885:: This is an excellent example of why the article should be deleted or renamed. It is based on a misconception. She is not facing capital punishment. If that is the only reason why she is notable, it is a false reason. The policies are there for a reason. Read and understand them before commenting. Without policies and guidelines, Knowledge becomes a pointless free for all.
441:"If the event is significant, and/or if the individual's role within it is substantial, a separate article for the person may be appropriate. Individuals notable for well-documented events, such as John Hinckley, Jr., fit into this category. The significance of an event or individual should be indicated by how persistent the coverage is in reliable secondary sources."
864:
providing my reasoning as that's a moronic thing to do. If you want it kept, say why. If you want it deleted, say why. Don't just quote lots of policies and other acronyms - that's the most annoying thing about wikipedia: the policies which allow lazy editors to vote without thinking properly or explaining THEIR reasons.--
1129:, especially since the media interest has waned with the clarification that she won't face the DP and will probably serve most of any sentence back in the UK. This is an encyclopedia, not a rolling news service. There is nothing wrong with waiting for things to become clearer before recreating this article if necessary.
565:. The unique facts driving news media over-exposure are Orobator's pregnancy and strict capital punishment laws in Laos — but news sources cover Orobator only in the context of the arrest in Laos. Avoid news media coverage as rationale for an encyclopedia article, which is premature for this developing incident.
1183:. While she probably doesn't warrant her own article, as per the policies cited by the nominator, the reason her case has received such international publicity is that it has brought focus to Laos's treatment of prisoners. If the issue becomes sufficiently major, the article can be split out again.--
1354:
Can you please point to any
Knowledge policy that says that an article should be created for an otherwise non-notable person who has been arrested as drug-smuggling suspect? If we don't follow the rules and guidelines why bother having them? I have pointed to three policies this article clearly fails
973:
intervenes when a citizen is arrested in such circumstances. So that hardly makes it notable. They sent somebody because they don't have a resident consul. This has now gone from the headlines as I was sure it would. Nothing new on Google news search since 7 May. Simply no more notable than any other
728:
I added the see also link, not to turn it into a campaigning page (which as you say it should not be), but because according to news, her rights have been violated, e.g. trial date moved to stop her getting legal representation. As for her being pregnant, she is currently 4-5 months pregnant, yet was
1075:
You will of course recognise a rhetorical flourish. She shouldn't have an article as she's only accused ("editors must give serious consideration into not creating an article on an alleged perpetrator until a conviction is secured"), she is not otherwise notable, and neither the potential motivation
694:
If you think the article is problematic, then edit/improve it! I don't think material being "negative" is valid grounds for deleting a biography of a living person. We are to avoid slander and defamatory content...but there's no problem with neutral statements of simple facts backed up in numerous
713:
issues. It is not usual for someone who is not already notable to have a page created because they have been charged with a crime. There is also the potential for this page to become a campaigning vehicle for
Samantha Orobator's supporters, which again is not an appropriate use of Knowledge. (There
600:
Yes, I hate it when people use wikipedia for news, but the volume of coverage here is so overwhelming that there is absolutely no question of notability, even if it's a single event. I also want to pointt out that this event is tied into so many interesting legal, cultural, diplomatic, and ethical
183:
Citing three
Knowledge policies is a bit weak? Extensive media coverage does not equate notability. "If reliable sources cover the person only in the context of a particular event, and if that person otherwise remains, or is likely to remain, low profile, then a separate biography is unlikely to be
1124:
Indeed. That is why if it is kept it should be merged. As to the pregnancy, it is possible that, as she was pregnant when she was arrested, she may have been told that because of this she would not face the death penalty. When she lost the baby, it is certainly possible that she may have sought to
754:
Sadly, people have their rights violated in custody every day. That does not mean they merit a
Knowledge article. In any event, the last execution in Laos was almost 20 years ago, so the threat of execution was remote at best. Laos does not routinely execute people. It is also standard in Laos, as
354:
Excuse me but who is engaging in borderline personal attacks? You say, "Everyone is entitled to their opinion concerning individual articles..." immediately after saying in essence I have no right to voice my opinion by nominating it for deletion. As the creator of this article, maybe you would be
1094:
This article is not about the alleged crime itself (which was not a huge amount of drugs), but about the events surrounding it, especially the human rights issues that have been publicised, how Laos wishes to be seen, the Anglo-Laos negotiations and possible prisoner exchange that has come out of
482:
No, they are three different guidelines with different criteria. That's why they are listed separately. If we were to include everything that was mentioned in multiple news sources for a few days, this would no longer be an encyclopaedia. What is considered "persistent" news coverage needs to be
1441:
be deleted. You are arguing for it's retention based on speculation. "If" this and "if" that. If indeed any of these things come to pass, the article can simply be recreated by an admin. But at the moment she is not notable. The UK government provides support for any citizen arrested abroad who
1414:
But if we, lets say, delete it... And she then gets death sentence or a really long prison sentence that will get enormous publicity what do we do?... Also the fact that she could be transferred doesnt change the facts about her and her notability.Actually that will only increase her notability
863:
Article is notable, current and encyclopaedic. Anyone facing such a barbaric punishment (that's what capital punishment is) is big news in civilized countries of the world (that excludes the USA, Saudi Arabia, etc.) I'm not going to quote lots of pointless wikipedia policies and guidelines in
824:. The article does NOT fail BLP because it's sourced to multiple media sources which are accurate and reliable, and it's a fairly major news story. Having said that I don't know how significant this is going to be in the long term hence I'm not sure about the 'one event' test.--
714:
are already hints of this with the addition of the "Human rights in Laos" see also.) The fact is, she rose to prominence because she was a pregnant woman potentially facing the death penalty. Now that it has been confirmed she won't, interest in this story will wane.
1200:
until she meets notability requirements. She's a suspected drug smuggler under arrest and there are thousands of similar people, I'm not seeing anything important or significant about her case. Even if she technically met the guidelines for notability it would be
263:
No but it doesnt neither mean that it should be deleted just because the nominator is of a strong "deletion opinion" like you. And i have to agree with Judo it seems a bi strange that you nominate it for deletion just minutes after a speedy deletion request was
385:
246:
but decided that it was better to have a discussion. Just because a speedy is not accepted does not mean that an article shouldn't be deleted after proper discussion, so you'll need to come up with better reasons than that, citing
Knowledge policy.
1446:, as confirmed by a senior Laotian minister, so that "if" is definitely not happening, and certainly lessens her notability. The only thing that conforms to Knowledge policy is to delete and recreate later if notability is confirmed.
906:. Straightforward BLP1E. (If she's discussed months from now, that will be a different matter.) The person commenting anonymously immediately above is of course free to term this vote ("!vote") and/or myself "moronic". Lazily yours,
1260:. Knowledge could have thousands of such articles on rather trivial people in the news. Seems a summary in another article, thus a merge, would be best to serve our readers as a modern example of the various issues at play.
1060:
Not all western durg smugglers have their own wikipedia page first of all. Second, Orobator is a special case which had recieved more coverage than your average drug smuggler case/person. So your reasons arent the best, but
846:. Undoubtedly there are multiple, secondary, reliable sources but they are about the case (i.e. arrest, consequences and preparation for trial) and not about Orobator's life and career. This should not be a bio article.
48:. Our biographies of living persons policies have much more importance over the fact that the event of this woman's arrest is a news story in the UK. The content of the article can be retrieved and merged upon request.—
978:
it was against her will but we don't know. For an encyclopaedia, it has to be verifiable. When we know the full details of the case, we can determine whether it is a notable event. Until then, it is only speculation.
309:
Yes the admin asked for someone to check it out and then perhaps nominate it for deletion. The nomination should have been placed here after a look trough and not in haste. And perhaps not by Harry but by a impartial
1328:
The Delete minded people dont seem to have mutch really to point towards deletion more than the usual pointing towards wikipedia rules this wikipedia rules that-... Which anyway points to keeping this article.--
369:
Can you take a step back Judo. There's no reason why the same person cannot nominate it for AfD after putting it up for a speedy delete. Just stick to discussing whether it meets the guidelines please.
784:
First of all, she is a suspect, the article doesn't imply guilt. either way, this has significant coverage and rather than outright delete, merge it with a death penalty in Laos article, if it exists.
833:
695:
reliable sources. And is the article really that negative? After all, a lot of the articles are about how people are calling for her protection and trying to make sure she doesn't get executed!!!
162:
per numerous sources pointing towards notability over the normal drug mule case. Orobators story is known in many nations. Also the reasons for the deletion seems a bit weak to say the least.--
1000:, as per Cazort and Dream Focus. Significant incident which had prompted reactions and talks between the governments of the two countries involved, and which has received widespread coverage.
755:
even
Reprieve acknowledges, for defendants not to have access to lawyers until right before the trial. There really is nothing unusual enough in this case that merits a separate article on
803:
1222:
trivial crime; the interest isv only in the conflict of cultures. If she does get the dealh penalty, which I gather from the story is unlikely, then she might become notable.
680:
case. The article implies she trafficked drugs which is clearly negative material about a living person. Articles purely based on said negative content should be avoided. -
582:
and rename as suggested by
Hipocrite. This is an international incident and controversy with plenty of RS coverage that will continue to develop beyond the NOT#NEWS scope. --
326:
I am an impartial observer who has actually read the guidelines I quote. It is perfectly acceptable for me to nominate, and it is improper for you to suggest otherwise.
1355:
at the moment (although it may not in the future). If it does meet notability guidelines in the future it can be recreated, but for now it should be deleted or merged.
648:
as per Cazort and MarkusBJoke. This is not just about drug mule, it has human rights issues in it, e.g. Orobator's pregnancy and attempts to bring the trial forward.
292:
BLP1E is still a fair reason to argue for deletion, especially considering that the admin who declined the speedy stated the article was a potential AFD candidate
125:
184:
warranted." It is likely that this is the only event for which she will be in the news. If that proves not to be the case, then an article can be considered.
340:
No need for any sort of personal attacks. Everyone is entitled to their opinion concerning individual articles here on
Knowledge its not a "one man state".--
829:
144:. Many people get arrested every day. A simple arrest for alleged drug trafficking does not make someone notable even if there is extensive news coverage.
1241:- this article meets all of the deletion criteria as set out by policy as stated by the nominator which is my long winded way of saying "per nom". --
601:
issues. It's interesting. In my opinion, this is among the best possible examples of single events that should be covered in detail by wikipedia.
221:
as above, and the fact that the nominator nominated the article for deletion three different times in less than five minutes on very vage grounds.--
200:
I have said what is needed to say. I rest my case and let other people decide. But your grounds for deletion does not apply on
Orobators article.--
1125:
become pregnant again because of this. There is just too much speculation on the key issues that affect notability for an article to be included
925:
A notable human rights case, which gained worldwide media attention. The
British government sent someone over to talk to them about this even.
865:
92:
87:
1077:
525:
The article should retain her first name, but not include the year as she was arrested in 2008, and the story only came to light this year.
96:
1040:
Although her case is by itself not notable, it deserves inclusion in Humans rights in Laos, in particular because she became preganant
79:
974:
arrest for alleged drug smuggling. Many of the details are simply speculation (we don't know how she got pregnant again; people are
17:
1450:
1359:
1133:
983:
889:
825:
763:
718:
487:
384:
This is both Judo and Harry the dog,s discussion and Judo shouldnt be the blame-game victim. However i ask all parties to
359:
330:
251:
188:
148:
242:
I nominated it for speedy which was not accepted. I am going through the proper channels for deletion. I thought about a
1085:
1049:
1035:
1398:- this is the point; the event may be notable but the person isn't. Consequently the page should, if kept, be moved.
1493:
36:
1492:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
1478:
1455:
1424:
1407:
1386:
1364:
1337:
1323:
1309:
1293:
1276:
1250:
1233:
1214:
1192:
1168:
1138:
1119:
1096:
1089:
1070:
1053:
1009:
988:
964:
948:
915:
894:
873:
869:
855:
843:
815:
793:
768:
749:
723:
704:
687:
668:
638:
610:
590:
574:
545:
513:
492:
470:
452:
411:
397:
379:
364:
349:
335:
319:
304:
287:
273:
256:
230:
209:
193:
171:
153:
61:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
1474:
1081:
1045:
1031:
685:
1284:
Why was this re-listed? it seems consensus was already reached, either merge or close as keep and move on.
443:
I think we can now say that there is persistent coverage, but obviously, interpretation of this will vary.
83:
1403:
1333:
1319:
851:
393:
300:
283:
269:
205:
167:
1210:
1180:
1025:
811:
1300:
I still say Keep as this person has reached notability beyond your average drug smuggler/criminal.--
1188:
1164:
1115:
745:
664:
541:
509:
448:
375:
1314:
Is this discussion still going on. For me this is a straight to Keep article. No doubt about it.--
1261:
1202:
1030:
I can't see that every Westerner accused of drug smuggling in SE Asia needs a Knowledge article.
681:
636:
483:
looked at retrospectively, not in the heat of the event. It is far too early for this article.
1420:
1381:
1305:
1066:
960:
570:
407:
345:
315:
226:
75:
67:
55:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
628:
Flashy story with high coverage? Yes. Enduring historical notability? Almost certainly zero.
1399:
1329:
1315:
1289:
926:
847:
789:
700:
606:
389:
296:
279:
265:
201:
163:
1206:
1005:
911:
807:
562:
141:
137:
278:
Especially on the grounds that "decline speedy - multiple sources indicate notability".--
1246:
1184:
1160:
1100:
1078:
Knowledge:Notability_(criminal_acts)#Criteria_for_inclusion_of_articles_on_participants
730:
649:
526:
505:
467:
463:
444:
371:
243:
1229:
710:
677:
630:
621:
558:
133:
1416:
1301:
1062:
956:
566:
403:
341:
311:
222:
49:
113:
504:
Keep but move to event name (2009 Orobator-Laos drug mule incident/allegations?)
1470:
1285:
785:
696:
602:
584:
1001:
907:
1242:
1154:
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
1224:
1076:
or exectution of the alleged crime was unusual or noteworthy. See
1486:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
1442:
requests it. Plus, let's once and for all be clear that she
1437:
Judo112, you have just demonstrated neatly why this article
1380:
This is an important current event, so deserves a mention
1044:
being jailed, almost certainly by being raped in jail.
293:
120:
109:
105:
101:
1159:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
1099:claims that she consented (It is a mixed prison).
804:list of Living people-related deletion discussions
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
1496:). No further edits should be made to this page.
462:You really cited 1 policy/guideline. Agree with
1415:because of the UKs efforts to bring her home.--
1095:this. Also it is not clear that she was raped,
1469:, coatrack, not news, BLP1E. Take your pick.
439:. THe guidelines on 'one event' go on to say
8:
802:: This debate has been included in the
402:Not interested in meta-discussions.--
7:
24:
295:. Nothing strange going on here.
826:Yo Dawg! What's Going On Today?
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
1:
355:better to take a step back.
1444:won't get the death penalty
502:Keep but move to event name
1513:
1038:) 03:13, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
844:Case of Samantha Orobator
1489:Please do not modify it.
1479:12:57, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
1456:17:41, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
1425:16:29, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
1408:16:14, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
1387:16:09, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
1365:12:24, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
1338:11:43, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
1324:11:41, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
1310:11:40, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
1294:06:09, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
1277:00:40, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
1251:18:59, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
1234:09:23, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
1215:20:31, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
1193:18:16, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
1169:18:13, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
1139:05:24, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
1120:22:02, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
1090:17:58, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
1071:12:58, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
1054:16:26, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
1010:12:12, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
989:08:13, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
965:09:40, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
62:04:46, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
32:Please do not modify it.
1258:Weak keep leaning merge
949:20:23, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
916:02:09, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
895:06:56, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
874:22:30, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
856:22:08, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
834:20:58, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
816:00:03, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
794:18:03, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
769:16:45, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
750:15:44, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
729:arrested 9 months ago.
724:07:14, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
709:I agree there are also
705:18:43, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
688:17:50, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
669:17:39, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
639:17:29, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
611:17:06, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
591:15:48, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
575:13:31, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
546:17:56, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
514:12:44, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
493:11:54, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
471:11:35, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
453:11:25, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
412:12:15, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
398:12:11, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
380:12:06, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
365:12:03, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
350:12:00, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
336:11:56, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
320:11:46, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
305:11:37, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
288:11:24, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
274:11:23, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
257:11:19, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
231:11:13, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
210:11:35, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
194:11:15, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
172:11:10, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
154:11:08, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
1181:Human rights in Laos
1026:Human rights in Laos
557:The situation is a
1082:Fences and windows
1046:Fences and windows
1032:Fences and windows
969:The UK government
635:
1171:
818:
629:
76:Samantha Orobator
68:Samantha Orobator
1504:
1491:
1453:
1449:
1384:
1362:
1358:
1273:
1267:
1158:
1156:
1136:
1132:
1111:
1108:
1105:
986:
982:
945:
942:
939:
936:
933:
930:
892:
888:
798:
766:
762:
741:
738:
735:
721:
717:
660:
657:
654:
633:
587:
537:
534:
531:
490:
486:
386:read trough this
362:
358:
333:
329:
310:administrator.--
254:
250:
191:
187:
151:
147:
123:
117:
99:
58:
52:
44:The result was
34:
1512:
1511:
1507:
1506:
1505:
1503:
1502:
1501:
1500:
1494:deletion review
1487:
1451:
1447:
1382:
1360:
1356:
1271:
1265:
1205:at this point.
1152:
1134:
1130:
1109:
1106:
1103:
984:
980:
943:
940:
937:
934:
931:
928:
890:
886:
866:217.203.140.226
840:Rename and move
764:
760:
739:
736:
733:
719:
715:
658:
655:
652:
631:
585:
535:
532:
529:
488:
484:
360:
356:
331:
327:
252:
248:
189:
185:
149:
145:
119:
90:
74:
71:
56:
50:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
1510:
1508:
1499:
1498:
1482:
1481:
1463:
1462:
1461:
1460:
1459:
1458:
1448:Harry the Dog
1430:
1429:
1428:
1427:
1411:
1410:
1390:
1389:
1374:
1373:
1372:
1371:
1370:
1369:
1368:
1367:
1357:Harry the Dog
1345:
1344:
1343:
1342:
1341:
1340:
1297:
1296:
1279:
1254:
1253:
1236:
1217:
1195:
1173:
1172:
1157:
1149:
1148:
1147:
1146:
1145:
1144:
1143:
1142:
1141:
1131:Harry the Dog
1057:
1056:
1013:
1012:
994:
993:
992:
991:
981:Harry the Dog
952:
951:
919:
918:
900:
899:
898:
897:
887:Harry the Dog
877:
876:
858:
836:
819:
796:
778:
777:
776:
775:
774:
773:
772:
771:
761:Harry the Dog
757:the individual
716:Harry the Dog
691:
690:
671:
642:
641:
614:
613:
594:
593:
577:
551:
550:
549:
548:
517:
516:
498:
497:
496:
495:
485:Harry the Dog
474:
473:
456:
455:
433:
432:
431:
430:
429:
428:
427:
426:
425:
424:
423:
422:
421:
420:
419:
418:
417:
416:
415:
414:
367:
357:Harry the Dog
328:Harry the Dog
290:
260:
259:
249:Harry the Dog
234:
233:
215:
214:
213:
212:
197:
196:
186:Harry the Dog
175:
174:
146:Harry the Dog
130:
129:
70:
65:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1509:
1497:
1495:
1490:
1484:
1483:
1480:
1476:
1472:
1468:
1465:
1464:
1457:
1454:
1445:
1440:
1436:
1435:
1434:
1433:
1432:
1431:
1426:
1422:
1418:
1413:
1412:
1409:
1405:
1401:
1397:
1394:
1393:
1392:
1391:
1388:
1385:
1379:
1376:
1375:
1366:
1363:
1353:
1352:
1351:
1350:
1349:
1348:
1347:
1346:
1339:
1335:
1331:
1327:
1326:
1325:
1321:
1317:
1313:
1312:
1311:
1307:
1303:
1299:
1298:
1295:
1291:
1287:
1283:
1280:
1278:
1275:
1274:
1268:
1259:
1256:
1255:
1252:
1248:
1244:
1240:
1237:
1235:
1231:
1227:
1226:
1221:
1218:
1216:
1212:
1208:
1204:
1199:
1196:
1194:
1190:
1186:
1182:
1178:
1175:
1174:
1170:
1166:
1162:
1155:
1151:
1150:
1140:
1137:
1128:
1123:
1122:
1121:
1117:
1113:
1112:
1098:
1093:
1092:
1091:
1087:
1083:
1079:
1074:
1073:
1072:
1068:
1064:
1059:
1058:
1055:
1051:
1047:
1043:
1039:
1037:
1033:
1027:
1023:
1020:
1019:
1015:
1014:
1011:
1007:
1003:
999:
996:
995:
990:
987:
977:
972:
968:
967:
966:
962:
958:
954:
953:
950:
947:
946:
924:
921:
920:
917:
913:
909:
905:
902:
901:
896:
893:
884:
881:
880:
879:
878:
875:
871:
867:
862:
859:
857:
853:
849:
845:
841:
837:
835:
831:
827:
823:
820:
817:
813:
809:
805:
801:
797:
795:
791:
787:
783:
780:
779:
770:
767:
758:
753:
752:
751:
747:
743:
742:
727:
726:
725:
722:
712:
708:
707:
706:
702:
698:
693:
692:
689:
686:
683:
679:
675:
672:
670:
666:
662:
661:
647:
644:
643:
640:
637:
634:
627:
623:
620:This is what
619:
618:Strong Delete
616:
615:
612:
608:
604:
599:
596:
595:
592:
589:
588:
581:
578:
576:
572:
568:
564:
560:
559:Cause celebre
556:
553:
552:
547:
543:
539:
538:
524:
521:
520:
519:
518:
515:
511:
507:
503:
500:
499:
494:
491:
481:
478:
477:
476:
475:
472:
469:
465:
461:
458:
457:
454:
450:
446:
442:
438:
435:
434:
413:
409:
405:
401:
400:
399:
395:
391:
387:
383:
382:
381:
377:
373:
368:
366:
363:
353:
352:
351:
347:
343:
339:
338:
337:
334:
325:
324:
323:
322:
321:
317:
313:
308:
307:
306:
302:
298:
294:
291:
289:
285:
281:
277:
276:
275:
271:
267:
262:
261:
258:
255:
245:
241:
238:
237:
236:
235:
232:
228:
224:
220:
217:
216:
211:
207:
203:
199:
198:
195:
192:
182:
179:
178:
177:
176:
173:
169:
165:
161:
158:
157:
156:
155:
152:
143:
139:
135:
127:
122:
115:
111:
107:
103:
98:
94:
89:
85:
81:
77:
73:
72:
69:
66:
64:
63:
59:
53:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
1488:
1485:
1466:
1443:
1438:
1395:
1377:
1281:
1269:
1263:
1257:
1238:
1223:
1219:
1197:
1176:
1153:
1127:at this time
1126:
1102:
1041:
1029:
1021:
1017:
1016:
997:
975:
970:
927:
922:
903:
882:
860:
839:
821:
799:
781:
756:
732:
673:
651:
645:
625:
617:
597:
583:
579:
554:
528:
522:
501:
479:
459:
440:
436:
239:
218:
180:
159:
131:
45:
43:
31:
28:
1400:TerriersFan
1330:MarkusBJoke
1316:MarkusBJoke
1203:WP:ONEEVENT
848:TerriersFan
622:WP:NOT#NEWS
598:Strong Keep
561:example of
390:MarkusBJoke
297:Someguy1221
280:MarkusBJoke
266:MarkusBJoke
202:MarkusBJoke
164:MarkusBJoke
134:WP:NOT#NEWS
1383:Fahrenheit
1207:Drawn Some
955:Exactly!--
808:Erwin85Bot
1185:Aervanath
1161:Aervanath
822:Weak keep
506:Hipocrite
468:Unionhawk
464:Quantpole
445:Quantpole
372:Quantpole
264:denied.--
976:assuming
563:WP:BLP1E
142:WP:BLP1E
138:WP:BIO1E
126:View log
1417:Judo112
1396:Comment
1302:Judo112
1282:Comment
1063:Judo112
957:Judo112
883:Comment
567:Mtd2006
523:Comment
480:Comment
404:Judo112
342:Judo112
312:Judo112
244:WP:PROD
240:Comment
223:Judo112
181:Comment
93:protect
88:history
51:Ryūlóng
1471:Stifle
1467:Delete
1439:should
1286:riffic
1239:Delete
1220:Delete
1198:Delete
1101:Martin
1061:hey.--
1018:Delete
971:always
904:Delete
786:riffic
731:Martin
711:WP:BLP
697:Cazort
678:WP:BLP
676:Clear
674:Delete
650:Martin
626:about.
603:Cazort
555:Delete
527:Martin
132:Fails
121:delete
97:delete
46:delete
1177:Merge
1042:after
1022:Merge
1002:Aridd
944:Focus
908:Hoary
124:) – (
114:views
106:watch
102:links
16:<
1475:talk
1452:WOOF
1421:talk
1404:talk
1378:Keep
1361:WOOF
1334:talk
1320:talk
1306:talk
1290:talk
1264:Banj
1247:talk
1243:Whpq
1230:talk
1211:talk
1189:talk
1165:talk
1135:WOOF
1116:talk
1097:this
1086:talk
1067:talk
1050:talk
1036:talk
1006:talk
998:Keep
985:WOOF
961:talk
923:Keep
912:talk
891:WOOF
870:talk
861:Keep
852:talk
830:talk
812:talk
806:. --
800:Note
790:talk
782:Keep
765:WOOF
746:talk
720:WOOF
701:talk
665:talk
646:Keep
607:talk
580:Keep
571:talk
542:talk
510:talk
489:WOOF
460:Keep
449:talk
437:Keep
408:talk
394:talk
376:talk
361:WOOF
346:talk
332:WOOF
316:talk
301:talk
284:talk
270:talk
253:WOOF
227:talk
219:Keep
206:talk
190:WOOF
168:talk
160:Keep
150:WOOF
140:and
110:logs
84:talk
80:edit
1262:--
1225:DGG
1179:to
1024:to
842:to
682:Mgm
632:Ray
624:is
388:.--
1477:)
1423:)
1406:)
1336:)
1322:)
1308:)
1292:)
1272:oi
1249:)
1232:)
1213:)
1191:)
1167:)
1118:)
1088:)
1080:.
1069:)
1052:)
1028:.
1008:)
963:)
914:)
872:)
854:)
832:)
814:)
792:)
759:.
748:)
703:)
667:)
609:)
573:)
544:)
512:)
466:--
451:)
410:)
396:)
378:)
348:)
318:)
303:)
286:)
272:)
229:)
208:)
170:)
136:,
112:|
108:|
104:|
100:|
95:|
91:|
86:|
82:|
60:)
57:竜龙
1473:(
1419:(
1402:(
1332:(
1318:(
1304:(
1288:(
1270:b
1266:e
1245:(
1228:(
1209:(
1187:(
1163:(
1114:(
1110:1
1107:5
1104:4
1084:(
1065:(
1048:(
1034:(
1004:(
959:(
941:m
938:a
935:e
932:r
929:D
910:(
868:(
850:(
838:-
828:(
810:(
788:(
744:(
740:1
737:5
734:4
699:(
684:|
663:(
659:1
656:5
653:4
605:(
586:J
569:(
540:(
536:1
533:5
530:4
508:(
447:(
406:(
392:(
374:(
344:(
314:(
299:(
282:(
268:(
225:(
204:(
166:(
128:)
118:(
116:)
78:(
54:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.