1042:- Of course she is notable on her own, just like Jolie's two other children. Why do people think these articles keep popping up, because nobody can notice them? It's not really the point, whether this child is of any particular importance either, the mere fact that people keep creating this article (after it has been deleted before) shows the apparent relevance this subject has to a lot of people. Knowledge (XXG) shouldn't act as an elitist group trying to impose its own intellectual standards, but remain true to its origin by being a encyclopedia of the people. (
564:
Oh, the sad state of the news . . . but that's another subject. But yes, this child's birth is certainly covered in the news, no question there. Despite that, I feel ok about advocating deletion on this one. WP:BIO is clear that "meeting one or more does not mean that a subject must be included." I
533:
Sure, I understand that there are other alternative criteria which are just as much not consensus as
Expandability, but for this article, this one makes the most sense to me. Based on history, as it stands today, can this be a good article? My opinion is no. I'm open to being proven wrong though.
1449:
Exactly - it's down to Jolie and Pitt that all this money is going to charity, not the baby. Likewise all the "public interest" in the child: it is not the child that's interesting, but the parents - why is this so hard to understand? If this child merits her own article, then surely all the
543:
Well, if e're going to continue to look at WP:WEB, we need to start looking at what's generally accepted before what's alternately accepted. Generally, there's no question - Shiloh meets the basic standard as her birth is a newsworthy event, as pathetic as that is. If we want to move to
1204:- who is this person? why is she more noteworthy than anyone else? just because of who her parents are? that is what is wrong with society - when we emphasize who someone is based on their parents or what they are instead of who they are. if she actually
1437:
Well, but that information could easily be incorporated into either of the parents' articles. After all, it was one or both of them who decided the money should go to charity. And in fact, that's where I would expect to find such information.
503:
To me, the most applicable section of WP:BIO is the alternative test of
Expandability. As the world stands on May 30th, 2006, I don't see how this article could ever exist as more than a stub. A month from now, maybe the kid shoots
924:
I understand the arguement for this one meeting WP:BIO. But really, at this point, there's nothing to put in this article that can't just as easily be found in the parent article. A redirect gets you to the same information.
544:
alternatives, it certainly meets Google and verifiability, and there's plenty of legitimate speculation that it doesn't pass expandibility or 100 year test. Of course, one wonders if people would think the
517:
Well, if we want to use applicable alternatives, Shiloh certainly meets the Google test and verifiability standards, but they're in the "alternative test" reason becaue they lackwide support. --
714:
to
Angelina Jolie, where the child is mentioned. This is fairly standard practice for young children famous by virtue of parentage who haven't yet done anything in their own right.
191:
an indiscriminate collection of information. Just because the information is true does not imply that it should be on the
Knowledge (XXG). Now, if the subject of the article is
993:
She's going to be very notable sooner or later anyway (when she grows up). In fact, she is notable as of right now considering the extreme media attention she has gotten lately.
966:
962:
233:
229:
647:. A one-day-old kid not only hasn't done anything, but hasn't even been around long to have had anything worth writing about, short of pasting in hourly bulletins from
1114:. There should be a page about the Jolie-Pitt children considering there's three of them and they're People's most beautiful family and their parents are superstars.
565:
think that this is just such a case where that clause is relevant. I just don't see how a good article can come of this. This is why I'm citing
Expandability here.
937:. The other children are redirects. This should be too. The kid's only notable because of her parents, and she's two(?) days old now, for crying out loud.
143:
1085:: The latest Time magazine even mentions her birth in the "Milestones" section. If Time mentions it, then it is notable enough for Knowledge (XXG).--
730:, they should be mentioned in the famous person's article, and their name should be a redirect. If it's not a redirect, it should be deleted, but
400:. As I noted when I removed the prod, the child meets basic notability standards already, and there isn't a clear redirect/merge target. --
188:
73:
766:(I believe). The kid is notable for the circumstances of her birth, so if there's going to be an article on anything, it should be on the
948:
858:
487:
That's the part. We, unfortunately, don't get to choose what's newsworthy. Unfortunately, it's been widely determined that this is. --
172:
1186:- She hasn't done anything of note, save being born to famous parents, and that information is better left on their respective pages.
671:
per above, but note that notability for persons need not be a matter of their own actions, but can also come about by their being the
265:
The hype over the child will die down, Namibia will be forgotten. And ever since when were tabloids reputable sources? Honestly, who
17:
1369:
279:
1008:
Do you have a crystal ball? Many children of celebrities grow up and deliberately choose to avoid the limelight. No way to tell.
698:
155:
192:
69:
608:
554:
523:
493:
447:
406:
1024:. As Angelina Jolie is reputedly a Liverpool fan, it pains me to make such a vote on a prospective Reds supporter. Meh ;-)
1372:
290:
For God's sake, this is a day-old infant. The kid has eaten, cried, slept and pooped, none of which are remotely notable.
459:
I suggest you cite actually back up things you say instead of pretending you've done so and hoping no one will notice. --
1502:
1469:
1454:
1442:
1425:
1409:
1397:
1377:
1342:
1326:
1310:
1287:
1274:
1258:
1239:
1212:
1190:
1178:
1162:
1153:
1144:
1128:
1102:
1089:
1073:
1046:
1033:
1012:
985:
973:
953:
929:
916:
887:
863:
838:
822:
789:
774:
750:
738:
718:
706:
702:
679:
663:
613:
597:
569:
559:
538:
528:
512:
498:
482:
467:
452:
432:
411:
392:
376:
352:
340:
322:
306:
294:
282:
257:
243:
215:
199:
177:
126:
113:
100:
80:
56:
1517:
478:
and that only applies if (a) childbirth is a "newsworthy event" and (b) the newborn may be considered a "participant".
36:
1477:. This was already speedy deleted earlier. What could the article possibly say besides "Daughter of Brangelina"?
767:
779:
I think that this does not need to be a seperate article it can be merged into the article
Angelina's children.
1516:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
1208:
something besides be the child of jolie and pitt then maybe she could get an article. check back in 20 years.
1098:
Time didn't list it because of who the child is, but because of who the parents are. They're the notable ones.
910:
62:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
602:
Oh really? Yes, I guess all those stories about what the name "Angelina" means backs that up just fine... --
1494:
943:
853:
349:
167:
1389:
998:
879:
is right again. Seems that children of celebs get their AfD decisions reversed without people noticing -
1354:
1228:
603:
549:
518:
488:
442:
401:
122:
I just checked, they seem to redirect to Jolie's page. If they don't, they should as per prior AfDs. --
1366:
1283:, I pity whoever put this up for deletion.. In three-six years you'll be laughed at for doing this =). -
1236:
1150:
1125:
337:
276:
1284:
1043:
1233:
1225:
1224:, if the sibilings of Shiloh are redirects to their adopted mother, what's so notable about Shiloh? --
782:
253:- This child is very notable. She's the talk of the tabloids, and is bringing attention to Namibia. -
694:
151:
147:
1254:
786:
771:
332:
319:
1481:
1451:
1271:
938:
848:
747:
420:? Is it her hit single, "Wah Wah Wah"? Was it her stint as the head of the WTO? Or maybe, as per
254:
162:
211:
and don't redirect. It's POV to redirect to the mother rather than the father, and vice-versa.
1306:
1175:
1029:
994:
804:
800:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
1422:
1361:
1351:
1323:
880:
807:
have
Knowledge (XXG) pages, then why can't Shiloh? This sounds a little hypocritical to me.
726:
The child is notable, but not notable enough for its own article. If someone is only famous
660:
594:
464:
429:
271:
212:
1066:
770:
or something like that. There would certainly be an abundance of sources for that article.
438:
1339:
1209:
1159:
1086:
835:
808:
735:
689:
240:
195:, that's another story. I don't think the subject is but this is a matter for debate. --
97:
1319:
1249:
1221:
1187:
905:
828:
676:
644:
577:
Which shows how wrong
Badlydrawnjeff is with his ridiculously overbroad criterion: the
545:
385:
315:
221:
110:
109:
The siblings aren't currently redirects on Pitt or Jolie's pages, from what I can see.
90:
49:
1137:
1062:
1099:
1009:
479:
421:
373:
291:
746:
at the very least - at this rate you might as well give Jolie's pet dog an article.
1431:
Keep What other child's birth led to 4.1 million dollars being donated to charity?
1394:
1386:
1297:
1025:
982:
970:
872:
763:
476:"Persons achieving renown or notoriety for their involvement in newsworthy events"
474:
Which section? The only thing I can see that might be remotely relevant would be
1418:
1141:
1115:
926:
759:
656:
590:
566:
535:
509:
460:
425:
303:
1439:
1406:
1070:
876:
832:
819:
715:
237:
196:
123:
94:
77:
505:
360:
to her mommy or her daddy. Being born is not a very notable feat, you know.
225:
53:
1198:- This is a big thing for the media, and I think it should be NOT DELETED.
1466:
884:
389:
361:
416:
What notability standards would those be? Is it her best-selling novel,
818:
That's a good point. However, I'd vote to delete those pages, too. --
68:
No reason to believe this child (distinct from the parents) will be
1124:: It would be sexist to redirect this page to one of the parents.--
1405:(if Keep fails Redirect) : Like it or not this is a phenomenon --
1510:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
1136:- mention the kid at both parent articles, but no way she is
1450:
children of notable people should get their own articles.
1296:- per some of the above comments. Quite notable, I guess.
967:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Zahara Jolie-Pitt
963:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Maddox Jolie-Pitt
234:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Zahara Jolie-Pitt
230:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Maddox Jolie-Pitt
220:
There is already lots of information about the kid at
1270:
magazine either, but this kid is of public interest.
1158:
The comment didn't mention a thing about "redirect".
1247:; child is only noteworthy because of her parents. —
1069:. Has this article really been deleted already? --
1057:Couldn't this argument be used to prevent deleting
424:
above, she pooped in a particularly notable way? --
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
875:has restored the redirect as per the last AfD so
847:It helps to read pages you're talking about. ;-)
1520:). No further edits should be made to this page.
1266:; I'm not for Knowledge (XXG) becoming the next
1338:-- redirection to any one parent is improper.
302:not notable at all in herself as per Fan1967
8:
1149:But who would you redirect the article to?--
581:is not the subject of the news stories, the
76:an indiscriminate collection of information
1385:to the mum, per the other two children.
1061:article on the grounds of it not being
827:They don't have pages, but redirect to
548:would be memorable either. so yeah. --
161:User's first non-sandbox contribution.
236:where the other kids were redirected.
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
1065:? Don't forget, Knowledge (XXG) is
781:(The previous comment was added by
140:This is all 100% true information!
24:
981:Any content to parent's article.
388:in the same way that Maddox was
758:- The same thing happened with
575:her birth is a newsworthy event
1:
961:per prior AfD discussions at
44:The result of the debate was
1001:19:28, 31 May, 2006 (UTC+1)
768:Pregnancy of Angelina Jolie
93:, like her other children.
1537:
785:on this nom's talk page.
762:, which now redirects to
1513:Please do not modify it.
1503:23:32, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
1470:23:30, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
1455:22:08, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
1443:20:56, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
1426:14:33, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
1410:13:00, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
1398:12:19, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
1378:06:26, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
1343:02:07, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
1327:00:58, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
1311:22:54, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
1288:16:27, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
1275:03:41, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
1259:15:24, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
1240:13:32, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
1213:03:26, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
1191:18:23, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
1179:11:13, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
1163:02:07, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
1154:00:56, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
1145:12:25, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
1129:07:06, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
1103:02:09, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
1090:01:16, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
1074:23:50, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
1047:23:30, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
1034:21:16, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
1013:18:44, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
986:01:59, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
974:01:52, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
954:00:59, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
930:23:03, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
917:21:04, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
888:09:50, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
864:00:59, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
839:20:26, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
823:20:25, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
790:18:55, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
775:18:33, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
751:18:16, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
739:17:36, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
719:17:09, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
707:15:12, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
680:14:32, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
664:11:51, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
614:02:12, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
598:01:58, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
570:00:48, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
560:00:32, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
539:00:26, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
529:00:16, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
513:23:13, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
499:21:58, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
483:20:11, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
468:01:58, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
453:17:58, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
433:11:51, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
412:11:11, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
393:10:01, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
377:09:07, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
353:05:02, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
341:04:52, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
323:04:50, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
307:04:05, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
295:03:59, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
283:03:54, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
258:03:51, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
244:03:58, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
216:03:26, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
200:14:34, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
178:05:56, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
127:23:19, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
114:23:13, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
101:03:12, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
81:03:07, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
63:Shiloh Nouvel Jolie-Pitt
57:01:28, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
32:Please do not modify it.
883:was one that I recall.
728:because of someone else
675:of some notable event.
1350:as per TheProject. --
811:4:18 30 May 2006 (UTC)
589:herself newsworthy? --
348:to mother's article.
146:comment was added by
72:, Knowledge (XXG) is
1334:to both parents and
1272:Sean Hayford O'Leary
732:definitely not kept
585:is. So, how is the
583:mother giving birth
328:Definitely not keep
187:Knowledge (XXG) is
1118:17:05, 2 June 2006
1022:Merge and redirect
915:
437:I suggest reading
350:Wile E. Heresiarch
1375:
904:
705:
612:
558:
527:
508:. . . who knows?
497:
451:
418:Gurgle Gurgle Goo
410:
159:
1528:
1515:
1498:
1491:
1486:
1480:
1392:
1365:
1359:
1304:
1231:
1174:- Stupid afds --
951:
946:
941:
913:
908:
881:Brooklyn Beckham
861:
856:
851:
783:User:Mythstalker
693:
606:
552:
521:
491:
445:
404:
370:
367:
364:
338:Have your say!!!
175:
170:
165:
141:
34:
1536:
1535:
1531:
1530:
1529:
1527:
1526:
1525:
1524:
1518:deletion review
1511:
1501:
1496:
1487:
1482:
1478:
1390:
1355:
1298:
1229:
1067:not a democracy
949:
944:
939:
911:
906:
859:
854:
849:
368:
365:
362:
180:
173:
168:
163:
142:—The preceding
66:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
1534:
1532:
1523:
1522:
1506:
1505:
1493:
1472:
1460:
1459:
1458:
1457:
1446:
1445:
1429:
1428:
1412:
1400:
1380:
1345:
1329:
1320:Angelina Jolie
1313:
1291:
1277:
1261:
1242:
1222:Angelina Jolie
1215:
1199:
1193:
1181:
1169:
1168:
1167:
1166:
1165:
1131:
1119:
1108:
1107:
1106:
1105:
1093:
1092:
1079:
1078:
1077:
1076:
1052:
1051:
1036:
1018:
1017:
1016:
1015:
1003:
1002:
988:
979:Redirect/Merge
976:
956:
932:
919:
897:
896:
895:
894:
893:
892:
891:
890:
867:
866:
842:
841:
829:Angelina Jolie
825:
813:
812:
794:
787:The Disco King
777:
772:The Disco King
753:
741:
721:
709:
682:
666:
645:Angelina Jolie
638:
637:
636:
635:
634:
633:
632:
631:
630:
629:
628:
627:
626:
625:
624:
623:
622:
621:
620:
619:
618:
617:
616:
604:badlydrawnjeff
550:badlydrawnjeff
546:Lindbergh baby
519:badlydrawnjeff
489:badlydrawnjeff
472:
471:
470:
443:badlydrawnjeff
402:badlydrawnjeff
395:
379:
355:
343:
325:
320:Metropolitan90
316:Angelina Jolie
309:
297:
285:
260:
248:
247:
246:
224:, but none at
222:Angelina Jolie
205:
204:
203:
202:
182:
181:
160:
134:
133:
132:
131:
130:
129:
117:
116:
104:
103:
91:Angelina Jolie
65:
60:
50:Angelina Jolie
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1533:
1521:
1519:
1514:
1508:
1507:
1504:
1500:
1499:
1492:
1490:
1485:
1476:
1473:
1471:
1468:
1465:
1462:
1461:
1456:
1453:
1452:Bretonbanquet
1448:
1447:
1444:
1441:
1436:
1435:
1434:
1433:
1432:
1427:
1424:
1420:
1416:
1413:
1411:
1408:
1404:
1401:
1399:
1396:
1393:
1388:
1384:
1381:
1379:
1374:
1371:
1368:
1363:
1360:
1358:
1353:
1349:
1346:
1344:
1341:
1337:
1333:
1330:
1328:
1325:
1321:
1317:
1314:
1312:
1309:
1308:
1305:
1302:
1295:
1292:
1290:
1289:
1286:
1282:
1278:
1276:
1273:
1269:
1265:
1262:
1260:
1256:
1252:
1251:
1246:
1243:
1241:
1238:
1235:
1232:
1227:
1223:
1219:
1216:
1214:
1211:
1207:
1203:
1200:
1197:
1194:
1192:
1189:
1185:
1182:
1180:
1177:
1173:
1170:
1164:
1161:
1157:
1156:
1155:
1152:
1151:Greasysteve13
1148:
1147:
1146:
1143:
1140:on her own. -
1139:
1135:
1132:
1130:
1127:
1126:Greasysteve13
1123:
1120:
1117:
1113:
1110:
1109:
1104:
1101:
1097:
1096:
1095:
1094:
1091:
1088:
1084:
1081:
1080:
1075:
1072:
1068:
1064:
1060:
1056:
1055:
1054:
1053:
1050:
1048:
1045:
1041:
1037:
1035:
1031:
1027:
1023:
1020:
1019:
1014:
1011:
1007:
1006:
1005:
1004:
1000:
996:
992:
989:
987:
984:
980:
977:
975:
972:
968:
964:
960:
957:
955:
952:
947:
942:
936:
933:
931:
928:
923:
920:
918:
914:
909:
902:
899:
898:
889:
886:
882:
878:
874:
871:
870:
869:
868:
865:
862:
857:
852:
846:
845:
844:
843:
840:
837:
834:
830:
826:
824:
821:
817:
816:
815:
814:
810:
806:
802:
798:
795:
793:
791:
788:
784:
778:
776:
773:
769:
765:
761:
757:
754:
752:
749:
748:Bretonbanquet
745:
742:
740:
737:
733:
729:
725:
722:
720:
717:
713:
710:
708:
704:
700:
696:
692:
691:
686:
683:
681:
678:
674:
670:
667:
665:
662:
658:
654:
650:
646:
642:
639:
615:
610:
605:
601:
600:
599:
596:
592:
588:
584:
580:
576:
573:
572:
571:
568:
563:
562:
561:
556:
551:
547:
542:
541:
540:
537:
532:
531:
530:
525:
520:
516:
515:
514:
511:
507:
502:
501:
500:
495:
490:
486:
485:
484:
481:
477:
473:
469:
466:
462:
458:
457:
456:
455:
454:
449:
444:
440:
436:
435:
434:
431:
427:
423:
422:User:Fan-1967
419:
415:
414:
413:
408:
403:
399:
396:
394:
391:
387:
383:
380:
378:
375:
371:
359:
356:
354:
351:
347:
344:
342:
339:
335:
334:
329:
326:
324:
321:
318:per Kusma. --
317:
313:
310:
308:
305:
301:
298:
296:
293:
289:
286:
284:
281:
278:
274:
273:
268:
264:
261:
259:
256:
255:Richardcavell
252:
249:
245:
242:
239:
235:
231:
227:
223:
219:
218:
217:
214:
210:
207:
206:
201:
198:
194:
190:
186:
185:
184:
183:
179:
176:
171:
166:
157:
153:
149:
145:
139:
136:
135:
128:
125:
121:
120:
119:
118:
115:
112:
108:
107:
106:
105:
102:
99:
96:
92:
88:
85:
84:
83:
82:
79:
75:
71:
64:
61:
59:
58:
55:
51:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
1512:
1509:
1495:
1488:
1483:
1474:
1463:
1430:
1414:
1402:
1382:
1356:
1347:
1335:
1331:
1315:
1307:
1300:
1293:
1285:24.92.43.149
1280:
1279:
1267:
1263:
1248:
1244:
1217:
1205:
1201:
1195:
1183:
1176:DragonWR12LB
1171:
1133:
1121:
1111:
1082:
1058:
1044:138.246.7.73
1039:
1038:
1021:
995:EliasAlucard
990:
978:
958:
934:
921:
900:
796:
780:
764:Katie Holmes
755:
743:
731:
727:
723:
711:
690:CrazyRussian
688:
684:
672:
668:
652:
648:
640:
586:
582:
578:
574:
475:
417:
397:
381:
357:
345:
331:
327:
311:
299:
287:
270:
266:
262:
250:
208:
137:
86:
67:
45:
43:
31:
28:
1324:Fallout boy
760:Suri Cruise
687:- silly. -
272:Hobbeslover
228:. See also
213:Sarge Baldy
1340:TheProject
1210:Jeremys779
1160:TheProject
1087:SeizureDog
903:per above
809:Fanficgurl
736:Kicking222
330:per above.
280:(contribs)
148:Laurenself
138:KKEEEEPP!!
1362:rovingian
1250:tregoweth
1188:Starcross
907:digital_m
677:Sandstein
609:WP:MEMES?
555:WP:MEMES?
524:WP:MEMES?
506:Mr. Burns
494:WP:MEMES?
448:WP:MEMES?
407:WP:MEMES?
226:Brad Pitt
111:Starcross
1489:spinster
1383:Redirect
1316:Redirect
1218:Redirect
959:Redirect
935:Redirect
922:Redirect
901:Redirect
756:Redirect
744:Redirect
724:Redirect
712:Redirect
699:contribs
685:Redirect
669:Redirect
641:Redirect
382:Redirect
358:Redirect
346:Redirect
333:Blnguyen
312:Redirect
156:contribs
144:unsigned
87:Redirect
46:redirect
1100:Fan1967
1063:notable
1026:SoLando
1010:Fan1967
983:JoshuaZ
971:Lbbzman
873:Sceptre
480:Fan1967
292:Fan1967
193:notable
70:notable
1475:Delete
1423:-: -->
1336:delete
1268:People
1245:Delete
1202:Delete
1184:Delete
1142:Jcbarr
1134:Delete
1116:Sio280
945:master
927:ScottW
855:master
805:Zahara
801:Maddox
673:object
657:Calton
653:Hello!
649:People
591:Calton
567:ScottW
536:ScottW
510:ScottW
461:Calton
439:WP:BIO
426:Calton
304:Bwithh
300:Delete
288:Delete
277:(talk)
267:cares?
263:Delete
209:Delete
169:master
1484:disco
1440:Yamla
1407:DuKot
1387:Colon
1348:Merge
1332:Merge
1237:e Ong
1112:Merge
1071:Yamla
940:Grand
877:Kusma
850:Grand
833:Kusma
820:Yamla
734:. --
716:Xoloz
703:email
587:child
579:child
238:Kusma
197:Yamla
164:Grand
124:Yamla
95:Kusma
78:Yamla
16:<
1497:talk
1464:Keep
1419:Vlad
1415:Keep
1403:Keep
1299:The
1294:Keep
1281:Keep
1264:Keep
1255:talk
1206:does
1196:Keep
1172:Keep
1138:WP:N
1122:Keep
1083:Keep
1040:Keep
1030:Talk
999:Talk
991:Keep
965:and
836:(討論)
803:and
797:Keep
695:talk
661:Talk
655:. --
595:Talk
465:Talk
441:. --
430:Talk
398:Keep
386:Mama
374:Talk
269:NN.
251:Keep
241:(討論)
232:and
152:talk
98:(討論)
54:Ezeu
52:. --
1479:...
1467:Dea
1395:Tom
1322:.--
1318:to
1226:Ter
1220:to
1059:any
885:MLA
799:If
651:or
643:to
390:MLA
384:to
314:to
189:not
158:) .
89:to
74:not
48:to
1438:--
1417:--
1391:el
1376:}
1301:JP
1257:)
1234:nc
1032:)
969:.
950:ka
860:ka
831:.
659:|
593:|
463:|
428:|
372:|
336:|
275:|
174:ka
154:•
1421:|
1373:@
1370:C
1367:T
1364:{
1357:e
1352:M
1303:S
1253:(
1230:e
1049:)
1028:(
997:|
912:e
792:)
701:/
697:/
611:)
607:(
557:)
553:(
526:)
522:(
496:)
492:(
450:)
446:(
409:)
405:(
369:P
366:I
363:J
150:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.