2175:. It also involves allegations against Wankhede for extortion in the same case, a related allegation of fraud on his part (i.e scheduled caste issue), an attack on him, etc. Parts of the event can't be picked out and considered separate events. There is some marginal coverage of him before this, in connection with investigations against other celebrities, although these are all arguably related as well. There is a lot of tabloid coverage, most of the focus is on the celebrities themselves, while the subject has no apparent claim of significance.
1779:. Central Civil Service again not All India. The person is irrelevant and not notable. He is not a Nobel laureate or a revolutionary leader for anyone to preserve this article. The individual is just a government worker doing a job and getting media attention because the son of a major actor (not the arrest of the actor itself) did drugs and in jail. Arresting or investigating officers of other countries don't have Knowledge encyclopedia article or biographies at all.
2090:. They're reporting in one case that he's been attacked and threatened while at work -- hardly indicative of paid news or COI, in my view -- and in another case that he's refused security cover. So it's not coverage of one event.After subtracting these two arguments from the debate, I don't see a convincing argument for deletion. The article definitely has problems but in my view they qualify as fixable.
168:
114:. This was a difficult AfD to parse through. On the surface, there are significantly more delete votes than keep votes (I count about 24 delete and 16 keep). There was some obvious rampant socking and votes by SPAs, and it seems like the majority of those voters were voting to keep the article. This was a very widely attended AfD, and the delete voters had a significant numerical advantage.
60:
31:
134:
majority of sources in the article focus on the recent event that began in late 2020. While keep voters point to a few remaining sources from prior to 2020, several editors convincingly argue that these sources have reliability issues, and/or do not cover the subject in a significant way, and/or do not describe particularly notable events beyond everyday news stories.
2078:). So on the basis of our normal custom and practice on Indian language sources, I'll buy those two a general notability guideline pass.It's then claimed that Wankhede is only notable for one event, which would be the scheduled caste quota dispute. But I don't buy that either. The event was in 2021, but I can see other news sources
2411:
to not apply. The primary issue I see is that while it may be possible to snip out information about the allegations, it would not be an accurate representation of the sources, since most of the information about the subject is contextualised with references to the allegations. So creating an article
1747:
I'm probably missing something but why are we even considering keeping this article? The "Personal life" section contains rather odd musings on this person's relationship with
Muslims that looks more like an editor's obsession with things Islamic rather than with things encyclopedic. The rest: an IAS
2487:
Our rules do say that we should avoid including accusations of crimes (without a conviction) when it concerns individuals who are not public figures. The criminal investigation and scheduled caste issue (which is the forgery allegation) are all framed as part of the same story by the newspapers; for
2466:
You're clearly right to say that most of the coverage about this gentleman is recent and there are only a couple of examples of coverage from 2013. I think there are two matters that the sources talk about in any detail: the criminal investigation and the scheduled caste issue. My position is that
2351:
with smaller populations than Mumbai. When we're dealing with countries as populous as India, the criticism that a source is "local" loses some of its impact for me.I'm not convinced by the criticism that the Mumbai Mirror article is "routine coverage", either. To my
British eyes, having never set
1622:
That dispute is worthy material for newspapers not encyclopedia. Every garbage that gets published need not find its way into an online encyclopedia. Let this guy become chief of CBI or get a Padma or achieve something. Investigating someone does not make a person notable, even though the newspapers
1360:
In 2021, he is in news for arresting an actor's son, and interrogating other celebrities. Again celebrities are involved. It is not even a big case, no dugs was found from the actor's son and the drugs his friend was carrying was very little in quantity. The case is getting attention only because he
2576:
Or perhaps, instead of misrepresenting the arguments of "!delete voter", you could take a look at the references in the article for a start? The criminal allegations were removed from the article, while the remaining material is entirely sourced from references that are about the allegations or are
2342:
Well, yes, I understand your concern about whether the Sunday
Guardian is reliable. It's not one that the community has evaluated for reliability. I'm not clear where the burden of proof lies here. Do you feel it's for me to demonstrate the newspaper's reliability, or would you say that it's for
1047:
Very good question. This person has not done anything extraordinary to deserve an article. The case of this drug agency raid centered around few grams of weed is only getting coverage as an Indian film superstar's son is involved. All the characters in this incident have received some form of case
2391:
does cover a populous region but it's not any different from any other major city elsewhere in the world, wouldn't you consider a single piece in say a London specific newspaper (if that exists) to be local coverage? And all that their article says is that a mid ranking official refused security
1032:
which no one has answered yet: Genuine question, what makes this person so notable compared to others in the same type of job all around the world? He has led some investigations I see, so have 100's of others in his same position. Explain WHAT makes him different to others doing the same job as
2467:
these two things don't meet any reasonable definition of "one event". I also don't believe that they're routine. I'm not saying they're of earth-shattering importance, but I do feel that if similar events took place in New York, the newspapers there would cover them, and so would
Knowledge.â
133:
Reviewing these arguments, it is difficult to accept the argument that the subject has not received significant coverage. At least a few articles that were presented in this discussion demonstrate clear significant coverage. So, that only leaves us to determine whether BLP1E applies. The vast
1357:
even when an event is notable, individuals involved in it may not be. Unless news coverage of an individual goes beyond the context of a single event, our coverage of that individual should be limited to the article about that event, in proportion to their importance to the overall
1361:
is the son of
Bollywood's biggest actor. I don't know what do you mean by deleting Oscar related pages. Oscar is an internationally recognized award and this is not a notable case. I suggest the closing admin to see thisnews article to understand the chronology of the events.
1299:
news article. The majority of the coverage he received was because celebrities were involved. He has also investigated other cases, but they did not get this kind of coverage and probably are not notable. It is also to be noted that he himself was recently accused see
2073:
evaluated the
Hindustan Times but it's been my experience that Wikipedians do accept the Hindustan Times as a reliable source in cases where it's also confirmed by The Indian Express (or The Hindu which is the other top-reliability news source native to India, see
657:
He is not known for these events. Though he received some coverage in the reporting of the recent event while acting as a spokesman for the reporters. The older incident is even more trivial. The detailed coverage requirement does not allow passing mentions.
117:
When we get down to the major policy arguments on both sides, the delete voters are mainly arguing that the subject of the article is an unremarkable government worker who is clearly not a public figure, the subject lacks significant coverage required by
1545:
as reliable sources from 2020 and 2021 have provided significant coverage to the subject. WP:BLP1E is even less of a criteria at this stage thanks to the recent drug-related arrests and political mudslinging which has made the subject even more notable.
2395:
Regarding the SG article, can't say if the rest of their material is accurate, a lot of it is just based on quoting him and even if it was to be considered reliable, it's hardly a mainstream newspaper i.e, it's a weekly with a very low circulation, the
760:
1436:
No significance notability of the person in the past other than present controversy. Person will disappear from the news once matter is settled. Moreover, you would rarely find any mention of the person in news before
October or September
768:
2200:
the topic in the manner covered by reliable sources and it will end up being predominantly composed of the allegations against Aryan Khan who is not a notable figure as well as all those against
Wankhede who is not a public figure.
1157:
Whilst, I have voted for Keep but I agree with you that there appears to be some canvassing. This is drawing unusual attention in the article page, talk page and in this discussion. Some of the voters have only fewer edits.
2313:
one and I'm not sure whether that can be considered an RS. In any case, as I have already said this is borderline and we should not be building an article on a BLP which would almost entirely be about criminal allegations.
606:
1453:
678:
1331:
BLP is not violated only because of the existence of a biographical article. It makes no sense in saying that a subject's coverage "was because celebrities were involved", because then you would also want to delete
405:
1853:
Knowledge is an open platform of useful & notable events. Passes WP:GNG & WP:EVENT criterion as there have been multiple events surrounding
Wankhade. He is himself subject to the investigation now. Passes
1350:
He is currently accused of multiple things including trying to extort money for the release of the actor's son so having an article on him violates WP:BLP and WP:NOTNEWSPAPER. Wankhede is not notable, in 2020 the
1597:
Even if I were to entertain your non-policy based opinion then you are ought to be aware that now there is a dispute about his caste certification which has nothing to do with any his crime-related investigation.
1604:" which has been already punctured as reliable sources from 2020 and 2021 have provided significant coverage to the subject concerning issues different from each other. You need to only remember that as long as
537:, in the article the other events where the officer led the investigations are mentioned, same can also be found over the internet. Disclosure: I created the article but am not related to subject in any ways.
2448:, so that doesn't help us very much. I note wryly from that discussion that it doesn't even come up that the Evening Standard might be "local". Lots of English people doing the evaluation there, of course.
2343:
you to demonstrate its unreliability?I do sort-of recognize the argument that the Mumbai Mirror is "local coverage", but in my view it founders on the fact that the "local" region, the city of Mumbai, is
1245:
I have added 'Comment - THIS IS NOT VOTE' tag and have made the text as normal. I only responded to that comment because I see a lot of users with few edits or IP users voting both / editing both ways.
2403:
In the end, I don't think it matters much, even if we somehow used both of the above, his predominant coverage is still indisputably the recent coverage. The two articles alone wouldn't have given him
2057:
So when I look at the sources in this article, a lot of them are terrible, and the article definitely needs revision. The basic problem with Indian sources is well summarized in our article on
1197:: I voted only on 21 October 2021. The above sentence is not my second vote - there I have just mentioned about the unusual canvassing activity - I agreed on canvassing part by a user who voted
1115:
There are lots of raids every day happening in the world and not every constable and upper officer can have a
Knowledge encylopedia article. This article must be deleted and out. - Thanks, KU
706:
as the subject is an IRS officer of a city unit who got attention only during an ongoing drug investigation. 4 out of the present 7 sources talks about the drug case where 2 sources are from
1309:
2066:
1305:
607:
https://m.timesofindia.com/entertainment/hindi/bollywood/news/not-just-aryan-khan-shah-rukh-khan-these-bollywood-celebs-have-also-faced-sameer-wankhede-in-the-past/photostory/87310095.cms
2503:
1048:
dependent coverage. Remove the Superstar and no one will want to hear about these characters. This criminal case dependent coverage of the characters neither counts for GNG nor for
1659:
My point is he should become chief of a major org, to become notable for an article. Chief investigator of few gms of weed related case doesn't cut it, to get a Knowledge article.
1598:
2061:. But our redoubtable reliable sources analysts have (of course) formed views about which Indian sources are reliable. They've evaluated the Indian Express as a good one: see
2500:
175:
2506:
2384:
article which identifies him as a customs official. The latter is accurate as it's fairly clear in the recent coverage of him that he is posted at customs and is with the IRS.
2083:
1493:
So delete all articles that got coverage by 2020? You are wrong even if you want others to believe in that. The article shows the subject had significant coverage since 2013.
366:
2372:
I mean, I myself am not certain if SG should be considered outright unreliable although I can point to one obvious mistake in their article itself. It refers to him as an
1514:
399:
682:
580:
with this opinion. This page existed before the controversy; the subject was already a notable person with moderate amount of media coverage, especially with the actor
1139:
per WP:BLP1E; no WP:SIGCOV beyond recent kerfuffle. I caution the (would-be) closer to evaluate age of the participant accounts - this discussion is being canvassed.
2352:
foot in India, the story appears newsworthy and even somewhat remarkable.I do think there are sources that go some way beyond the criminal behaviour allegations.â
1301:
1565:
Political mudslinging does not make anyone notable for Knowledge. In fact Political mudslinging is not even added here even though they find place in Newspaper.
636:
1402:
I was talking about violation of Wankhede's BLP. He is not a notable person and having an article on him violates BLP, because currently he is an accused. User
680:
457:
69:
772:
2509:
477:
40:
2194:
including materialâin any articleâthat suggests the person has committed, or is accused of having committed, a crime, unless a conviction has been secured."
313:
1296:
122:, and that the coverage that this individual has received is mostly surrounding a single event, which would invalidate his eligibility for an article per
2392:
after receiving death threats. It's peculiar but it just reads like any other human interest piece to me, I don't know what encyclopedic value it brings.
298:
130:
received significant coverage in reliable sources, and that the subject has actually been a notable player in multiple notable events spanning a decade.
2493:
2079:
1897:
605:
In addition to the references mentioned in the article, Times of India, has published an articles of some of his previous cases from 2011 onwards.
797:
That award was given to 152 cops this year. So it is not a significant award. Would need to be given Padma award to be called a significant award.
2451:
It does seem to be widely believed that we need to delete negative articles about living people. I don't think that's quite what our rules say.
1107:
1075:
More than an 'official' of an agency, he has drawn significant news media coverage regarding his biography. Clearly, a Knowledge-worthy person.
1412:. But still it won't change the fact that Wankhede is not notable. He is getting attention only because of the involvement of the celebrities.
764:
2042:
2022:
1786:
1710:
1646:
1834:
1226:
If you don't intend to vote multiple times or create an impression of voting multiple times, why are you bolding your words. Please read
1278:
1122:
1012:
894:
839:
339:
334:
1933:
343:
2682:
184:
1568:
There is no such rule of notability based on arrests or mudslinging as you are claiming. If there is then please show. Please read
2478:
2363:
2298:
2244:
2105:
326:
214:
1950:
Hundreds (thousands? more than that?) law enforcement officers work on such cases. This would definitely not pass WP:SUSTAINED.
293:
286:
17:
420:
2629:
1080:
2558:
as per the article that does not even include that "one event" in question for correct reasons. The !delete voters that are
1474:. Many people were covered by the media during this incident. There is no significant coverage of Mr. Wankhede before 2020.
1295:
Not independently notable. He has received coverage both now and in the past only because of investigating celebrities. See
387:
1776:
1730:
per sources mentioned above. Has gained significant attention of reliable sources unrelated to arrest of Aryan Khan. -----
1471:
1352:
1748:
officer who detained an actor, who is investigating a case which appears to involve actors, and who is investigating a
1836:
talks about his career since 2011. Agree with GreaterPoncence655 that WP:1EVENT/BLP1E is being grossly misrepresented.
1227:
307:
303:
200:
2412:
based on them doesn't seems consistent with the principle of taking additional care in article about living people.
1494:
1955:
505:
1380:
The article does not get deleted only because some particular parts of the person's events can't be included, see
173:
If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
2664:
1076:
859:: He is definitely notable because of the great work he is doing and the threats he is receiving as a result. --
715:
381:
102:
79:
46:
2445:
1355:
was a notable event but Wankhede himself didn't receive significant coverage before that. Per the later policy,
1095:
As per IRS Civil List, he is just a B. A. (History Hons.) and his rank is currently at Additional Director level
137:
While this is a borderline case, I believe there is sufficient consensus to delete the article primarily due to
2587:
2521:
2422:
2324:
2269:
2211:
1976:
1714:
864:
2123:, the 1event they are talking about precedes the caste quota event. I reached a slightly different conclusion
2046:
2026:
1790:
1650:
1282:
1126:
2647:
2616:
2596:
2571:
2530:
2482:
2431:
2367:
2333:
2302:
2278:
2248:
2220:
2159:
2136:
2109:
2050:
2030:
2009:
1980:
1959:
1941:
1937:
1907:
1887:
1866:
1845:
1818:
1794:
1763:
1739:
1718:
1701:
1668:
1654:
1632:
1617:
1613:
1580:
1555:
1551:
1523:
1504:
1500:
1480:
1465:
1461:
1443:
1418:
1397:
1393:
1381:
1367:
1345:
1341:
1322:
1286:
1255:
1251:
1239:
1220:
1216:
1187:
1167:
1163:
1148:
1130:
1084:
1065:
1042:
1020:
1016:
1003:
982:
965:
938:
914:
910:
890:
868:
847:
843:
829:
806:
788:
742:
728:
692:
667:
652:
622:
618:
596:
568:
546:
542:
489:
469:
449:
377:
151:
2377:
2171:
does apply here, the one event being his drug related investigation against Aryan Khan, who is the son of
1996:. Given that there have been reports of his on cases from before 2020, this is clearly not an instance of
1772:
1569:
1144:
1100:
962:
879:
Notable. As of now, significant coverage can be easily found. PangolinPedia 14:30, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
648:
246:
2400:
itself has exponentially more despite SG being published in three cities including both Mumbai and Delhi.
755:: There is sufficient coverage in national media on the subject. He is the Zonal Director for Mumbai in
2660:
2373:
2005:
1951:
1758:
1749:
98:
427:
2639:
2474:
2359:
2294:
2240:
2101:
1929:
1814:
1807:
1782:
1605:
1274:
1118:
1038:
1029:
934:
882:
711:
589:
581:
501:
330:
230:
204:
142:
990:
References are enough to justify the notability of the subject. Notable for multiple events. Passes
2579:
2513:
2414:
2316:
2261:
2203:
2187:
2062:
1972:
1883:
1697:
1664:
1628:
1576:
1235:
1183:
1061:
1053:
860:
802:
784:
663:
564:
485:
465:
445:
413:
189:
143:
2259:
and nothing else anywhere till 2020. I don't think that's sufficient. What are the other sources?
1878:. Simply some investigating officer who came in the news because he investigated some celebrities.
500:: There numerous officers part of UPSC and come to limelight only when celebrities are involved.
2492:
overview, where it describes how the allegations against Wankhede rose out of his investigation (
2459:
negative information about living people. It doesn't require us to whitewash articles where the
2181:
2075:
2058:
1841:
1735:
1609:
1547:
1510:
1496:
1457:
1389:
1337:
1247:
1212:
1159:
978:
906:
886:
614:
556:
538:
236:
167:
2376:(IPS) officer working for a Tax Department which doesn't make sense since that would fall under
2499:
has consistently marked developments around the caste certificate under the "Aryan Khan case" (
2155:
1862:
1140:
956:
644:
282:
91:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
2659:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
1517:
on WP:RS noticeboard. Are there any major news outlets who have articles on him before 2020.
393:
97:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
2609:
2567:
2441:
2197:
2001:
1993:
1831:
1753:
1601:
1438:
1209:
Whilst, I have voted for Keep but I agree with you that there appears to be some canvassing.
1049:
999:
951:
927:
819:
776:
719:
640:
585:
534:
437:
1113:
Also, the total members in IRS are 4192 (Income Tax) and 5583 (Customs and Indirect Taxes).
2633:
2625:
2468:
2408:
2404:
2353:
2309:
2288:
2253:
There is one article from 2013 about a routine incident in the city (i.e local) newspaper
2234:
2168:
2147:
2132:
2118:
2095:
2039:
1997:
1924:
1920:
1875:
1689:
1034:
947:
930:
703:
322:
157:
138:
123:
905:
Read all the discussions. Sameer is highlighted just because of superstar's son. Period.
1562:
Investigating or arresting someone does not make the investigator notable for Knowledge.
1097:
which is not even the highest rank in the service or even Joint Secretary level in GOI.
2172:
1903:
1879:
1693:
1660:
1624:
1572:
1231:
1194:
1179:
1057:
798:
780:
688:
659:
560:
520:: Not a notable one. For such, there will be floods of IRC/IAS officers in Knowledge.
481:
461:
441:
677:
Disruptive nomination. The subject got significant coverage before this year as well.
2676:
2559:
2555:
2452:
2255:
2018:
1989:
1968:
1837:
1731:
1542:
1385:
1313:
991:
974:
707:
635:
Found some other cases where the officer made news. Added the news reference as well
521:
119:
2151:
1896:
Wrong. Has received significant coverage for non-celebrities related incidents too.
1858:
1518:
1475:
1413:
1362:
1317:
737:
723:
264:
252:
220:
360:
2185:
199:
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to
2563:
1827:
1470:
In 2020 he got media coverage only because he was involved in investigating the
1408:
has re-wrote the entire article and now most BLP related issues are solved, see
995:
1178:
Advait.kansal is the article creator and this is his second vote on this page.
2407:
notability, so it seems like a stretch to use them as additional coverage for
2233:
that one event causing all of this coverage, why are there sources from 2013?â
2128:
1805:: Similar to above, I can't see how this is anything beyond BLP1E at best.
2511:), etc. The recent coverage is not routine but it's part of a single event.
2180:
In any case this is borderline and we should err on the side of caution per
1899:
1384:. Your personal reflection about Aryan Khan's arrest has nothing to do with
1333:
736:: Both sources from TOI and REPUBLIC are now replaced with better sources.
684:
1011:
Has already attracted significant coverage in reliable sources for years.
1606:
there are multiple sources that discuss the topic directly and in detail
973:; ample amount of media coverage and he is not a single event case. -
613:
Please note this article or content is currently not in the article.
756:
2440:
We certainly have London-specific newspapers, most prominently the
2127:
but decided to delete my neutral !vote after more RS were added. -
838:
Not occasional if the coverage is happening for more than 2 years.
818:
Some ocassional media coverages don't qualify someone as notable.
2606:
No indication of significance. Seem to be a man doing his job.
2655:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
1056:
This article is a fit case for deletion and should be deleted.
1752:
that apparently doesn't even merit an article on Knowledge. --
509:
162:
54:
25:
1857:
Such important content should not be deleted from Knowledge.
1645:
He is IRS would never be CBI chief. CBI Director is from IPS.
1623:
talk about him in their coverage of the crime investigation.
193:(agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments,
126:. The keep voters are primarily countering that the subject
1404:
2444:. According to the most recent RSN discussion, there is
1228:
Knowledge:Guide_to_deletion#Recommendations_and_outcomes
2124:
1409:
356:
352:
348:
1316:. Disclosure: I have edited the article in the past.
412:
1709:
No one will remember him once the matter is settled.
2562:or Khan's arrest should sort it outside Knowledge.
2065:. And this article cites an Indian Express source
559:and his sock participating here have been blocked.
2508:), the Indian Express covers them simultaneously (
105:). No further edits should be made to this page.
2667:). No further edits should be made to this page.
1052:. There is no way this article is going to pass
1028:I asked the following question on the article's
476:Note: This discussion has been included in the
456:Note: This discussion has been included in the
1608:, there is no need to worry about notability.
2380:(IRS), compare that with the contemporaneous
533:I disagree that the officer just covered for
426:
213:Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected
183:among Knowledge contributors. Knowledge has
8:
2577:about details related to those allegations.
1312:, so having an article on him might violate
314:Help, my article got nominated for deletion!
761:Outstanding Investigation for the year 2021
458:list of People-related deletion discussions
2560:having issue with the subject's activities
1927:
1830:article published 11 months ago satisfies
1780:
1272:
1116:
478:list of India-related deletion discussions
475:
455:
187:regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
2196:If the article is kept, we will have to
207:on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.
72:. The result of the deletion review was
436:Officer covered for updates related to
78:For an explanation of the process, see
45:For an explanation of the process, see
759:. He was awarded by Home Ministry for
508:, 23:16, Sunday, September 29, 2024 (
7:
1271:This article should not be deleted
714:. I find the other coverage as only
2287:Mumbai Mirror and Sunday Guardian.â
584:'s case. To say they are known for
2446:no consensus as to its reliability
2190:, editors must seriously consider
2088:pre-date the scheduled caste issue
70:deletion review on 2021 November 7
24:
1206:Kindly re-read my sentence =: -->
1103:is not a condition of notability.
440:of alleged crime done by others.
41:deletion review on 2022 August 15
299:Introduction to deletion process
166:
58:
29:
1967:Subject clearly complies with
1099:Just because he is a member of
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
1688:Not a notable personality per
1:
2017:Subject is notable and meets
1777:Indian Administrative Service
1472:death of Sushant Singh Rajput
1353:death of Sushant Singh Rajput
926:: Not notable and not enough
203:on the part of others and to
2648:03:41, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
2617:20:06, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
2597:08:06, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
2572:07:44, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
2531:04:07, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
2483:23:45, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
2432:14:20, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
2368:10:19, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
2334:09:42, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
2303:09:24, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
2279:09:17, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
2249:08:44, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
2221:02:21, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
2186:"or individuals who are not
2160:01:31, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
2137:18:17, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
2110:17:42, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
2051:07:27, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
2031:19:14, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
2010:17:41, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
1981:12:54, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
1960:05:32, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
1942:19:13, 30 October 2021 (UTC)
1908:04:25, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
1888:13:30, 30 October 2021 (UTC)
1867:03:33, 30 October 2021 (UTC)
1846:00:38, 30 October 2021 (UTC)
1819:22:17, 29 October 2021 (UTC)
1795:19:18, 29 October 2021 (UTC)
1764:15:38, 29 October 2021 (UTC)
1740:14:57, 29 October 2021 (UTC)
1719:14:19, 29 October 2021 (UTC)
1702:14:10, 29 October 2021 (UTC)
1669:14:56, 29 October 2021 (UTC)
1655:14:49, 29 October 2021 (UTC)
1633:13:56, 29 October 2021 (UTC)
1618:13:41, 29 October 2021 (UTC)
1581:13:21, 29 October 2021 (UTC)
1556:13:14, 29 October 2021 (UTC)
1524:14:10, 30 October 2021 (UTC)
1505:12:02, 30 October 2021 (UTC)
1481:15:22, 29 October 2021 (UTC)
1466:13:09, 29 October 2021 (UTC)
1444:13:53, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
1419:13:56, 30 October 2021 (UTC)
1398:12:02, 30 October 2021 (UTC)
1368:04:05, 30 October 2021 (UTC)
1346:13:09, 29 October 2021 (UTC)
1323:13:13, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
1287:08:03, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
1256:12:21, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
1240:12:13, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
1221:12:09, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
1188:08:32, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
1168:08:16, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
1149:06:48, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
1131:14:54, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
1085:08:17, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
1066:12:36, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
1043:22:25, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
1021:15:05, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
1004:02:03, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
983:17:55, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
966:16:50, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
939:16:40, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
915:14:48, 30 October 2021 (UTC)
869:13:18, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
848:14:57, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
830:07:56, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
807:06:42, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
789:11:19, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
743:08:25, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
729:10:35, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
693:10:23, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
668:17:08, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
653:15:06, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
623:18:02, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
597:16:15, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
569:13:14, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
547:09:29, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
524:07:03, 27 October 2021 (IST)
490:09:24, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
470:09:24, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
450:09:24, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
152:04:52, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
1093:) is not a notable person.
1089:Sameer Wankhede (full name
289:(AfD)? Read these primers!
2699:
1155:Comment - THIS IS NOT VOTE
1033:himself around the world.
2347:. There are quite a few
763:. Some article about him
504:23:16, 29 September 2024
80:Knowledge:Deletion review
47:Knowledge:Deletion review
2683:Pages at deletion review
2657:Please do not modify it.
2198:proportionally represent
1091:Sameer Dnyandev Wankhede
94:Please do not modify it.
245:; accounts blocked for
215:single-purpose accounts
185:policies and guidelines
2378:Indian Revenue Service
1773:Indian Revenue Service
1101:Indian Revenue Service
757:NCB which has 13 zones
718:and couldn't find any
2374:Indian Police Service
1874:Not encyclopedic and
1108:BLP violation removed
287:Articles for deletion
2630:significant coverage
2463:say negative things.
1988:. Clearly satisfies
1600:Your argument was "
1541:- Absolutely passes
1077:AltruisticHomoSapien
954:beyond recent news.
582:Sushant Singh Rajput
502:User:Vinodmahalingam
1440:25 CENTS VICTORIOUS
197:by counting votes.
176:not a majority vote
2184:which states that
2059:Paid news in India
861:Dr. Abhijeet Safai
775:. Hence it is not
716:WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS
557:User:Advait.kansal
2628:due to a lack of
2481:
2366:
2301:
2247:
2108:
1944:
1932:comment added by
1797:
1785:comment added by
1762:
1289:
1277:comment added by
1133:
1121:comment added by
1111:
885:comment added by
588:is disingenious.
492:
472:
304:Guide to deletion
294:How to contribute
278:
277:
274:
201:assume good faith
86:
85:
68:was subject to a
53:
52:
39:was subject to a
2690:
2646:
2644:
2636:
2624:: Does not pass
2614:
2612:
2595:
2592:
2584:
2529:
2526:
2518:
2473:
2442:Evening Standard
2430:
2427:
2419:
2358:
2332:
2329:
2321:
2293:
2277:
2274:
2266:
2239:
2219:
2216:
2208:
2195:
2122:
2100:
2038:: Clear case of
1952:ThisFeelsABitOff
1810:
1756:
1441:
1407:
1382:WP:AFDNOTCLEANUP
1336:-related pages.
1105:
960:
913:) PangolinPedia
898:
826:
823:
726:
594:
431:
430:
416:
364:
346:
284:
272:
260:
244:
228:
209:
179:, but instead a
170:
163:
149:
147:
96:
62:
61:
55:
33:
32:
26:
2698:
2697:
2693:
2692:
2691:
2689:
2688:
2687:
2673:
2672:
2671:
2665:deletion review
2640:
2638:
2634:
2610:
2608:
2594:
2588:
2580:
2578:
2528:
2522:
2514:
2512:
2497:Hindustan Times
2429:
2423:
2415:
2413:
2331:
2325:
2317:
2315:
2310:Sunday Guardian
2307:Didn't see the
2276:
2270:
2262:
2260:
2218:
2212:
2204:
2202:
2116:
1808:
1570:WP:NOTNEWSPAPER
1439:
1403:
958:
880:
824:
821:
724:
592:GreaterPonce665
590:
373:
337:
323:Sameer Wankhede
321:
318:
281:
262:
250:
234:
218:
205:sign your posts
161:
158:Sameer Wankhede
145:
110:The result was
103:deletion review
92:
66:This discussion
59:
37:This discussion
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
2696:
2694:
2686:
2685:
2675:
2674:
2670:
2669:
2651:
2650:
2619:
2601:
2600:
2599:
2586:
2582:Tayi Arajakate
2549:
2548:
2547:
2546:
2545:
2544:
2543:
2542:
2541:
2540:
2539:
2538:
2537:
2536:
2535:
2534:
2533:
2520:
2516:Tayi Arajakate
2464:
2449:
2435:
2434:
2421:
2417:Tayi Arajakate
2401:
2393:
2385:
2337:
2336:
2323:
2319:Tayi Arajakate
2282:
2281:
2268:
2264:Tayi Arajakate
2224:
2223:
2210:
2206:Tayi Arajakate
2188:public figures
2177:
2176:
2173:Shah Rukh Khan
2162:
2140:
2139:
2113:
2112:
2054:
2053:
2043:115.97.187.217
2033:
2023:122.161.72.152
2012:
1983:
1973:Yogesh Khandke
1962:
1945:
1913:
1912:
1911:
1910:
1891:
1890:
1869:
1855:
1848:
1821:
1800:
1799:
1798:
1787:106.206.53.153
1742:
1724:
1723:
1722:
1721:
1711:183.82.104.213
1704:
1682:
1681:
1680:
1679:
1678:
1677:
1676:
1675:
1674:
1673:
1672:
1671:
1647:122.161.64.114
1638:
1637:
1636:
1635:
1588:
1587:
1586:
1585:
1584:
1583:
1566:
1563:
1535:
1534:
1533:
1532:
1531:
1530:
1529:
1528:
1527:
1526:
1486:
1485:
1484:
1483:
1447:
1446:
1430:
1429:
1428:
1427:
1426:
1425:
1424:
1423:
1422:
1421:
1373:
1372:
1371:
1370:
1326:
1325:
1290:
1269:
1268:
1267:
1266:
1265:
1264:
1263:
1262:
1261:
1260:
1259:
1203:
1151:
1134:
1087:
1070:
1069:
1068:
1023:
1006:
985:
968:
941:
920:
919:
918:
917:
872:
871:
853:
852:
851:
850:
833:
832:
812:
811:
810:
809:
748:
747:
746:
745:
696:
695:
672:
671:
670:
629:
628:
627:
626:
610:
599:
572:
571:
550:
526:
525:
514:
513:
494:
493:
473:
434:
433:
370:
317:
316:
311:
301:
296:
279:
276:
275:
171:
160:
155:
108:
107:
87:
84:
83:
77:
63:
51:
50:
44:
34:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
2695:
2684:
2681:
2680:
2678:
2668:
2666:
2662:
2658:
2653:
2652:
2649:
2645:
2643:
2637:
2631:
2627:
2623:
2620:
2618:
2615:
2613:
2605:
2604:Strong Delete
2602:
2598:
2593:
2591:
2585:
2583:
2575:
2574:
2573:
2569:
2565:
2561:
2557:
2554:Easily meets
2553:
2550:
2532:
2527:
2525:
2519:
2517:
2510:
2507:
2504:
2501:
2498:
2494:
2491:
2488:instance see
2486:
2485:
2484:
2480:
2476:
2472:
2471:
2465:
2462:
2458:
2454:
2450:
2447:
2443:
2439:
2438:
2437:
2436:
2433:
2428:
2426:
2420:
2418:
2410:
2406:
2402:
2399:
2394:
2390:
2389:Mumbai Mirror
2386:
2383:
2382:Mumbai Mirror
2379:
2375:
2371:
2370:
2369:
2365:
2361:
2357:
2356:
2350:
2346:
2341:
2340:
2339:
2338:
2335:
2330:
2328:
2322:
2320:
2312:
2311:
2306:
2305:
2304:
2300:
2296:
2292:
2291:
2286:
2285:
2284:
2283:
2280:
2275:
2273:
2267:
2265:
2258:
2257:
2256:Mumbai Mirror
2252:
2251:
2250:
2246:
2242:
2238:
2237:
2232:
2228:
2227:
2226:
2225:
2222:
2217:
2215:
2209:
2207:
2199:
2193:
2189:
2183:
2179:
2178:
2174:
2170:
2166:
2163:
2161:
2157:
2153:
2149:
2145:
2142:
2141:
2138:
2134:
2130:
2126:
2120:
2115:
2114:
2111:
2107:
2103:
2099:
2098:
2093:
2089:
2085:
2081:
2077:
2072:
2069:. They have
2068:
2064:
2060:
2056:
2055:
2052:
2048:
2044:
2041:
2037:
2034:
2032:
2028:
2024:
2020:
2016:
2013:
2011:
2007:
2003:
1999:
1995:
1991:
1987:
1984:
1982:
1978:
1974:
1970:
1966:
1963:
1961:
1957:
1953:
1949:
1948:Strong Delete
1946:
1943:
1939:
1935:
1931:
1926:
1922:
1918:
1915:
1914:
1909:
1905:
1901:
1898:
1895:
1894:
1893:
1892:
1889:
1885:
1881:
1877:
1873:
1870:
1868:
1864:
1860:
1856:
1854:WP:GOLDENRULE
1852:
1849:
1847:
1843:
1839:
1835:
1833:
1829:
1825:
1822:
1820:
1816:
1812:
1811:
1804:
1801:
1796:
1792:
1788:
1784:
1778:
1774:
1770:
1767:
1766:
1765:
1760:
1755:
1751:
1746:
1743:
1741:
1737:
1733:
1729:
1726:
1725:
1720:
1716:
1712:
1708:
1705:
1703:
1699:
1695:
1691:
1687:
1684:
1683:
1670:
1666:
1662:
1658:
1657:
1656:
1652:
1648:
1644:
1643:
1642:
1641:
1640:
1639:
1634:
1630:
1626:
1621:
1620:
1619:
1615:
1611:
1610:LearnIndology
1607:
1603:
1599:
1596:
1595:
1594:
1593:
1592:
1591:
1590:
1589:
1582:
1578:
1574:
1571:
1567:
1564:
1561:
1560:
1559:
1558:
1557:
1553:
1549:
1548:LearnIndology
1544:
1540:
1537:
1536:
1525:
1522:
1521:
1516:
1513:I have found
1512:
1511:LearnIndology
1508:
1507:
1506:
1502:
1498:
1497:LearnIndology
1495:
1492:
1491:
1490:
1489:
1488:
1487:
1482:
1479:
1478:
1473:
1469:
1468:
1467:
1463:
1459:
1458:LearnIndology
1455:
1452:Then what is
1451:
1450:
1449:
1448:
1445:
1442:
1435:
1434:Strong Delete
1432:
1431:
1420:
1417:
1416:
1411:
1406:
1401:
1400:
1399:
1395:
1391:
1390:LearnIndology
1387:
1383:
1379:
1378:
1377:
1376:
1375:
1374:
1369:
1366:
1365:
1359:
1354:
1349:
1348:
1347:
1343:
1339:
1338:LearnIndology
1335:
1330:
1329:
1328:
1327:
1324:
1321:
1320:
1315:
1311:
1307:
1303:
1298:
1294:
1291:
1288:
1284:
1280:
1279:122.169.93.58
1276:
1270:
1258:
1257:
1253:
1249:
1243:
1242:
1241:
1237:
1233:
1229:
1225:
1224:
1223:
1222:
1218:
1214:
1211:
1210:
1204:
1202:
1200:
1196:
1191:
1190:
1189:
1185:
1181:
1177:
1174:
1173:
1172:
1171:
1170:
1169:
1165:
1161:
1156:
1152:
1150:
1146:
1142:
1138:
1135:
1132:
1128:
1124:
1123:122.172.46.29
1120:
1114:
1109:
1104:
1102:
1096:
1092:
1088:
1086:
1082:
1078:
1074:
1071:
1067:
1063:
1059:
1055:
1051:
1046:
1045:
1044:
1040:
1036:
1031:
1027:
1024:
1022:
1018:
1014:
1013:106.214.126.2
1010:
1007:
1005:
1001:
997:
993:
989:
986:
984:
980:
976:
972:
969:
967:
964:
963:
961:
953:
949:
945:
942:
940:
936:
932:
929:
925:
922:
921:
916:
912:
908:
907:PangolinPedia
904:
901:
900:
899:
896:
892:
888:
887:PangolinPedia
884:
878:
874:
873:
870:
866:
862:
858:
855:
854:
849:
845:
841:
840:106.214.126.2
837:
836:
835:
834:
831:
828:
827:
817:
814:
813:
808:
804:
800:
796:
793:
792:
791:
790:
786:
782:
778:
774:
770:
766:
762:
758:
754:
750:
749:
744:
741:
740:
735:
732:
731:
730:
727:
721:
717:
713:
712:WP:REPUBLICTV
709:
705:
701:
698:
697:
694:
690:
686:
683:
681:
679:
676:
673:
669:
665:
661:
656:
655:
654:
650:
646:
642:
638:
634:
631:
630:
625:
624:
620:
616:
611:
609:
608:
604:
600:
598:
595:
593:
587:
583:
579:
576:
575:
574:
573:
570:
566:
562:
558:
554:
551:
549:
548:
544:
540:
536:
532:
528:
527:
523:
522:User:Arunudoy
519:
516:
515:
511:
507:
503:
499:
496:
495:
491:
487:
483:
479:
474:
471:
467:
463:
459:
454:
453:
452:
451:
447:
443:
439:
429:
425:
422:
419:
415:
411:
407:
404:
401:
398:
395:
392:
389:
386:
383:
379:
376:
375:Find sources:
371:
368:
362:
358:
354:
350:
345:
341:
336:
332:
328:
324:
320:
319:
315:
312:
309:
305:
302:
300:
297:
295:
292:
291:
290:
288:
283:
270:
266:
258:
254:
248:
242:
238:
232:
226:
222:
216:
212:
208:
206:
202:
196:
192:
191:
186:
182:
178:
177:
172:
169:
165:
164:
159:
156:
154:
153:
150:
140:
135:
131:
129:
125:
121:
115:
113:
106:
104:
100:
95:
89:
88:
81:
75:
71:
67:
64:
57:
56:
48:
42:
38:
35:
28:
27:
19:
2656:
2654:
2641:
2621:
2607:
2603:
2589:
2581:
2551:
2523:
2515:
2496:
2489:
2469:
2460:
2456:
2424:
2416:
2397:
2388:
2381:
2354:
2348:
2344:
2326:
2318:
2308:
2289:
2271:
2263:
2254:
2235:
2230:
2213:
2205:
2191:
2164:
2143:
2096:
2091:
2087:
2070:
2063:WP:INDIANEXP
2035:
2014:
1985:
1964:
1947:
1934:115.98.59.92
1928:â Preceding
1916:
1871:
1850:
1823:
1806:
1802:
1781:â Preceding
1768:
1744:
1727:
1706:
1685:
1538:
1519:
1476:
1433:
1414:
1363:
1356:
1318:
1292:
1273:â Preceding
1244:
1208:
1207:
1205:
1198:
1192:
1175:
1154:
1153:
1141:TrangaBellam
1136:
1117:â Preceding
1112:
1098:
1094:
1090:
1072:
1054:WP:SUSTAINED
1025:
1008:
987:
970:
955:
943:
923:
902:
881:â Preceding
876:
875:
856:
820:
815:
794:
752:
751:
738:
733:
699:
674:
645:Jehowahyereh
643:won't stand
632:
612:
602:
601:
591:
577:
552:
530:
529:
517:
497:
435:
423:
417:
409:
402:
396:
390:
384:
374:
280:
268:
256:
247:sockpuppetry
240:
229:; suspected
224:
210:
198:
194:
188:
180:
174:
136:
132:
127:
116:
111:
109:
93:
90:
74:No consensus
73:
65:
36:
2635:FormalDude
2611:scope_creep
2182:WP:BLPCRIME
2076:WP:THEHINDU
2002:Rsrikanth05
1828:India Today
1754:RegentsPark
400:free images
2470:SÂ Marshall
2355:SÂ Marshall
2290:SÂ Marshall
2236:SÂ Marshall
2119:S Marshall
2097:SÂ Marshall
1809:Ravensfire
1035:Equine-man
931:Equine-man
181:discussion
2661:talk page
2490:The Hindu
2457:unsourced
2455:is about
1994:WP:SIGCOV
1880:LukeEmily
1832:WP:SIGCOV
1750:drug case
1694:Nenetarun
1661:Venkat TL
1625:Venkat TL
1602:WP:1EVENT
1573:Venkat TL
1334:the Oscar
1232:Venkat TL
1195:Venkat TL
1180:Venkat TL
1058:Venkat TL
1050:WP:1EVENT
1030:talk page
952:WP:SIGCOV
928:WP:SIGCOV
799:Venkat TL
781:Vinod2608
777:WP:1EVENT
725:SUN EYE 1
720:WP:SIGCOV
660:Venkat TL
641:WP:1EVENT
586:WP:1EVENT
561:Venkat TL
535:WP:1EVENT
482:Venkat TL
462:Venkat TL
442:Venkat TL
438:WP:1EVENT
237:canvassed
231:canvassed
190:consensus
99:talk page
2677:Category
2663:or in a
2626:WP:BASIC
2409:WP:BLP1E
2405:WP:BASIC
2345:colossal
2169:WP:BLP1E
2148:WP:BLP1E
2040:WP:BLP1E
1998:WP:BLP1E
1930:unsigned
1925:WP:BLP1E
1921:WP:NOTNP
1876:WP:NOTNP
1838:TolWol56
1783:unsigned
1732:Yoonadue
1690:WP:BLP1E
1275:unsigned
1119:unsigned
1026:Comment:
975:Hatchens
959:itsJamie
948:WP:BLP1E
895:contribs
883:unsigned
704:WP:BLP1E
555:creator
367:View log
308:glossary
269:username
263:{{subst:
257:username
251:{{subst:
241:username
235:{{subst:
225:username
219:{{subst:
144:ââ Scotty
139:WP:BLP1E
124:WP:BLP1E
101:or in a
2495:), the
2461:sources
2349:nations
2152:4meter4
1923:; also
1859:Dhy.rjw
1759:comment
1707:Delete:
1686:Delete:
1520:Eevee01
1477:Eevee01
1437:2021.--
1415:Eevee01
1364:Eevee01
1319:Eevee01
1293:Delete:
903:Comment
795:Comment
739:Eevee01
553:Comment
406:WPÂ refs
394:scholar
340:protect
335:history
285:New to
233:users:
2622:Delete
2564:desmay
2556:WP:GNG
2453:WP:BLP
2398:Mirror
2229:If it
2165:Delete
2144:Delete
2086:which
2036:Delete
2019:WP:GNG
1990:WP:GNG
1969:wp:GNG
1917:Delete
1872:Delete
1803:Delete
1769:Delete
1745:Delete
1543:WP:GNG
1386:WP:GNG
1358:topic.
1314:WP:BLP
1248:Advait
1213:Advait
1199:Delete
1160:Advait
1137:Delete
996:DMySon
992:WP:GNG
944:Delete
924:Delete
825:SPLEND
816:DELETE
708:WP:TOI
700:Delete
639:hence
637:News18
615:Advait
539:Advait
518:Delete
498:Delete
378:Google
344:delete
120:WP:GNG
112:delete
2387:Yes,
2129:hako9
950:; no
822:Trend
603:Note:
578:Agree
421:JSTOR
382:books
361:views
353:watch
349:links
211:Note:
16:<
2642:talk
2632:. ââ
2590:Talk
2568:talk
2552:Keep
2524:Talk
2425:Talk
2327:Talk
2272:Talk
2214:Talk
2156:talk
2146:per
2133:talk
2125:here
2092:Keep
2084:here
2082:and
2080:here
2067:here
2047:talk
2027:talk
2015:Keep
2006:talk
2000:. --
1992:and
1986:Keep
1977:talk
1965:Keep
1956:talk
1938:talk
1919:Per
1904:talk
1900:Mukt
1884:talk
1863:talk
1851:Keep
1842:talk
1826:The
1824:Keep
1815:talk
1791:talk
1775:not
1736:talk
1728:Keep
1715:talk
1698:talk
1665:talk
1651:talk
1629:talk
1614:talk
1577:talk
1552:talk
1539:Keep
1515:this
1501:talk
1462:talk
1454:this
1410:this
1405:Mukt
1394:talk
1342:talk
1310:this
1308:and
1306:this
1302:this
1297:this
1283:talk
1252:talk
1236:talk
1217:talk
1184:talk
1176:Note
1164:talk
1145:talk
1127:talk
1081:talk
1073:Keep
1062:talk
1039:talk
1017:talk
1009:Keep
1000:talk
988:Keep
979:talk
971:Keep
957:OhNo
946:per
935:talk
911:talk
891:talk
877:Keep
865:talk
857:Keep
844:talk
803:talk
785:talk
753:Keep
734:Note
722:. -
710:and
689:talk
685:Mukt
675:Keep
664:talk
649:talk
633:Keep
619:talk
565:talk
543:talk
531:Keep
486:talk
466:talk
446:talk
414:FENS
388:news
357:logs
331:talk
327:edit
146:Wong
2192:not
2071:not
1456:?
510:UTC
506:UTC
428:TWL
365:â (
265:csp
261:or
253:csm
221:spa
195:not
148:â â
128:has
2679::
2570:)
2505:,
2502:,
2231:is
2167:.
2158:)
2135:)
2094:.â
2049:)
2029:)
2021:.
2008:)
1979:)
1971:.
1958:)
1940:)
1906:)
1886:)
1865:)
1844:)
1817:)
1793:)
1771:.
1738:)
1717:)
1700:)
1692:.
1667:)
1653:)
1631:)
1616:)
1579:)
1554:)
1503:)
1464:)
1396:)
1388:.
1344:)
1304:,
1285:)
1254:)
1238:)
1230:.
1219:)
1186:)
1166:)
1147:)
1129:)
1083:)
1064:)
1041:)
1019:)
1002:)
994:.
981:)
937:)
897:)
893:â˘
867:)
846:)
805:)
787:)
771:,
767:,
702::
691:)
666:)
651:)
621:)
567:)
545:)
488:)
480:.
468:)
460:.
448:)
408:)
359:|
355:|
351:|
347:|
342:|
338:|
333:|
329:|
271:}}
259:}}
249::
243:}}
227:}}
217::
141:.
43:.
2566:(
2479:C
2477:/
2475:T
2364:C
2362:/
2360:T
2299:C
2297:/
2295:T
2245:C
2243:/
2241:T
2154:(
2150:.
2131:(
2121::
2117:@
2106:C
2104:/
2102:T
2045:(
2025:(
2004:(
1975:(
1954:(
1936:(
1902:(
1882:(
1861:(
1840:(
1813:(
1789:(
1761:)
1757:(
1734:(
1713:(
1696:(
1663:(
1649:(
1627:(
1612:(
1575:(
1550:(
1509:@
1499:(
1460:(
1392:(
1340:(
1281:(
1250:(
1234:(
1215:(
1201:.
1193:@
1182:(
1162:(
1143:(
1125:(
1110:)
1106:(
1079:(
1060:(
1037:(
1015:(
998:(
977:(
933:(
909:(
889:(
863:(
842:(
801:(
783:(
779:.
773:3
769:2
765:1
687:(
662:(
647:(
617:(
563:(
541:(
512:)
484:(
464:(
444:(
432:)
424:¡
418:¡
410:¡
403:¡
397:¡
391:¡
385:¡
380:(
372:(
369:)
363:)
325:(
310:)
306:(
273:.
267:|
255:|
239:|
223:|
82:.
76:.
49:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
