1284:--the one is an article, the other a collection of crufty descriptions.) Again: not mentions of these villains, that's nothing--in-depth coverage of the concept. Because you have latched on to my "non-notable characters", but the main thrust is the "trivial tidbits"--that is, the article is full of factoids but there is no concept of villainy in this TV show that's been discussed in reliable sources, as far as I know. Remember, this isn't a list;
1189:. The article is terrible, tagged as unreferenced since 2008, consisting mostly of plot and description based on--on what? original research. Try to look for sources--good luck. I searched and found that Spin magazine once described him as "a big freak with wings", and that's all they had to say (I added it to the article--you're welcome). No, this is cruft, and the associated articles don't seem to be any better.
813:
to this one with whatever reliable sources might exist and it should be used for what it is, a list of fictional characters, of which there are thousands on this project, all of which have plot "description" and I don't know what you mean about "misrepresenting the content of this list". It's a list of fictional character biographies and links to other articles for a specific group of antagonists from
31:
383:: A list of characters of from notable television series (all antagonists), the inclusion of which on the parent article would clutter it up. It's not really the same as the previously deleted page (but I don't know what was there to begin with; I assume it was just a list summarizing the other lists). There's plenty that can be removed from the page though.โ
81:. The current consensus here is fairly clear, that this article in particular does not pass the notability guidelines. Keep !votes have not been founded in policy and thus bear little weight in the discussion. Considering a similar article exists and is currently under consideration at AFD, if somebody would like to merge the two I'll provide the text ย โ
1136:? And that's being kind--an encyclopedia should find its secondary sources in published books and printed articles of the highest quality. Remember, we are talking about Power Rangers here, not about brains or countries or Shakespeare plays. You and I probably have different ideas about what an encyclopedia is, but fortunately there's
1518:. And no matter how much you argue with everyone in AFDs and deletion reviews, you don't seem to ever convince anyone. Do you not understand how list articles function on Knowledge? And don't tell administrators how to close a discussion. Unlike you, I'm sure they know what a list article is suppose to be.
812:
Again, what the hell is supposed to go on lists of characters? Fictional character biographies exist on this project in various forms for all works of fiction. And if it seems that the characters that are listed on this page and have separate articles aren't worth keeping, then those should be merged
742:
as having any sort of discussion of the plot. Your determination as to what makes a list page valid for deletion pretty much includes every single dedicated character list I've ever come across on this project. And that all we should include on a list of characters is the actor who portrayed the role
839:
isn't a good enough reason. Plot points or bios, if necessary, can already be summed up in the main articles, we don't have to make endless lists of every plot point that ever existed. Lists are supposed to have some use, they're not the "throw everything that doesn't fit anywhere else" magic bag.
250:
a viable article if we limit the list to just the big baddies who were threats for at least a season or so, and not their minions or one-off bosses. The fact that this is just plot summary tips the line to delete; any viable article would need real-world commentary or background information on the
1302:
This article is simply not a list in name but it is one in function. And that AFD had so many problems. And from the multitude of sources I provide, the bulk of them discuss the fact that because there's the dynamic between good and evil in the show, it leads to issues in informing children of
683:
I understand but you have to make sure the other criteria don't actually conflict with existing guidelines and policies. Besides, don't you think that if we remove all the plot shit the page is left almost blank, without even solving the notability issueย ? I think it would be easier and more
928:
On a Wikia all the content I removed in a diff I posted at the top of the page would have its own separate article. I'm aware that the article in its current state is crap but that can be fixed by cutting out entire plot summaries, and leaving only a much more protracted fictional character
1241:
1578:
I understand there are thousands of list articles just like this, that have been around for years. I understand that over the years I've seen hordes of articles like this one go to AFD, and they are never deleted, because they are perfectly valid list articles.
1235:
1226:
1220:
561:
Actually I did grew up watching Power
Rangers and had all the action figures at some point. AfDs still aren't votes, though. I encourage you to find policy-based reasons to keep the article, otherwise the closing admin is unlikely to take your comment into
880:
This boils down to "what a bunch of fanboys want" vs "what the community as a whole wants WP to be". This was settled long ago and I don't want to waste my time anymore. All I can tell you is that wikia is a better place for the kind of content you want.
761:
You're the one who talked about "plot shit" being "edited out" but yes, if, basically, the only purpose of this list is to have plot shit, then it is worthless. Also, I'm sorry, but this is for the sake of our debate: there is absolutely no plot
195:
1184:
I didn't purposely pick the worst ones. I picked two, and they happen to be terrible. I hadn't looked at any others, but to appease you, I picked another one, from the purportedly notable ones (notable since there's an article):
1357:
In one of the articles I saw they mentioned one of the characters specifically as an example for gender equality, but seriously these guidelines you're bringing up are for individual items and not the list as a
629:"There is no present consensus for how to assess the notability of more complex and cross-categorization lists (such as "Lists of X of Y") or what other criteria may justify the notability of stand-alone lists"โ
589:
parent to multiple existing villain articles. No objections to merging some of them to here if appropriate, and no objection to trimming excessive plot summary, but I see no policy-based reason for deletion.
913:
Then maybe you can understand why stuff like "Because people are clearly interested in xxx" is not the best argument you could find. A line has to be drawn somewhere if we don't want WP to become another
405:
to leave just the big bosses and related recurring characters. To be quite honest, if this was part of a list that included the protagonists and antagonists I doubt this would be up for deletion at all.โ
1285:
227:
1775:
Merging into the parent article is not a suitable choice as this is not a standalone list as much as it is a subarticle. If this were to be merged anywhere, it should be into some not-yet-existant
1264:
Can you find a reliable source that discusses
Villains in Mighty Morphin Power Rangers as a topic? Something more than some entry in a fancyclopedia that merely lists them? Because the validity of
189:
121:
116:
1158:
You cherry picked the worst choices from the list which just shows that those two are probably not notable on their own. You could probably find mentions of the major antagonists on this page
125:
278:
108:
1232:
1096:. This is cruft, a long list of trivial tidbits about non-notable characters in a kids TV show. I thought we wuz writing an encyclopedia here, which is a book of important things.
1500:
1) You don't provide any policy-based reason to keep the article. Your comment can be discarded by the closing admin. 2) That articles exist don't mean their necessarily notable.
862:
Because people are clearly interested in the characters enough that the information about them cannot be kept within the descriptive text of the work of fiction they come from.โ
148:
155:
1133:
318:
1110:
Do you have proof that the characters are not notable? This is just a spinoff list after all, and it can be proven that the subject of the parent article is notable.โ
720:
is essentially that list minus all the plot shit. I thus see absolutely no reason for that list to be separate if its only purpose is to add plot shit that violates
1776:
1129:
246:
I'm a bit on the fence here. What we have is way too much plot emphasis, tiny details about nonessential characters, and a whole lot of OR. That being said, this
1303:
fantasy violence and the like (and also because half of the cast was females it did something with marketing. I'm not sure. I can't read the articles at home).โ
665:
I was more under the "what other criteria may justify the notability ofs tand-alone lists" and plot shit can be edited out instead of throwing out a list page.โ
112:
40:
1246:. And while I can't access all of them at the moment, it would seem that she is important to discuss if all of these child psychology articles are to suggest.โ
298:
933:(and also because I force the usage of official translations of Japanese text over what they take to be more looser yet accurate translations or whatever).โ
1722:
1401:
NOTPLOT is an editing rule rather than a notability guideline. Also, how can you not discuss the plot when the article is a list of fictional characters?โ
1472:
There are four things on the list notable enough to have their own main articles. Rename this to say "list of" before its current title, and its fine.
1805:
is at AFD again, having been relisted after deletion review. So we're having the same discussion in two different areas for basically the same thing.
210:
177:
104:
96:
1876:
1858:
1828:
1792:
1770:
1707:
1689:
1664:
1639:
1602:
1573:
1555:
1541:
1509:
1495:
1448:
1414:
1396:
1371:
1352:
1316:
1297:
1259:
1198:
1179:
1153:
1123:
1105:
1086:
1068:
1038:
1017:
946:
923:
908:
890:
875:
857:
830:
807:
756:
733:
711:
693:
678:
660:
642:
624:
599:
571:
556:
536:
522:
502:
476:
444:
418:
396:
373:
358:
330:
310:
290:
269:
237:
90:
342:
171:
456:- Let this page stay. We should have full information on the villains that appear in this show and brief descriptions of it's monsters.
263:
1060:
167:
1915:
798:
in secondary sources. That is not the case here and I'd appreciate if you stopped misrepresenting the content of this list. Thanks.
651:, being policy, trumps any other criteria you may want to argue for concerning the notability of stand-alone lists about fiction.
217:
1742:
1673:
1420:
1383:(and as I said above, though LISTN does leave room for more possible criteria, the remark doesn't supercede actual policy like
17:
547:
Maybe you didn't grow up watching Power
Rangers, but I did. It had Villains; too many to count. I figure a list is justified.
365:
Thanks, I hadn't thought of that because I don't know the topic area and started the AFD as part of the close of another AFD.
1802:
1685:
1635:
1144:
to make some kind of demarcation between an attempt at a real encyclopedia and a list of Lego toys and TV show characters.
1011:
552:
518:
1159:
738:
So basically, and I'm not going to bother posting it twice because I'm just going to be making the same point, you count
1718:
930:
717:
817:. I don't know if I've ever said anything different other than your insistence that I'm not using a single word right.โ
183:
1624:, which would get too unwieldy. Villains are an essential plot element and a directory of them is a good compromise.
1276:
of ghost ships is well attested. I don't see that being the case for this article. (See also the difference between
1207:
isn't notable on its own and it should be merged into this article. I can find references that mention and describe
1281:
836:
1897:
1569:
1505:
1444:
1392:
1348:
1082:
919:
886:
853:
803:
729:
689:
656:
620:
567:
532:
472:
69:
46:
548:
514:
1268:
article stands or falls with the validity of the topic in its own right. Even if none of the ghost ships in
258:
1166:
on page 2 (although most of these articles seem to be about violence on television or gendered marketing).โ
1056:
1223:
1893:
1764:
352:
345:
that a article within its scope is up for AfD. Anyway, I notified WikiProject
Tokusatsu about this AfD.
86:
65:
1163:
1754:
1750:
1746:
1565:
1501:
1440:
1388:
1344:
1078:
915:
882:
849:
799:
725:
685:
652:
616:
563:
528:
468:
1546:
Folken, Dream Focus is correct. There's no need to point out the obvious to the point of badgering.
698:
It's already a list split off from a parent article. Why would it be merged back into said article?โ
1332:
1034:
203:
1681:
1629:
1238:
1074:
1049:
595:
253:
1842:), and none of the sources covers the topic of these villains as a group, making the list fail
1870:
1786:
1701:
1658:
1561:
1408:
1384:
1365:
1310:
1253:
1173:
1117:
1053:
1003:
940:
902:
869:
845:
824:
750:
739:
721:
705:
684:
consensual for you to argue for clean up + merge rather than to blindly stick to conservation.
672:
648:
636:
608:
412:
390:
326:
306:
286:
58:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
1892:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
1757:, which says "Notability guidelines apply to the inclusion of stand-alone lists and tables."
1229:
64:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
1806:
1758:
1580:
1551:
1519:
1473:
1328:
1293:
1194:
1149:
1101:
984:
488:
461:
430:
346:
82:
1843:
1376:
1277:
1064:
841:
612:
499:
441:
743:
without any sort of fictional character biography. Doesn't seem very encyclopedic to me.โ
647:
1) Maybe I'm mistaken but this is not a "more complex and cross-categorization" list. 2)
1749:
guidelines;" all of which this this does not meet. As well, this list does not meet the
1849:
1738:
1515:
1030:
1909:
1734:
1677:
1648:
1625:
1621:
1428:
1424:
591:
1864:
1780:
1695:
1652:
1402:
1359:
1304:
1247:
1208:
1167:
1137:
1111:
995:
934:
896:
863:
818:
744:
699:
666:
630:
586:
406:
384:
367:
322:
302:
282:
231:
142:
1839:
1730:
1547:
1380:
1340:
1289:
1244:
1190:
1145:
1141:
1097:
457:
1694:
They're all still there. What made you think they were deleted or redirected?โ
1269:
987:
to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
491:
to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
433:
to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
1216:
1212:
931:
the fans despise me for taking a stricter stance on sourcing on newer pages
1335:, it's up to the users who want to keep an article to prove it's notable,
895:
I'd rather be boiled alive than edit a fan run Wikia in this topic area.โ
929:
biography. And one of the main reasons I want to avoid Wikia is because
1204:
1186:
1886:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
1073:
With only 3 entries leading to actual articles, I don't see how
814:
766:
in this list. Please stop making any incorrect use of the word
1863:
Since when have lists of characters not been suitable topics?โ
228:
Knowledge:Articles for deletion/List of Power
Rangers villains
25:
1779:
page (as would any individual article on single characters).โ
402:
279:
list of
Fictional elements-related deletion discussions
138:
134:
130:
835:
And why the hell should we have lists of charactersย ?
202:
1423:
for an encyclopedia" is a valid reason to delete per
1272:are notable, it's still a viable topic because the
994:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
498:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
440:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
403:gutted the article of the monsters of the week/day
226:As substantially similar to an article deleted at
1729:subject to Knowledge's content policies, such as
842:isn't an indiscriminate collection of information
72:). No further edits should be made to this page.
1900:). No further edits should be made to this page.
1725:, which says "Being articles, stand-alone lists
1777:List of Mighty Morphin Power Rangers characters
467:Reason why the page would meet our guidelinesย ?
319:list of Television-related deletion discussions
1564:. Do you not understand what Knowledge is not?
1379:, which is for lists as a whole, is a part of
1343:, mere mentions are not proofs of notability.
216:
8:
1672:: What's the deal with all of pages in this
1620:as legitimate subarticle of parent article,
317:Note: This debate has been included in the
297:Note: This debate has been included in the
277:Note: This debate has been included in the
316:
299:list of Lists-related deletion discussions
296:
276:
1838:The list is only very sparsely sourced (
341:You know it would be good if you notify
105:Villains in Mighty Morphin Power Rangers
97:Villains in Mighty Morphin Power Rangers
844:. Lists aren't a magic trick to bypass
45:For an explanation of the process, see
1160:somewhere in the depths of this search
1719:Mighty Morphin Power Rangers#Villains
718:Mighty_Morphin_Power_Rangers#Villains
7:
1723:WP:Manual of Style/Stand-alone lists
1676:Are they all deleted or redirected?
1162:. Hell, Goldar gets name dropped in
1052:as a valuable informative source.
41:deletion review on 2013 January 15
24:
1647:: The AFD that spurred this one
1327:Just a note to Ryulong that per
1219:too) throughout Google Scholar:
29:
1755:WP:Notability#Stand-alone lists
464:) 2:37, December 26 2012 (UTC)
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
1803:List of Power Rangers villains
1339:the other way around. And per
1:
1282:Demons in the Marvel Universe
600:08:00, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
523:05:17, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
503:03:17, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
445:01:05, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
419:17:40, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
397:17:31, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
374:17:28, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
359:17:24, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
331:22:18, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
311:22:18, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
291:22:18, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
270:05:27, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
238:22:46, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
1877:22:48, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
1859:22:31, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
1829:10:59, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
1793:22:02, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
1771:20:41, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
1751:general notability guideline
1708:05:53, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
1690:05:43, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
91:02:40, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
1665:16:42, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
1640:09:45, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
1603:22:53, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
1574:20:06, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
1556:17:53, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
1542:17:50, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
1510:17:18, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
1496:17:14, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
1449:12:43, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
1415:12:27, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
1397:11:59, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
1372:11:34, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
1353:08:05, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
1317:17:52, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
1298:17:39, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
1260:17:01, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
1199:15:14, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
1180:07:17, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
1154:05:18, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
1124:01:16, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
1106:15:55, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
1087:16:52, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
1069:13:20, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
1039:10:49, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
1018:10:13, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
947:17:37, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
924:17:23, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
909:17:15, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
891:17:12, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
876:17:06, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
858:17:03, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
831:16:45, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
808:15:34, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
757:12:49, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
734:12:43, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
712:12:35, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
694:12:32, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
679:12:27, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
661:11:59, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
643:01:18, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
625:02:25, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
572:16:52, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
557:10:19, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
537:02:25, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
477:02:25, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
1932:
1721:. This list does not meet
1649:has been at DRV for a week
1431:. Besides, I see no plot
1427:, and NOTPLOT is part of
47:Knowledge:Deletion review
1916:Pages at deletion review
1889:Please do not modify it.
1753:for which it should per
585:as list appears to be a
343:WT:WikiProject Tokusatsu
61:Please do not modify it.
1286:that one's already gone
1029:as per Themfromspace.
770:, and talk about plot
251:important characters.
1743:what Knowledge is not
1739:neutral point of view
782:is when something is
1735:no original research
1419:"Any other content
1203:So that just means
837:WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS
549:PortlandOregon97217
527:AfDs are not votes.
515:PortlandOregon97217
1435:here, merely plot
1211:(some mentions of
77:The result was
1857:
1769:
1077:would apply here.
1020:
505:
447:
357:
333:
313:
293:
53:
52:
39:was subject to a
1923:
1891:
1873:
1867:
1856:
1854:
1847:
1825:
1822:
1819:
1816:
1813:
1810:
1789:
1783:
1767:
1763:
1761:
1704:
1698:
1661:
1655:
1599:
1596:
1593:
1590:
1587:
1584:
1538:
1535:
1532:
1529:
1526:
1523:
1492:
1489:
1486:
1483:
1480:
1477:
1411:
1405:
1368:
1362:
1313:
1307:
1256:
1250:
1176:
1170:
1120:
1114:
1014:
1008:
1000:
993:
989:
943:
937:
905:
899:
872:
866:
827:
821:
753:
747:
708:
702:
675:
669:
639:
633:
497:
493:
439:
435:
415:
409:
393:
387:
370:
355:
351:
349:
266:
261:
256:
234:
221:
220:
206:
158:
146:
128:
63:
33:
32:
26:
1931:
1930:
1926:
1925:
1924:
1922:
1921:
1920:
1906:
1905:
1904:
1898:deletion review
1887:
1871:
1865:
1850:
1848:
1823:
1820:
1817:
1814:
1811:
1808:
1787:
1781:
1765:
1759:
1702:
1696:
1678:J u n k c o p s
1659:
1653:
1597:
1594:
1591:
1588:
1585:
1582:
1566:Folken de Fanel
1536:
1533:
1530:
1527:
1524:
1521:
1502:Folken de Fanel
1490:
1487:
1484:
1481:
1478:
1475:
1441:Folken de Fanel
1409:
1403:
1389:Folken de Fanel
1366:
1360:
1345:Folken de Fanel
1311:
1305:
1278:Angels in Islam
1254:
1248:
1174:
1168:
1118:
1112:
1079:Folken de Fanel
1012:
1004:
996:
982:
941:
935:
916:Folken de Fanel
903:
897:
883:Folken de Fanel
870:
864:
850:Folken de Fanel
825:
819:
800:Folken de Fanel
751:
745:
726:Folken de Fanel
706:
700:
686:Folken de Fanel
673:
667:
653:Folken de Fanel
637:
631:
617:Folken de Fanel
564:Folken de Fanel
529:Folken de Fanel
486:
469:Folken de Fanel
428:
413:
407:
391:
385:
368:
353:
347:
264:
259:
254:
232:
163:
154:
119:
103:
100:
70:deletion review
59:
37:This discussion
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
1929:
1927:
1919:
1918:
1908:
1907:
1903:
1902:
1882:
1881:
1880:
1879:
1832:
1831:
1798:
1797:
1796:
1795:
1712:
1711:
1710:
1667:
1642:
1615:
1614:
1613:
1612:
1611:
1610:
1609:
1608:
1607:
1606:
1605:
1516:Knowledge:LIST
1467:
1466:
1465:
1464:
1463:
1462:
1461:
1460:
1459:
1458:
1457:
1456:
1455:
1454:
1453:
1452:
1451:
1325:
1324:
1323:
1322:
1321:
1320:
1319:
1091:
1090:
1089:
1042:
1041:
1023:
1022:
1021:
991:
990:
979:
978:
977:
976:
975:
974:
973:
972:
971:
970:
969:
968:
967:
966:
965:
964:
963:
962:
961:
960:
959:
958:
957:
956:
955:
954:
953:
952:
951:
950:
949:
893:
716:You're right,
602:
579:
578:
577:
576:
575:
574:
542:
541:
540:
539:
508:
507:
506:
495:
494:
483:
482:
481:
480:
479:
450:
449:
448:
437:
436:
425:
424:
423:
422:
421:
377:
376:
362:
361:
335:
334:
314:
294:
273:
272:
224:
223:
160:
99:
94:
75:
74:
54:
51:
50:
44:
34:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1928:
1917:
1914:
1913:
1911:
1901:
1899:
1895:
1890:
1884:
1883:
1878:
1874:
1868:
1862:
1861:
1860:
1855:
1853:
1845:
1841:
1837:
1834:
1833:
1830:
1827:
1826:
1804:
1800:
1799:
1794:
1790:
1784:
1778:
1774:
1773:
1772:
1768:
1762:
1756:
1752:
1748:
1745:, as well as
1744:
1740:
1736:
1732:
1731:verifiability
1728:
1724:
1720:
1716:
1713:
1709:
1705:
1699:
1693:
1692:
1691:
1687:
1683:
1682:want to talk?
1679:
1675:
1671:
1668:
1666:
1662:
1656:
1650:
1646:
1643:
1641:
1637:
1634:
1631:
1627:
1623:
1622:Power Rangers
1619:
1616:
1604:
1601:
1600:
1577:
1576:
1575:
1571:
1567:
1563:
1559:
1558:
1557:
1553:
1549:
1545:
1544:
1543:
1540:
1539:
1517:
1513:
1512:
1511:
1507:
1503:
1499:
1498:
1497:
1494:
1493:
1471:
1468:
1450:
1446:
1442:
1438:
1434:
1430:
1426:
1425:WP:DEL#REASON
1422:
1418:
1417:
1416:
1412:
1406:
1400:
1399:
1398:
1394:
1390:
1386:
1382:
1378:
1375:
1374:
1373:
1369:
1363:
1356:
1355:
1354:
1350:
1346:
1342:
1338:
1334:
1330:
1326:
1318:
1314:
1308:
1301:
1300:
1299:
1295:
1291:
1287:
1283:
1279:
1275:
1271:
1267:
1263:
1262:
1261:
1257:
1251:
1245:
1242:
1239:
1236:
1233:
1230:
1227:
1224:
1221:
1218:
1214:
1210:
1206:
1202:
1201:
1200:
1196:
1192:
1188:
1183:
1182:
1181:
1177:
1171:
1165:
1161:
1157:
1156:
1155:
1151:
1147:
1143:
1139:
1135:
1131:
1127:
1126:
1125:
1121:
1115:
1109:
1108:
1107:
1103:
1099:
1095:
1092:
1088:
1084:
1080:
1076:
1072:
1071:
1070:
1066:
1062:
1058:
1055:
1051:
1047:
1044:
1043:
1040:
1036:
1032:
1028:
1025:
1024:
1019:
1015:
1009:
1007:
1001:
999:
992:
988:
986:
981:
980:
948:
944:
938:
932:
927:
926:
925:
921:
917:
912:
911:
910:
906:
900:
894:
892:
888:
884:
879:
878:
877:
873:
867:
861:
860:
859:
855:
851:
847:
843:
838:
834:
833:
832:
828:
822:
816:
811:
810:
809:
805:
801:
797:
793:
789:
785:
781:
777:
773:
769:
765:
760:
759:
758:
754:
748:
741:
737:
736:
735:
731:
727:
723:
719:
715:
714:
713:
709:
703:
697:
696:
695:
691:
687:
682:
681:
680:
676:
670:
664:
663:
662:
658:
654:
650:
646:
645:
644:
640:
634:
628:
627:
626:
622:
618:
614:
610:
606:
603:
601:
597:
593:
588:
587:summary style
584:
581:
580:
573:
569:
565:
560:
559:
558:
554:
550:
546:
545:
544:
543:
538:
534:
530:
526:
525:
524:
520:
516:
513:
510:
509:
504:
501:
496:
492:
490:
485:
484:
478:
474:
470:
466:
465:
463:
459:
455:
452:
451:
446:
443:
438:
434:
432:
427:
426:
420:
416:
410:
404:
400:
399:
398:
394:
388:
382:
379:
378:
375:
372:
371:
364:
363:
360:
356:
350:
344:
340:
337:
336:
332:
328:
324:
320:
315:
312:
308:
304:
300:
295:
292:
288:
284:
280:
275:
274:
271:
268:
267:
262:
257:
249:
245:
242:
241:
240:
239:
236:
235:
229:
219:
215:
212:
209:
205:
201:
197:
194:
191:
188:
185:
182:
179:
176:
173:
169:
166:
165:Find sources:
161:
157:
153:
150:
144:
140:
136:
132:
127:
123:
118:
114:
110:
106:
102:
101:
98:
95:
93:
92:
88:
84:
80:
73:
71:
67:
62:
56:
55:
48:
42:
38:
35:
28:
27:
19:
1888:
1885:
1851:
1835:
1807:
1726:
1714:
1669:
1644:
1632:
1617:
1581:
1520:
1474:
1469:
1436:
1432:
1421:not suitable
1336:
1333:WP:AFDFORMAT
1273:
1265:
1209:Rita Repulsa
1134:Hatchasaurus
1093:
1054:Presidentman
1045:
1027:Weak delete,
1026:
1005:
997:
983:
795:
792:commented on
791:
787:
783:
779:
775:
771:
767:
763:
604:
582:
511:
487:
453:
429:
380:
366:
338:
252:
247:
243:
230:
225:
213:
207:
199:
192:
186:
180:
174:
164:
151:
78:
76:
60:
57:
36:
1760:Powergate92
1560:To DF: see
1437:description
1164:this result
1128:Seriously?
1075:WP:LISTPURP
1050:WP:LISTPURP
772:description
348:Powergate92
244:Weak delete
190:free images
83:Crisco 1492
1852:Sandstein
1801:Note that
1747:notability
1562:WP:NOTPLOT
1433:discussion
1385:WP:NOTPLOT
1270:Ghost ship
846:WP:NOTPLOT
840:Knowledge
796:debated on
780:Discussion
768:discussion
764:discussion
740:WP:NOTPLOT
722:WP:NOTPLOT
649:WP:NOTPLOT
609:WP:NOTPLOT
500:Courcelles
442:Courcelles
1894:talk page
1674:template?
1329:WP:BURDEN
1217:Ivan Ooze
1213:Lord Zedd
1031:1292simon
784:discussed
778:instead.
66:talk page
1910:Category
1896:or in a
1844:WP:LISTN
1636:contribs
1626:Casliber
1377:WP:LISTN
1065:Talkback
1061:contribs
985:Relisted
788:analysed
613:WP:LISTN
611:+ fails
592:Jclemens
562:account.
489:Relisted
431:Relisted
339:Comment:
248:could be
149:View log
68:or in a
1866:Ryulong
1836:Delete.
1782:Ryulong
1697:Ryulong
1670:Comment
1654:Ryulong
1404:Ryulong
1361:Ryulong
1358:whole.โ
1306:Ryulong
1274:concept
1249:Ryulong
1169:Ryulong
1130:Oozemen
1113:Ryulong
998:Mediran
936:Ryulong
898:Ryulong
865:Ryulong
820:Ryulong
776:summary
746:Ryulong
701:Ryulong
668:Ryulong
632:Ryulong
408:Ryulong
386:Ryulong
369:MBisanz
323:Frankie
303:Frankie
283:Frankie
233:MBisanz
196:WPย refs
184:scholar
122:protect
117:history
1741:, and
1686:my log
1548:Drmies
1429:WP:NOT
1290:Drmies
1205:Goldar
1191:Drmies
1187:Goldar
1146:Drmies
1098:Drmies
1094:Delete
1048:Meets
914:wikia.
605:Delete
458:Rtkat3
168:Google
126:delete
79:delete
1824:Focus
1717:into
1715:Merge
1598:Focus
1537:Focus
1491:Focus
1138:WP:RS
401:I've
265:Space
211:JSTOR
172:books
156:Stats
143:views
135:watch
131:links
16:<
1840:WP:V
1766:Talk
1645:Note
1630:talk
1618:Keep
1570:talk
1552:talk
1514:See
1506:talk
1470:Keep
1445:talk
1393:talk
1381:WP:N
1349:talk
1341:WP:N
1331:and
1294:talk
1280:and
1266:this
1215:and
1195:talk
1150:talk
1142:WP:V
1140:and
1102:talk
1083:talk
1057:talk
1046:Keep
1035:talk
920:talk
887:talk
854:talk
815:MMPR
804:talk
730:talk
690:talk
657:talk
621:talk
607:per
596:talk
583:Keep
568:talk
553:talk
533:talk
519:talk
512:Keep
473:talk
462:talk
454:Keep
381:Keep
354:Talk
327:talk
321:. โ
307:talk
301:. โ
287:talk
281:. โ
260:From
255:Them
204:FENS
178:news
139:logs
113:talk
109:edit
87:talk
1727:are
1337:not
774:or
218:TWL
147:โ (
1912::
1875:)
1872:็็ซ
1846:.
1791:)
1788:็็ซ
1737:,
1733:,
1706:)
1703:็็ซ
1688:)
1663:)
1660:็็ซ
1651:.โ
1638:)
1572:)
1554:)
1508:)
1447:)
1413:)
1410:็็ซ
1395:)
1387:).
1370:)
1367:็็ซ
1351:)
1315:)
1312:็็ซ
1296:)
1288:.
1258:)
1255:็็ซ
1243:,
1240:,
1237:,
1234:,
1231:,
1228:,
1225:,
1222:,
1197:)
1178:)
1175:็็ซ
1152:)
1132:?
1122:)
1119:็็ซ
1104:)
1085:)
1067:)
1059:ยท
1037:)
1016:)
1010:โข
945:)
942:็็ซ
922:)
907:)
904:็็ซ
889:)
874:)
871:็็ซ
856:)
829:)
826:็็ซ
806:)
755:)
752:็็ซ
732:)
710:)
707:็็ซ
692:)
677:)
674:็็ซ
659:)
641:)
638:็็ซ
623:)
598:)
570:)
555:)
535:)
521:)
475:)
417:)
414:็็ซ
395:)
392:็็ซ
329:)
309:)
289:)
198:)
141:|
137:|
133:|
129:|
124:|
120:|
115:|
111:|
89:)
43:.
1869:(
1821:m
1818:a
1815:e
1812:r
1809:D
1785:(
1700:(
1684:|
1680:(
1657:(
1633:ยท
1628:(
1595:m
1592:a
1589:e
1586:r
1583:D
1568:(
1550:(
1534:m
1531:a
1528:e
1525:r
1522:D
1504:(
1488:m
1485:a
1482:e
1479:r
1476:D
1443:(
1439:.
1407:(
1391:(
1364:(
1347:(
1309:(
1292:(
1252:(
1193:(
1172:(
1148:(
1116:(
1100:(
1081:(
1063:(
1033:(
1013:c
1006:t
1002:(
939:(
918:(
901:(
885:(
868:(
852:(
848:.
823:(
802:(
794:/
790:/
786:/
749:(
728:(
724:.
704:(
688:(
671:(
655:(
635:(
619:(
615:.
594:(
566:(
551:(
531:(
517:(
471:(
460:(
411:(
389:(
325:(
305:(
285:(
222:)
214:ยท
208:ยท
200:ยท
193:ยท
187:ยท
181:ยท
175:ยท
170:(
162:(
159:)
152:ยท
145:)
107:(
85:(
49:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.