497:
were deleted, and keeping this one would incur a lack of neutrality on the part of
Knowledge (XXG), giving it the appearance of taking sides. This wikipedia entry comes up as second on search engines under this corporation's link, making it possible that this article has been fought for so hard through deletion review, etc based on wanting recognition, marketability, recruitment and business advantage which is in COI to Knowledge (XXG). Many of the citations are from members of the organization or from the organization's president, who himself may be notable but this is besides the point. Anything trivial which may draw any notability about the organization appears to pertain to events happening before the subject of the article, the incorporation, was incorporated in 1988. As for merging, it simply does not have the notability requirements to be on the main
772:
Temples and Vault, for which there is published photographic evidence. There is similar photographic evidence showing
Regardie and Cicero together, all in the illustrations and plates of some of the aforementioned books. HOGDI has scans of correspondence between Regardie and Cicero, concerning both temple activities and legal contractual issues. No one has ever challenged the authenticity of the letters. HOGDI is the foremost proponent of Regardie's Golden Dawn work today, and it's doubtful that Cicero's books would continue to be published and republished by a major book company (Llewellyn) if his bona fides were not authentic and verified.
178:, where I've minimized the use of the website as a reference (it's still needed for general existence and related "certified" organizations), and tried to only keep the non-controversial facts which could be cited to books published by reliable publishers. I think there is no need to explain teachings, etc. in detail, that's what the Order's website and Cicero's books are for. Of course, I had to rely on
858:. I understand that that is why the articles were split in the first place, the self-published sources couldn't be used in a combined article. However, it turned out that self-published sources couldn't be used exclusively, they needed third-party sources to establish notability. What it boils down to is that if some organization is not notable enough to have it's own article
48:. The article appears to show notability. The "delete" commenters about it being spam must have read the article at a different revision that what I did, as it doesn't read like spam to me. There's plenty of references as well - just because they aren't accessable on the internet does not make them unreliable. In all, the general consensus was to keep the article.
1095:. Whether other similar groups do or do not meet such guidelines is irrelevant to the discussion of this particular subject. However, if others did decide to merge the content into another article, I personally cannot see any objection to their doing so. That, however, is an entirely separate matter from whether this particular group is notable in and of itself.
359:: The Ciceros are notable people within the ceremonial magic community. They seem currently to be the most widely available authors of serious books on the subject, partly through their partnership with Llewellyn publishing, through whom they have released quite a few books. They have also sparked considerable controversy through the naming of their order.
903:
versions completely erased. Other orgs need to be mentioned if HOGD inc is mentioned in the main article, for NPOV. Not everyone agrees that HOGD Inc. is the One True Golden Dawn, anyway like happens on most articles it's ok to mention things that wouldn't get their own entire article. Plus we need only mention that these orgs
753:
HOGD(I) is the longest continuously operating modern revival group of the Golden Dawn still in existence today. This is documented by major published references to the founding date of 1978, as well as their incorporation in the 1980s. No other Golden Dawn order shows this level of organization and
902:
article, groups are explained briefly who were denied their own article. If things were either worth their own article or not mentioned at all on wikip, the truth of things would not be represented and in fact it would seem like only one version of the truth was presented, very POV and all other
836:
Well, if they have a website that is reliable enough to say something like: "Other bodies which claim to be heirs to the original HOGD include: "The
Hermetic Golden Order of Dawn", "The Order of Hermetic Golden Dawn", "Joe's Golden Dawn Org.", and "The Dawn of Golden Hermeticism". I am not saying
1034:
Yes, I understand you, but I disagree. Knowledge (XXG) is an encyclopedia. We must have a reliable source for information. We have no obligation to level the playing field for groups which are non-notable by
Knowledge (XXG) standards, which does not mean there is anything wrong with these groups,
1024:
there used to be (dunno if there is now) 3 groups mentioned by name as running pagan events. If only one is mentioned, even if they have more sources, that would create the misleading impression that they are the only one running events. Do you see what I mean? It would be misleading and maybe
771:
HOGDI is the organization that grew out of the work of the late Dr. Israel
Regardie and his efforts to revive and re-establish the Golden Dawn Order in the USA. Chic Cicero and his partners were instrumental in that effort. To that end, Regardie performed Adept and Neophyte rituals in the HOGDI's
747:
Disclosure: I am a member of the Open Source Order of the Golden Dawn, an organization that is certified by the HOGD (Inc.) I have met
Charles 'Chic' and Tabatha Cicero twice. My organization is sponsoring a workshop with them in September in San Francisco. Admins and editors may take my comments
496:
Delete as it does not establish enough notability. Coverage in citations lacks depth. Appears to be an advertisement. Website contains links to a paypal site to take sides in legal suits against another golden dawn styled order. There were many Orders in the contemporary section, most all of whom
310:
are associated with it - and I notice that the former author's notability is suspect and survived an AfD with a "no consensus" vote. At any rate, even if these people are well-known within a subculture (and I'm skeptical of that), there's no reason to believe that they confer their notability on
628:
article. That might create a deceptive impression that HOGD Inc. are inarguably a direct continuation of the original HOGD, with a chain of succession incontravertable compared to the other modern HOGD based orders. That is by no means accepted by a lot of people, and at least 2 modern orders
943:
IPSOS, I think you have an unusually narrow view of WP:SELF... but it does not apply in any case. Since these bodies all claim to be descended from the historical HOGD in some way or another, I would argue that they fit within the criteria of WP:SELF in an article on that subject. At least in
928:
third-party references, there is no problem. For example, relatives of famous people are usually mentioned in the subject's biography, autobiography or memoirs. Thus there are third party references and there is indeed no problem mentioning them. However, if fringe groups in "theistic
Satanism"
777:
One of the
Ciceros' most popular books, "Self-Initiation in to the Golden Dawn Tradition" has the symbol of the Order and a description of the organization in it's introduction pages. While the book was written by the Ciceros, it was published by Llewellyn, and we can assume a certain level of
84:
629:
claim to be the 'real' HOGD, with one other org actually calling itself the "Authentic" order of the Golden Dawn or something. I don't think HOGD Inc deserve much more coverage in that article than the other orgs. I know it's an 'other stuff exists' argument, but
633:
was decided as a keep, and I think actually HOGD Inc may be more noteable than them, if it wasn't for the novelty of OSOGD's open source-ness. Anyway with out getting into the general arguments about actual coverage on wiki, it is possibly more well known than
248:
to be found in the revised article - if it is, please show us the evidence. If there is no evidence to show that, will you please give your rationale for the above, really difficult to comprehend, example of biased opinin pushing? Furthermore, your comment does
759:
HOGDI is one of the few occult groups to establish a non-profit corporation, one that has persevered from the 1980s to the present day. Few such groups ever distinguish themselves in this manner. They also have IRS 50i(c) tax-exempt status as a charitable
287:
after re-reading the comments and article. The article does stand alone, the facts will be poorly accepted by POV pushers on the page if merged, and the notability of this movement is evident based on penetration of influence throughout GD circles.
1010:
descent, because they are recreations and descendants in spirit, I still think the self-published rules indicate inclusion for a simple "these are the moddern groups" statement. But all that can (and probably will) be argued at the article.
79:
765:
The founder and leader of HOGD(I) is the foremost published author of books about the Golden Dawn tradition. These are not self-published, but are under the
Llewellyn imprint, the largest publisher of occult and new age books in the
663:
per
Kephera975, and by the same standards by which any religious congregation congregation or other organization would be judged. The refs appear to lack the degree of independence that would be required to satisfy
723:- As the article says - "While bearing the same name as the historical Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn (1888-1908), the modern Order does not have direct descent or institutional lineage from the original Order"
1005:
Sorry, my mistake... I thought SELF directed to that section of WP:V you point to ... I was talking about the same "Self-published sources" section you point to. And while none of these groups claim a
111:
106:
115:
98:
175:
138:
944:
support of the statement that they do claim descent. Anyway, that is beyond the scope of this AfD. I still think the HOGD Inc. article should be merged into the main article.
1099:
1065:
1044:
1029:
1015:
1000:
966:
948:
938:
915:
883:
849:
831:
809:
787:
727:
715:
696:
672:
651:
638:
614:
565:
538:
506:
487:
450:
438:
410:
396:
368:
347:
338:
324:
315:
292:
278:
257:
239:
230:
209:
191:
157:
63:
898:
Nooo, hence not entirely noteable relatives of famous people, if their articles are deleted, often get a mention in the more famous relative's article. And like on the
253:
to establish the basis for inclusion or removal, of an article which is factual, contributes to understanding of a topic, and provides a careful balanced NPOV article.
102:
647:
Also, as to the noteability being mainly by association with Chic Cicero, if it's decided that's so, it should not have it's own article but just a mention in his.
531:
149:
that result for a variety of reasons, including the AfD's nominator's failure to list the debate in the daily AfD log, limiting community participation. Still,
987:: that ceased to exist circa 1902 - 1908. Therefore the self-published websites of these groups simply cannot be used in that article without at the very least
610:
Addendum: I've switched to !vote delete; after rereading this it's clear the references are minimal and they're not 3rd party, so the article lacks notability.
401:
Strange comment. I was watching. The close was done at 00:21, then the article was undeleted, then the AfD created at 00:28. Everything seems to be in order.
822:
in this way? In fact, these sorts of arguments for including other non-notable groups if this one is merged have made me decide to change my !vote to keep.
94:
69:
818:
even for their existence. They have all recently been deleted as non-notable because there were not any third-party sources at all. How could we ignore
929:(whatever that is) are being mentioned based only on their own websites or other self-published material, these mentions should be removed post haste.
874:
that would allow such a mention? Both articles and mention of fringe Masonic groups have been completely eliminated in just this way, haven't they?
205:
order looks to me like its pretending to be the real The Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn or as notable as The Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn,
378:. Deletion was overturned recently, and it appears that this article was relisted before it was closed as overturn. (see Xoloz's link above).
182:'s account of the creation of the Order, but as it is not self-published and only gives a timeline of events, I don't see it as problematic.
1049:
Each article must stand or fall on its own merits. Most of the others were deleted, but at least one survived because it was notable enough.
630:
589:
of the other contemporary order articles were also to be merged, and the AfDs on those have established a 'keep' outcome, as demonstrated
523:
854:
No, autobiographical & self-published sources like websites can only be used in an article about the author or publisher. It's in
17:
984:
707:
625:
602:
582:
498:
270:
169:
174:
after reducing the article to facts supported primarily by sources published by reliable publishers. For example, I've done so at
548:- you have made this assertion before and I have asked you to provide citations to a source where the individual in question has
519:
845:
other groups that claim to be an heir to the original group, and at least some of them should be mentioned. NPOV and all that.
552:
as a member, which is the Knowledge (XXG) requirement for membership determination. So far you have been unable to provide this
907:
they are part of the golden dawn tradition. All these AfDs and arguments stem from the deletion/redirect of the article
735:
per IPSOS' trimming down the article. There are half a dozen third party references and notability has been established.
462:
and ...there are already some references, including it seems, three non-self-published books with a couple that describe
434:
392:
1114:
36:
862:
it has no third party sources at all, then it can't even be mentioned on Knowledge (XXG). At least, that's how I read
466:'s involvement with the origins of the group. This seems to be a small group but notable enough to have received some
274:- As proposed in the revised article (see IPSOS above) The revised article is NPOV, encyclopaedic, provides balance.
711:. I believe the article stands on its own, but if the choice is between deleting and merging, it should be merged.
1053:
783:
With concise trimming of the article, all the previous issues raised regarding notability have been addressed.
1113:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
530:
I've struck the above !vote as the user in question has been proven to be a sock of an indef blocked user, see
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
218:
1096:
1021:
957:
claim descent. They are revival or re-creation Orders and nearly everyone agrees that this is the case.
908:
501:
page seeing as it uses self-published material and attempts to give advantage to one contemporary POV.
515:
344:
312:
590:
1060:
712:
535:
482:
363:
475:
899:
58:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
972:
611:
431:
389:
321:
289:
275:
254:
1092:
665:
459:
1040:
1026:
996:
962:
934:
912:
879:
827:
648:
635:
561:
511:
503:
463:
406:
334:
226:
187:
988:
867:
320:
Could you hang about a bit and review the revised article which IPSOS will be inserting?
307:
236:
206:
980:
976:
871:
863:
855:
819:
471:
467:
1057:
1012:
945:
846:
806:
479:
360:
85:
Articles for deletion/The Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn, Inc. (second nomination)
784:
754:
continuity. This makes them the most notable part of a notable spiritual tradition.
736:
50:
132:
669:
447:
421:
379:
303:
244:"pretending to be the real The Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn" ... is simply
179:
1036:
992:
958:
930:
875:
823:
557:
402:
330:
235:
I didnt say that, indeed its a very poor understanding of my comments indeed,
222:
183:
154:
724:
841:
coverage, nor am I saying that every group needs to be included, but there
680:
per the same reasons I gave on the last AfD. Reasons: notability and spam.
981:
WP:V#Self-published and questionable sources in articles about themselves
682:
556:
proof. Given this, none of your objections are valid reasons to delete.
911:, maybe that would be worth recreating for more edit-warring fun.:)
302:- the only possible assertion of notability in the article is that
1025:
POV/advertising. Anyway, we can argue this on the HOGD article.:)
598:
80:
Articles for deletion/The Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn, Inc.
1107:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
594:
778:
editorial fact checking and verification from a major imprint.
805:
other bodies that claim to be "heirs" of the original group.
546:"Many of the citations are from members of the organization"
624:
there are deeper problems here if the content moves to the
343:
I'll give it another look before the close of the AfD. --
983:. The point is, none of these groups can actually be the
953:
Well, actually, the point is that they for the most part
814:
I would object to mentioning other bodies as there are
146:
128:
124:
120:
176:
User:IPSOS/The Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn, Inc.
153:, given weak notability and little reliable sourcing.
1091:- Subject seems to meet notability guidelines as per
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
446:per IPSOS' shearing down the article. Looks good.
581:. I no longer believe this should be merged with
532:Knowledge (XXG):Suspected sock puppets/Kephera975
1117:). No further edits should be made to this page.
420:. It seems to be spam and indirect advertising.
977:WP:V#Self-published sources (online and paper)
8:
145:This was deleted through its previous AfD.
95:The Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn, Inc.
70:The Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn, Inc.
924:then those mentions should be removed. If
1052:We should avoid basing this decision on
1020:It would be analogous to in the article
1035:merely that they are not encyclopedic.
77:
870:. Could you show me some exception in
748:with as many grains of salt as needed.
601:. All of those should be merged into
579:per reworking of the article by IPSOS
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
920:Sorry, if those things are going on
631:Open Source Order of the Golden Dawn
76:
24:
985:Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn
708:Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn
626:Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn
603:Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn
583:Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn
499:Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn
271:Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn
217:- so your argument boils down to
170:Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn
922:without third-party references
1:
470:coverage, so also, keep per
1100:16:41, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
1066:21:51, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
1045:21:13, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
1030:20:20, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
1016:15:42, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
1001:15:29, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
967:15:25, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
949:15:23, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
939:15:04, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
916:14:36, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
884:14:09, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
850:13:40, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
832:12:44, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
810:12:20, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
788:01:57, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
728:21:10, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
716:17:43, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
697:15:56, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
673:15:27, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
652:13:26, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
639:13:23, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
615:07:48, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
566:12:37, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
539:22:14, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
507:04:45, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
488:06:12, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
451:02:41, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
439:02:28, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
411:02:38, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
397:02:28, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
369:07:00, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
348:02:55, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
339:02:38, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
325:02:32, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
316:02:03, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
311:this organization. nn. --
293:02:49, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
279:01:58, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
258:01:56, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
240:01:18, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
231:01:14, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
210:01:01, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
192:00:32, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
158:00:28, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
64:17:20, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
1134:
147:Deletion Review overturned
1110:Please do not modify it.
975:I am refering to, it is
797:- to main HOGD article,
605:if this this article is.
32:Please do not modify it.
979:and its sole exception
971:In any case, it is not
837:that these bodies need
1022:Religion in Birmingham
75:AfDs for this article:
991:third-party support.
909:Golden Dawn tradition
739:20:41, 22 August 2007
524:few or no other edits
801:mentioning this and
526:outside this topic.
816:no reliable sources
576:Delete do not merge
580:
575:
502:
900:theistic Satanism
578:
573:
527:
492:
329:I've updated it.
283:Revising vote to
1125:
1112:
691:
688:
685:
509:
428:
425:
386:
383:
366:
136:
118:
53:
34:
1133:
1132:
1128:
1127:
1126:
1124:
1123:
1122:
1121:
1115:deletion review
1108:
1063:
1054:WP:ALLORNOTHING
695:
689:
686:
683:
550:self-identified
485:
464:Israel Regardie
437:
426:
423:
395:
384:
381:
364:
199:Delete and salt
109:
93:
90:
73:
51:
44:The result was
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
1131:
1129:
1120:
1119:
1103:
1102:
1085:
1084:
1083:
1082:
1081:
1080:
1079:
1078:
1077:
1076:
1075:
1074:
1073:
1072:
1071:
1070:
1069:
1068:
1061:
1050:
969:
893:
892:
891:
890:
889:
888:
887:
886:
791:
790:
780:
779:
774:
773:
768:
767:
762:
761:
756:
755:
750:
749:
741:
740:
730:
718:
699:
694:
675:
657:
656:
655:
654:
642:
641:
618:
617:
607:
606:
570:
569:
568:
542:
541:
490:
483:
453:
441:
433:
415:
414:
413:
391:
373:
372:
371:
354:
353:
352:
351:
350:
308:Tabatha Cicero
297:
296:
295:
265:
264:
263:
262:
261:
260:
242:
195:
194:
143:
142:
89:
88:
87:
82:
74:
72:
67:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1130:
1118:
1116:
1111:
1105:
1104:
1101:
1098:
1094:
1090:
1087:
1086:
1067:
1064:
1059:
1055:
1051:
1048:
1047:
1046:
1042:
1038:
1033:
1032:
1031:
1028:
1023:
1019:
1018:
1017:
1014:
1009:
1004:
1003:
1002:
998:
994:
990:
986:
982:
978:
974:
970:
968:
964:
960:
956:
952:
951:
950:
947:
942:
941:
940:
936:
932:
927:
923:
919:
918:
917:
914:
910:
906:
901:
897:
896:
895:
894:
885:
881:
877:
873:
869:
865:
861:
857:
853:
852:
851:
848:
844:
840:
835:
834:
833:
829:
825:
821:
817:
813:
812:
811:
808:
804:
800:
796:
793:
792:
789:
786:
782:
781:
776:
775:
770:
769:
764:
763:
760:organization.
758:
757:
752:
751:
746:
743:
742:
738:
734:
731:
729:
726:
722:
719:
717:
714:
710:
709:
703:
700:
698:
693:
692:
679:
676:
674:
671:
667:
662:
659:
658:
653:
650:
646:
645:
644:
643:
640:
637:
632:
627:
623:
620:
619:
616:
613:
609:
608:
604:
600:
596:
592:
588:
584:
577:
571:
567:
563:
559:
555:
551:
547:
544:
543:
540:
537:
533:
529:
528:
525:
521:
517:
513:
508:
505:
500:
495:
491:
489:
486:
481:
477:
473:
469:
465:
461:
457:
454:
452:
449:
445:
442:
440:
436:
432:
430:
429:
419:
416:
412:
408:
404:
400:
399:
398:
394:
390:
388:
387:
377:
374:
370:
367:
362:
358:
355:
349:
346:
342:
341:
340:
336:
332:
328:
327:
326:
323:
319:
318:
317:
314:
309:
305:
301:
298:
294:
291:
286:
282:
281:
280:
277:
273:
272:
267:
266:
259:
256:
252:
247:
243:
241:
238:
234:
233:
232:
228:
224:
220:
216:
213:
212:
211:
208:
204:
200:
197:
196:
193:
189:
185:
181:
177:
173:
172:
171:
165:
162:
161:
160:
159:
156:
152:
148:
140:
134:
130:
126:
122:
117:
113:
108:
104:
100:
96:
92:
91:
86:
83:
81:
78:
71:
68:
66:
65:
61:
60:
55:
54:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
1109:
1106:
1088:
1007:
954:
925:
921:
904:
859:
842:
838:
815:
802:
798:
794:
744:
737:User:Hogd120
732:
721:Do not merge
720:
705:
701:
681:
677:
660:
621:
586:
572:
553:
549:
545:
493:
455:
443:
422:
417:
380:
375:
356:
299:
284:
268:
250:
245:
214:
202:
198:
167:
166:
163:
150:
144:
57:
49:
45:
43:
31:
28:
1097:John Carter
612:Coldmachine
522:) has made
304:Chic Cicero
219:IDONTLIKEIT
180:Chic Cicero
1027:Merkinsmum
913:Merkinsmum
649:Merkinsmum
636:Merkinsmum
512:Kephera975
504:Kephera975
926:there are
839:extensive
706:Merge to
622:weak keep
345:Hyperbole
313:Hyperbole
269:Merge to
237:SqueakBox
207:SqueakBox
168:Merge to
1058:Parsifal
1013:Blueboar
989:reliable
946:Blueboar
847:Blueboar
807:Blueboar
713:GlassFET
554:required
536:GlassFET
520:contribs
480:Parsifal
476:WP:PAPER
435:Contribs
393:Contribs
361:Fuzzypeg
221:, then.
139:View log
973:WP:SELF
799:Breifly
785:JMax555
585:unless
376:Comment
357:Comment
322:docboat
290:docboat
276:docboat
255:docboat
251:nothing
246:nowhere
215:Comment
203:article
201:, this
112:protect
107:history
52:Majorly
1093:WP:ORG
1008:direct
766:world.
678:Delete
670:Edison
666:WP:ORG
661:Delete
634:OSOGD.
597:, and
494:Delete
460:WP:HEY
448:Sethie
418:Delete
300:Delete
151:Delete
116:delete
1062:Hello
1056:. --
1037:IPSOS
993:IPSOS
959:IPSOS
955:don't
931:IPSOS
876:IPSOS
868:WP:RS
824:IPSOS
795:Merge
745:Keep:
558:IPSOS
484:Hello
403:IPSOS
331:IPSOS
223:IPSOS
184:IPSOS
155:Xoloz
133:views
125:watch
121:links
16:<
1089:Keep
1041:talk
997:talk
963:talk
935:talk
880:talk
872:WP:V
866:and
864:WP:V
856:WP:V
828:talk
820:WP:V
733:Keep
725:Artw
702:Keep
599:here
595:here
591:here
574:Keep
562:talk
516:talk
478:. --
474:and
472:WP:N
468:WP:V
458:per
456:Keep
444:Keep
427:stan
407:talk
385:stan
335:talk
306:and
285:Keep
227:talk
188:talk
164:Keep
129:logs
103:talk
99:edit
59:talk
46:keep
905:say
860:and
843:are
803:all
704:or
587:all
137:– (
1043:)
999:)
965:)
937:)
882:)
830:)
668:.
593:,
564:)
534:.
518:•
510:—
424:J-
409:)
382:J-
337:)
229:)
190:)
131:|
127:|
123:|
119:|
114:|
110:|
105:|
101:|
62:)
1039:(
995:(
961:(
933:(
878:(
826:(
690:.
687:V
684:.
560:(
514:(
405:(
365:☻
333:(
225:(
186:(
141:)
135:)
97:(
56:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.