600:
596:
595:hundreds more
592:...and so on
591:
587:
583:
579:
575:
572:
571:Star Wars Day
568:
565:
561:
557:
554:
553:
552:
549:
544:
538:
533:
529:
525:
521:
520:
517:
513:
509:
505:
499:
496:
492:
489:
487:
485:
483:
481:
478:
475:
471:
468:
464:
461:
460:
459:
458:
455:
451:
447:
443:
442:86.20.193.222
439:
436:
434:
430:
423:
419:
416:
415:
410:
407:
402:
396:
392:
388:
384:
380:
376:
375:
374:
373:
370:
367:
362:
356:
352:
348:
345:
344:
340:
336:
332:
328:
323:
320:
316:
312:
308:
303:
300:
296:
292:
288:
283:
279:
275:
271:
267:
266:
265:
264:
261:
257:
253:
249:
248:
244:
242:
239:
235:
231:
228:
227:
226:
225:
221:
217:
213:
203:
199:
196:
193:
189:
185:
181:
178:
175:
172:
169:
166:
163:
160:
157:
153:
150:
149:Find sources:
145:
141:
137:
134:
128:
124:
120:
116:
111:
107:
102:
98:
94:
90:
86:
85:
82:
79:
77:
76:
73:
72:
67:
60:
55:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
1862:
1859:
1841:Mario#Legacy
1836:
1816:Mario#Legacy
1811:
1790:Sergecross73
1740:
1710:
1687:Sergecross73
1667:
1653:Sergecross73
1600:
1579:Sergecross73
1574:Metro source
1555:the subject.
1552:
1534:Sergecross73
1528:
1493:
1491:
1484:
1482:
1478:
1461:
1438:
1406:
1340:
1319:
1292:Sergecross73
1266:
1228:
1224:
1222:
1218:
1214:
1210:
1198:
1194:
1191:Sergecross73
1170:
1162:
1157:
1150:Sergecross73
1148:
1114:Sergecross73
1104:
993:Sergecross73
985:
981:
979:
945:Sergecross73
923:
892:Sergecross73
876:
834:
817:Sergecross73
793:
762:Sergecross73
730:
712:Sergecross73
681:
666:
652:Sergecross73
542:Sergecross73
527:
523:
502:— Preceding
440:: IP editor
437:
417:
400:Sergecross73
395:Mario#Legacy
378:
360:Sergecross73
355:Mario#Legacy
346:
246:
245:
229:
209:
197:
191:
183:
176:
170:
164:
158:
148:
135:
62:
49:
47:
31:
28:
1822:article. --
1773:TheJoebro64
1721:TheJoebro64
1611:per above.
1529:the subject
940:Destructoid
883:Newswire.ca
873:Seriously?
174:free images
1494:personally
1448:Yoshi24517
1418:Salvidrim!
1358:Salvidrim!
1342:Weak Merge
1328:Kakurokuna
928:notability
731:meaningful
524:standalone
238:Iridescent
1868:talk page
1845:Imalawyer
1763:Instagram
1381:Salvidrim
1279:this edit
1263:This edit
1258:coverage.
1212:period.
1166:WP:BEFORE
887:CNW Group
397:section.
37:talk page
1870:or in a
1824:McGeddon
1510:Geo Swan
1231:Geo Swan
1177:Geo Swan
1087:March 10
743:Geo Swan
688:Geo Swan
564:March 10
516:contribs
504:unsigned
446:Gronk Oz
216:Gronk Oz
133:View log
39:or in a
1759:Twitter
1466:Brianga
1142:outdent
438:Comment
180:WP refs
168:scholar
106:protect
101:history
1795:msg me
1692:msg me
1658:msg me
1584:msg me
1539:msg me
1454:Online
1297:msg me
1204:, and
1119:msg me
998:msg me
950:msg me
897:msg me
822:msg me
767:msg me
717:msg me
707:WP:OSE
657:msg me
547:msg me
405:msg me
365:msg me
230:Delete
212:WP:GNG
152:Google
110:delete
1837:Merge
1812:Merge
1785:Mario
1715:Mario
1711:Merge
1609:Mario
1603:- to
1601:Merge
1553:about
1498:WP:RS
1462:Merge
1443:Mario
1439:Merge
1324:Mario
1320:Merge
1109:Mario
839:Mario
835:Merge
532:Mario
528:Mario
422:Mario
418:Merge
391:Mario
351:Mario
347:Merge
195:JSTOR
156:books
140:Stats
127:views
119:watch
115:links
54:Mario
50:merge
16:<
1849:talk
1828:talk
1778:talk
1749:talk
1741:that
1726:talk
1675:talk
1638:talk
1617:talk
1564:talk
1514:talk
1479:Keep
1470:talk
1407:Keep
1396:talk
1332:talk
1235:talk
1195:both
1181:talk
1105:that
1095:talk
1073:talk
1058:talk
1048:fun.
1012:talk
969:talk
914:talk
877:just
875:You
865:talk
847:talk
802:talk
794:Keep
747:talk
739:4:20
737:and
692:talk
677:4:20
675:and
669:4:20
667:The
645:and
633:talk
619:talk
566:too.
512:talk
450:talk
428:czar
387:this
383:this
335:talk
315:talk
295:talk
274:talk
256:talk
247:Wait
220:talk
188:FENS
162:news
123:logs
97:talk
93:edit
1839:to
1814:to
1761:or
1713:to
1607:or
1508:.
1504:--
1441:to
1322:to
1267:not
924:can
837:to
535:be
420:to
385:or
349:to
202:TWL
131:– (
70:947
52:to
1851:)
1830:)
1751:)
1677:)
1640:)
1619:)
1566:)
1516:)
1472:)
1422:·
1414:·
1398:)
1362:·
1354:·
1334:)
1237:)
1183:)
1145:}}
1139:{{
1097:)
1089:.
1075:)
1060:)
1014:)
990:.
986:or
971:)
916:)
867:)
849:)
804:)
749:)
709:.
694:)
649:.
635:)
621:)
613:.
588:,
584:,
580:,
518:)
514:•
452:)
357:.
337:)
329:.
317:)
309:.
297:)
289:.
276:)
258:)
222:)
182:)
125:|
121:|
117:|
113:|
108:|
104:|
99:|
95:|
1847:(
1826:(
1747:(
1673:(
1636:(
1615:(
1562:(
1512:(
1468:(
1425:✉
1412:☺
1394:(
1383::
1379:@
1365:✉
1352:☺
1330:(
1233:(
1179:(
1093:(
1071:(
1056:(
1010:(
982:,
967:(
912:(
885:/
863:(
845:(
800:(
745:(
690:(
631:(
617:(
573:?
510:(
490:.
476:.
448:(
333:(
313:(
293:(
272:(
254:(
218:(
206:)
198:·
192:·
184:·
177:·
171:·
165:·
159:·
154:(
146:(
143:)
136:·
129:)
91:(
65:J
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.