2770:. The technique is to engage in hostile cite-tagging (placing multiple fact-tags on the page, generally one per paragraph). These fact-tags insist on "verifiability" and the pseudoskeptic editor poses as one who is simply "enforcing verifiability." If no other editor wanders by to add the cites, the data is eliminated and a second round of hostile cite-tagging ensues. Articles are stripped of their images with no justification, further reducing byte-count. Byte-count can drop 75% in a month or two. The article is then either tagged for deletion due to non-notability of the bio subject or it is redirected or merged to another page. If it is redirected, none of the data on the page is carried over to the new page -- it is simply effaced. The same happens when a merge is made -- the small amount of remaining data left after effacement (1,00 bytes or so) is not carried into the page into which the merge is made. Since this is a gradual process, it is very difficult to document, but i suggest that anyone interested in how this tchnique has been applied should start by checking the page for
2124:
this inhibitory practice is allowed to continue unabated, Knowledge (XXG) will be left behind for all contended zones of inquiry and become an encyclopedia featuring only 'solid' topics such as are supported by the data from natural sciences and conventional, uncontested topics such as games, sports, and cuisine. Other wikis will then take up protected zones of coverage for the disputed topics, and we can only hope that what develops there will begin to influence the content of
Knowledge (XXG). Perhaps this lesser content, lesser coverage (by net result) quality to the information showcased is truly the interest and intention of those driving and supporting Knowledge (XXG)'s current pro-skeptic stance, but i don't it is sustainable as presently pursued and am taking steps to voice an objection to it in as clear a way as is possible before moving on to other wikis where my interests aren't impeded by those who are arrayed against me in cultural struggle.
2054:
topic 'pseudoscience' -- regardless of whether in fact its participants try to give the impression of being science; regardless of whether it falls into the same species of object, as compared to a supposed phenomenon, a set of techniques for achieving a supposed result, a list of those with whom the pseudoskeptic disagrees such as occultists, or some theoretical principle or platform with which the skeptic disagrees -- which earns the skeptic the prefix 'pseudo', and discloses in part the hegemonic character of their activities. Another important indicator of this character is the haphazard, or worse, strictly inconsistent application of skeptical analyses and challenges (so as to reveal some of the favouritism or bias being brought to bear in this application), disclosing for the careful observer the factional identity of those issuing the challenges and those to whom they are being issued (note the comparison mentioned by
2373:...by analogy we have habitual abusers of science, and we label their practice "pseudoscience," and those who behave this way are usually called "pseudoscientists," and CSICOP publications often shorten this to the term "pseudos." A class of people certainly exists who practice fake science, facades of science with a corrupt core, science in name only. They need a name! They have one: "pseudoscientists." But sometimes "pseudoscientist" is used as a slur. Does this mean that we should remove "pseudoscience" from WP? Of course not. It's use as a slur has no effect on its more clinical uses and definition. So then Truzzi attached a name to a similar but opposite problem: people who call themselves Skeptic, but are irrational and unscientific; skeptics in name only. .... --Wjbeaty 01:48, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
1505:/treaty and as used by the agreements and bodies governing them. Similarly the Bosporus and Straits of Hormuz are "international waterways". They are not "transnational waterways", they are waterways where more than one nation has an interest and/or all are specified as having rights; ditto the term in relation to the American perspective on the Northwest Passage, and various American calls over hte years to declare the ] (BC portion only) as "international waters". All references I've seen to commissions and treaties and policies regarding the Rhine and Danube and so on have said "international rivers", in the same sort of construction as "heritage river" or "wild and scenic rivers" - it's a category of river
2087:, rather than a strict critical standard applied across the broad spectrum of knowledge such that each topical zone becomes a battleground of empirical vs non-empirical viewpoints, perspectives, and values. For some of the same reasons mentioned in this paragraph it is very unlikely that sufficient and convincing reference will be brought to bear in the defense of the assertion of pseudoskepticism being a hegemonic cultural attempt, and the best that might be attempted here is a reasoned argument disclosing for the interested reader the evident facets of the struggle which may be interpreted as such a hegemonic attempt on the part of particular cultural factions in pursuit of hegemony.
3504:. That said, if there was some independent sources which categorize topics as being "Targets of Pseudoskepticism", then perhaps this category could remain here. However, I have not seen such sources presented here as of yet. Therefore, the criteria for inclusion is way too subjective and easily abused. I don't think that Knowledge (XXG) should be creating categories which don't exist outside of Knowledge (XXG) (unless it is a Knowledge (XXG)-specific topic). If it is any consolation to Self-ref, I agree that Category:New_Age should not be categorized as "Pseudoscience". There is really no justification for this per
1353:; what I mean is that "international waters" as that term is normally used refers to the oceanic expanse beyond the 3, 12 or 200 mile limit (actually the 200 mile limit tends to be for bottom/undersea resources etc, what hte distinction between the 3 and 12 is I've forgotten). There's no ambiguity at all in the term, except for the exclusion of (fresh) waters which have or form boundaries; it's a different context than "international rivers", i.e. in the meaning of "international" - re the rivers it's governed between and as part of nation(-states), whereas "international waters" are waters in which no nation has
2782:, and note that one page (a page on a book the author wrote) had at that point already been deleted and that in order to even learn what was there, i will have to find an admin who will give me a copy of the version of the page when it was at its highest byte-count. (I am not saying that the missing "Master Key System" page is notable, only that it was deleted without being merged into the author's page, and then the author's page was slowly, incrementally cut from 4,000 bytes to 1,000 bytes, and then tagged for non-notability -- so i am very curious about that deleted page, as you can imagine.)
1153:. Only when I began populating this category (just to see how many more I could addâthirty-two so far) did I become aware that a naming dispute exists for at least half of them, so if nothing else the category would be a helpful as a watchlist for page-move wars. No, seriously I like the idea of getting a better sense of how many we have (maybe 250-300 existing articles?) and how many we will have, then deciding how to sub-divide it. I might also work on Foo-Bar border articles/categories to see how they should fit into this picture. â
2778:. Both were New Thought authors. You will need to read the HISTORY of each page for the byte-count numbers. Watch them gow and then gradually shrink. Note the names of the editors making the shrinkages. If you wish, track them back to their contributor pages. Look where they are editing. Then, also, if you have time, read the talk pages for the two biographies. You will find some evidences there of how other editors, now alerted to the technique of effacement and deletion, are trying to combat the pseudoskeptics. Here is
2737:. The strongest argument in favour of it is that it is USEFUL, in that those who wish to locate such pages quickly could do so. It could be a good tool to help Knowledge (XXG) editors and admins come to grips with the deliberate (and so-far condoned) campaign of effacement and deletion of biography pages about authors who have written on these topics (see below), and the deliberate campaign of false-branding of articles on spiritual and folkloric topics as "pseudoscience." (see below):
1514:
even beyond the usage from international law , which applies to the majority of border-spanning rivers (this is a litigation-happy world). "International rivers" is a term in widespread use; "transnational riers" is not. A trans-national river would include the
Saskatchewan system, or the Amazon or Volga or Yangtze or Ganges, but only in a descriptive sense; unless you can show me lots of examples of its usage vs the number of examples of "international river" you'll find.
2577:
pseudoscience. But if professional researchers in academia decide to investigate a controversial claimed anomaly (bigfoot, paranormal, etc.), and they rigorously adhere to the methods of science, then they're working outside of normal science (since science operates by replication and concensus.) They're doing "protoscience," science which is not yet replicated nor accepted by the scientific community. --Wjbeaty 20:06, Apr 27, 2005 (UTC)
1115:. However I for one agree that the category should include boundary rivers. The spirit here (I think) is to present the subset of rivers which are subject to agreements between countries, which to me is the only commonality of note. This category, as you note, will become crowded with every little stream that crosses a border, once we get Knowledge (XXG) finished with all human knowledge therein. I'm thinking already that
2664:, and any number of others). The greater majority of literate participants seem to be science-advocates and seem to want to employ the strategy of abusing the pejorative "pseudoscience" or "superstition" to eradicate consideration of, and fair attention to, those topics which i have consistently been identifying (some of which have now had the Category tags i applied removed from them since our discussion began).
2544:. So you're not only trying to have your way in a content dispute through improper use of categories, but this category also does not even accomplish what you believe it doesâthat something is a "target" of "pseudoskeptics" (whomever those people may be) is in no way mutually exclusive with it nevertheless being pseudoscience and a legitimate target of substantive skepticism.
1537:"Transnational river" is an invented term, a neologism; "international river" is a term long-established in international law and treaty wordings; it means a river where inter-national interests are at play, i.e. not because a river crosses a boundary, but because it as a resource and belongs to more than one nation. Of the North American rivers,
3077:
Integral thought Jewish
Renewal Large Group Awareness Training Neoshamanism Neotantra Neuro-linguistic programming New Age authors New Age female spiritual leaders New Age music New Age texts Otherkin Paranormal worlds and bodies Rainbow Family Reiki Transcendental Meditation Transpersonal psychology Vitalism New Age stubs
1484:(if that's a redlink, with a capital-h it's the old name for the Trans-Canada's predecessor until it became a federal responsibility, etc., and meaning "between provinces". And again addition to my original comments below below and newer ones above, the Niagara and St. Lawrence fall in the category/nomenclature of "international river"
3019:-- which are not "Pseudoscience" and should never have been classified as "Pseudoscience" in the first place -- are thus listed, held captive to the mocking whim of pseudoskeptics who think that their connection to rich, powerful, White scientific atheists gives them the right to disrespect and malign any religion they choose.
1064:, etc. or even to sub-categories for waterways forming or crossing each border (of which "international rivers" or whatever new name could become a second parent category). However, I'm not convinced that one massive (if fully utilized) category for "all rivers within or touching more than one country" would be useful. â
3130:
What is the corrective mechanism for a pejorative category marker being used by a majority at a knowledge-generation website such as
Knowledge (XXG)? Each time i am asking this question in a different way i am getting little to no response. If you can't beat them (the users of category markers to (in
2972:
If this were not so, the pseudoskeptics would allow members of these religions to absent their religions from the "Pseudoscience" category -- but they do not. They would allow practitioners and adherents of folkloric forms of divination to ask for independence from the "Pseudoscience" category -- but
2958:
It is my opinion that a pseudoskeptical faction of active and aggressive editors is waging a hegemonic culture war against small religions, folkloric customs, divination, mysticism, ccultism, and spirituality, that they are doing so by taking over and controlling the categories in which these diverse
2842:
The sub-clauses only function as agents upon the first clause ("claimed to be or made to appear scientific"). If this were not so, then anything in the world which "lacks scientific status" -- a cheeseburger, a dog, a piece of hand-woven cloth from
Equador -- could be classified as a "Pseudoscience."
2789:
Rather than write something new on this, i am going to copy-and-paste what i have previously written on this topic. Short version: It is prejudicial, bigoted, and biased to allow pseudo skeptics to brand religions and folkloric customs as "Peudoscience" when adherents and practitioners themselves may
1488:
they are governed by international agreements and authorities which define them as such; the St. Lawrence Seaway is a special case and may be technically bi-national rarther than international, though the "international" term is still used in reference to it; similarly in the agreements creating the,
1266:
is, while clumsy, more precise, as "boundary rivers" is sojmething also of an invented term, and the syntactial sense of the latter one, htough clumsier, is clearer. But again, in nearly all cases, "international rivers" is also going to apply; if anything rivers-that-form-boundaries are a subset of
1044:
I note that you used "international committee" rather than "transnational committee". Think about it. And as below, the IJC uses the term "international river"....as does the media. I think you'll find it's a standard geographic definition, i.e. in dictionaries of geographic terms. I used to have
3080:
You will note that, as part of their culture-war, pseudoskeptics have placed Angels, Jewish
Renewal, Otherkin, New Age female spiritual leaders, and New Age music (!) in the category of "pseudoscience" -- yet, to the best of my knowledge, none of these beings or cultural goups have falsely presented
2856:
The problem is that the pseudoskeptic group at
Knowledge (XXG) treats these three sub-clauses as independent clauses. They do this despite that fact that adherents and practitioners of the subjects labelled "pseudoscience" are not always claiming a scientific basis for their beliefs or, if they are,
2608:
then this becomes part of the epistemological territory captured and corrupted by insertion of negative views and critical voice, insufficiently justifying the application of the categorical tag by demonstrating its sufficient resemblance to science through its operations or claims. The compensatory
2338:
No, they are not. See my notes on "false branding" below. For example, the entire category of "New Age" is falsely branded as "Pseudoscience" when it is quite obviously a set of loosely related spiritual, religious, social, musical, artistic, and mystical concepts and cultural pheneomena. This is a
1357:
or territorial interests; both are terms used in legal convention and media, and they are not usually mutually inclusive, so while in an apparent-syntax way making one the subcat or another seems to make sense, it doesn't; ineternational rievrs are governed; international waters are governed only by
932:
It's rather obvious that landforms and water bodies that span areas of several sovereign nations warrant that special considerations be undertaken and collaborative administration of travel, environmental and conservation protection has to be observed. This has bearing on international relations and
2870:
Let us take
Spiritualism, for an example. Spiritualism is a religion. There have been claims made for it of a scientific nature in the narrow sense of the word, mostly in the past, and mostly by a very small minority of adherents. However, this entire religion, consisting of many denominations (see
2123:
outside of it will have entered into a presentation about the topic itself. This is not only obscuring of the presentation, but places additional hurdles and roadblocks beyond general citation before those interested in issuing coverage of these topics for the benefit of
Knowledge (XXG) readers. If
2118:
sake is not therefore justified, even though one might be able to cite scientific opinion as to the legitimacy of employing this pejorative term to the target within
Knowledge (XXG). At that point the NPOV is abandoned and the real struggle between the (sub)culture being described and the skeptical
2109:
of this category was to underscore the serious problem which pseudoskeptics are making for the integrity of the knowledge base that Knowledge (XXG) has the potential to and may become if some balance may be struck between those who are opposed to the topics of contention and those who are trying to
2082:
honestly, proceeding intuitively and without strictly empirical standards), and aren't likely to bring to bear any sort of representative defense against an establishment whose proponents are well-organized and interested in effacing them from cultural participation. What should be happening in the
2077:
science and its treatment of the objects or subjects of its evaluation in its respective sandboxes), the fact is that by and large the factions being targetted here by pseudoskeptics and 'picked off' with the unfair labelling practice employed is that they are disorganized, tend to be nonscientific
3032:
That's what it looks like to me, and i invite anyone who doesn't have a closed mind to click on the links to those small, mostly African American, Spiritualist groups and tell me why -- WHY? -- they are placed in the "Pseudoscience" category. Can you justify it? Really? If you can, tell me why. Or
2053:
Thirdly, fine and realistic skepticism of (especially) the categories mentioned in the above presentation should allow the topics themselves and the pages which describe them a safe haven from oversight by and contention with skeptics. It is this characteristic of labelling a category and page and
2035:
page, in Sections 1/2/3 prior to the CfD notice appearing there, with its Section 3 being an explanation of the use of the term 'hegemonic' when applied to the cultural struggle being engaged. By its aspects of pejorative dismissal and exclusivity in the arena of knowledge, incursion and dominance
1088:
Yes but there are many large countries whose borders which follow "imaginary" straight lines, and a lot of land-locked countries whose rivers obviously must drain somewhere else, but I digress. These estimates would be clearer if we had a clear consensus whether this category should include rivers
2888:
Then let us take New Age. This is an interfaith religio-cultural movement. Again, a small minority of adherents have made scientific claims, narrowly defined, for aspects of the movement, but the general woman-in-the-street adherent does not make scientific claims, merely thinking of herself as a
2643:
Incorrect. I have sufficient familiarity to the subject matter that i am aware (through review of CSICOP publications, scientific journals, online discussion of this precise topic in other contexts, as well as evaluation of the general make-up and conversation proportions engaged in WP) that this
2434:
does? If you accept the legitimacy of the (mis)use of that category's application to topics (/subcats/pages) which don't represent themselves as such, why not accept a compensatory categorical label which disputes the scientific character (presented) of the topic under consideration? If calls for
2013:
Preliminarily, and for clarity's sake as regards this nomination for deletion, the term 'hegemonic' is being used in a specific sense with respect to the extant cultural conflict. Whereas it is usually employed to describe "aggression or expansionism by large nations in an effort to achieve world
1513:
governed by wording othat uses "international rivers" or not under any international guarantees, treaties, or agreements, there's an argument that "international river" applies because of the "inter-" construction, meaning "between"; "trans" means "across", it's ultimately about that distinction,
1418:
I think I will now backpedal in the face of Skookum1's cogent arguments. International rivers is looking pretty good after all. It sounds a little funny, like the rivers are flying around on airplanes or something, but "international" is definitely a real word. If it's used in treaty language and
1073:
And I'm saying that the thing in common is that both will have political arrangements governing their use, things like water removals, pollution, fisheries will be general themes for all these rivers. I agree the category could become unwieldy when all minor rivers get added, but we can deal with
615:
Not all bands with albums should have an eponymous category. There should be some (more than in this case) albums, band member articles and possibly other articles before such a category is justigued. It's unfortunate that the child category isn't included in this nomination, however, it contains
3092:
The category of "Pseudoskeptic target" allows editors to easily patrol and maintain the articles thus tagged. It functions much like the extant "Antisemitism" categpory (also a negative) and helps those who support the inclusion in Knowledge (XXG) of articles on topics that are the targetted for
1253:
grammatically and in anti-neologistic senses is far preferable to "trans-boundary rivers", though of course you mean something different by the latter than you do by the former. I oppose the latter because it' necessarily going to include everyting that's in "international rivers" (which in the
1089:
which cross borders, or those which form borders, or both. If the category is going to exist it should include all of these. I mean at any given time, some of the water is in one country and some of it is in another country, regardless of the direction it is flowing. Can we agree on this much? â
2576:
Honest and unbiased people can decide, based on the meaning of "pseudoscience" and "protoscience." For example, if supporters of a certain belief embark on a search for supporting evidence while rejecting contrary evidence, yet they adopt the trappings of science... that's science in name only:
2566:
will be able to convince a consensus of editors that it should not be applied, so i am not going to try to do that. You are ignoring that it isn't just my taste that elicits my objection, but that i think it is being misapplied based on certain perverse criteria, and better and more supportable
3722:
There is no generally-accepted means to discriminate between real and pseudo-skeptics. The difference is whether a particular skeptic will accept genuine evidence if presented, and that question will often hang on whether a particular type of evidence is even valid. This category is just an
3076:
Here is another example of false branding: The entire New Age category is tagged as "pseudoscience" and if you go to that category, you will find the following topics: New Age Angels Astrology Atlantis Bermuda Triangle Channelling Consciousness studies Contactees Hollow Earth theory
1545:
styled "transnational rivers" (which by standard usage of "trans" to me means a river that crosses a nation, as in transcontinental railroad or Trans-Canada Highway). I'm pretty sure the Amur, Rhine, Elbe and Danube are also "international rivers" in treaty law/int'l agreements, likewise the
3088:
a group of scientists defending their discipline against false claims (the proper use of the term pseudoscience) but a goup of anti-theism, anti-spirituality, anti-mysticism, anti-folklore, and apparently anti-music pseudoskeptics falsely branding and thus targeting topics that they oppose.
875:
article and I wonder also if this is an applicable candidate for a new name. The only thing with that is that according to that article, this term does not automatically entail crossing of a national border, so even though the name sounds fine, its meaning is ambiguous if we are to trust the
1501:, though I'm more familiar with it from its activities re the Columbia, and also the North Pacific salmon fishery, also has jurisdictions in the Great Lakes and St. lawrence. In other woreds, you've given examples of rivers that are - I'm fairly sure - described as international rivers
3131:
this case) shift boundaries of their involvement for perturbing toward POV what should be NPOV), then why not join them (and use the same mechanism for (maintaining boundaries as a) defense)? It isn't criticism which is being repulsed, or attempted so, by these actions, but niggling
2944:
Why are the pseudoskeptics holding these topics hostage inside a category that exists only in the NEGATIVE, only to disrespect the items thus contained? Why is Knowledge (XXG) openly allowing a small coterie of editors to discredit and tarnish sincere religious and spiritual
913:
Why even have this category (either name)? What is so special about rivers crossing national borders that they deserve a category? From a European perspective, this is such a common characteristic that I wonder if anyone if anyone has used this as a topic of research.
2927:, in all its many branches. While some forms of divination are presented by some (but not all) adherents and practitioners as "scientific," others are virtually never given that appellation. In my 40-plus years of reading tea leaves, for instance, i have never heard
2812:
Pseudoscience is defined as a body of knowledge, methodology, belief, or practice that is claimed to be scientific or made to appear scientific, but does not adhere to the scientific method, lacks supporting evidence or plausibility, or otherwise lacks scientific
2857:
they may be using the word "science" in its broadest sense, meaning "knowledge," and not in the narrow sense of "an approved academic curriculum of study of the material world that utilizes the 'scientific method' of investigation into physical phenomena".
2339:
blatant abuse of the category "Pseudoscience." The use of the negative counter-category "Psudeoskeptic target" allows editors to patrol pages for such abuse. Compare with "Judaism" and its approved counter-category "Antisemitism." cat yronwode a.k.a. "64"
2506:
the situation which is longstanding. I started by removing the offending abuse of the category and was called a vandal by administrators whose User pages made it clear that they had a strong interest in the pseudoscience category. I responded by applying
193:
delete. As Black Falcon points out, nothing's really changed since the 2008 AUG 7 CfD. If an "activists" category is desired, it could still be created without prejudice towards it from this or the previous CfD. Such a category could be evaluated on its
2587:
I created this category as a means of defending against the incursion so described, because the encroachment is unidirectional. I have not been on the losing end of any of the discussions to which you refer because i wasn't a participant in them. I
2100:
Finally, and ultimately, we are not, by my estimation, dealing here merely with the consideration of a single category (Pseudoskeptic Target) and its substantiation or legitimacy based simply upon its cited references, though that is of course what
2540:, and you've been unable to convince a consensus of editors on those subjects that the category should not be applied. So you created this category as a counterbalance against those decisions you were on the losing end, making this in substance
2828:
This sentence contains an opening clause -- the "claimed to be or made to appear" clause -- and three dependent sub-clauses, the "does not adhere" sub-clause, the "lacks supporting evidence" sub-clause, and the "lacks scientific status"
356:
To be kept it needs to be an "activists" category, as only these are allowed for bio categories, as the escape the ban on categorization by opinion. I'm sympathetic to "anthropogenic" though "man-made" would be more widely understood.
2909:
NOT labeled a "Pseudoscience" at Knowledge (XXG), despite the fact that its motto is "The aim of religion, the method of science"? This is inconsistent, to say the least, and also a-historical, given the intertwined origins of the two
2072:
Fourth, specifically with regard to citation and reference, while it is quite true that the scientific community is more adept at documenting its progress and the references that it builds to justify this (one of the reasons that i
3307:. Regardless, as someone who has occasionally edited pseudoscience-related articles, I can say that inclusion in the category is generally a very difficult process requiring a broad consensus and high-quality references.
2058:
between treatment of the religion of Thelema which purports to employ the method of science toward the aims of religion (no attention) and that of Spiritualism which issue no contentions about being scientific at
2667:
It is therefore my interest not to attempt the futile move of badging Wikipedians, but to properly label an epistemological terrain of disputed character in part due to the allowed methodology prior of applying
2353:
No, they are not. They are at best protoscience, and usually not even that. They are generally phenomena and principles and techniques, etc., with which scientific skeptics (whose writings i sometimes enjoy)
3114:. The category seems to be an attempt to censor criticism. Of course critics need to maintain a NPOV and might even be over zealous, but a category isn't a corrective mechanism for any (perceived) abuses.
1098:
There are some subtle (and sometimes overt) differences in the politics when one country has sovereign control over either of the upstream or downstream portions of a river (salmon fishery management on the
1059:
I'm saying that a river partly in Canada and partly in the U.S. has nothing directly in common with a river partly in Romania and partly in Moldova. It would be fine to add such rivers to categories such as
1018:
an arbitrary boundary is no more of a commonality. Border-crossing rivers are notable precisely because of the differing geopolitical entities governing their use. In fact, Canada and the US have a whole
3574:
As per WP:POINT. The contents of this category (as far as I can tell from a quick glance) already should be adequately covered by Category:Pseudoscience (noting that this category is often abused). --
3342:
category should be able to repulse it. When a majority effectively controls where the category markers are to be placed, then the POV of critical, pro-science factions gains ground where it has no call.
1509:
and as used by governments and media and researc hers. it's not for Wikipedians to go making up new names, or new ways of redfining terms in current use. If there are border-crossing rivers that are
3701:
I agree with Filll. This category is just plain ludicrous, but I won't go into more detail because we are forbidden from discussing such things on Knowledge (XXG) by the political correctness police.
2468:â a compelling argument for keeping this category. I don't have any opinion about the pseudoscience category at this time, but I don't accept any of the premises you seem to be operating from here.
42:
37:
3299:'s own admission, "the sense of it is as a response to the overall abuse of the Category:Pseudoscience". In other words, the reason to keep this category is because of a perceived abuse of
3265:. Based on a misunderstanding of the fact that inclusion of verifiable sources stating that a subject is considered pseudoscience is normal policy, and a misunderstanding of the meaning of
2245:
3380:. This category is just plain ludicrous. I would go into more detail, but really we are forbidden from discussing such things on Knowledge (XXG) by the political correctness police here.--
994:
Rivers of Austria | Rivers of Bulgaria | Rivers of Croatia | Rivers of Germany | Rivers of Hungary | Rivers of Moldova | Rivers of Romania | Rivers of Slovakia | Rivers of Ukraine | etc.
313:
or similar, per the close of the August debate, removing the 2 non-biogs & the 3 US radio people, who are not especially active in nor notable because of global warming controversy.
2843:
Obviously this is not the case, because these items (and a million others), are never thought of as Pseudosciences because they were never "claimed to be or made to appear scientific."
2242:
240:
3500:- While I agree that Category:Pseudoscience is often time abused by POV-pushers, I don't think that this is the solution. Category:Pseudoscience should only be applied to a topic per
2592:
see that were i to have been involved with them i would indeed have been on what you are calling the losing side. What i am attempting to do here is forge a means of extending off of
1027:. This is certainly a category one might wish to follow as a line of research. It can be deduced from multiple "Rivers of..." categories, but there is no way to find that in advance.
2114:
categories and topics which may be labelled 'pseudoscience' and castigated by the scientific establishment for sociopolitical purposes. The misuse of this term in application for
3003:, i cannot help but note that this enforced classification of religions as "pseudo-somethings" is abhorrent and grossly offensive. Let me tell you how horrific it appears to me.
2541:
255:; however, if renamed, the category will most likely become a dumping grounds for any article about a concept, organisation, object, or person related to global warming. â
3007:
is not "Pseudochristianity" and no one at Knowledge (XXG) would allow it to be listed as such -- but at the same time, Spiritualism and its attendent organizations like
2959:
socio-cultural topics appear at Knowledge (XXG), and that this is being done with the full knowledge and encouragement of Knowledge (XXG) administrators and bureaucrats.
371:
If renamed, I think it's important to include "anthropogenic" (I prefer it over "man-made"), but it's equally important to include "theory" or something to that effect.
1024:
988:
Being within more than one arbitrary political boundary is not a defining commonality among unrelated rivers, lakes, or any other natural geographic feature. That the
2905:
is listed as "Pseudoscience" at Knowledge (XXG), which makes some sense, as this religion does curently present itself as "science" based. But why is the religion of
1476:(from below), "transnational" is a neologism, it also means "across (a/the) nation" in th same way "transcontinental" means "across (a/the) country", likewise as in
1337:
While in abstract terms, i.e. pure definition, "international rivers" is a subset of "international waters", but the conventional usage of the latter refers to the
2252:, my interests in refining the use of the Pseudoscience cat were met with resistance, and so i took up a compensatory identification with this category identifier.
871:. I just created the current category, but as I was populating it I thought that perhaps a better name would be what is being proposed. Then I stumbled across the
2439:
have a valuable referent but is being extended beyond this referential application to infringe hegemonically), and identifying the ground of contention (with the
1123:, and such-like will be needed to make this manageable. But one step at a time often works well. Anyway, yes I think the category should include boundary rivers.
2648:
beyond Knowledge (XXG) users. These users are representative of a cultural struggle about knowledge that is ongoing in the media, in online forums of discourse
894:
which has not been nominated, but that category inspired me to create the current category and the results of this discussion may have a bearing on that one. __
1074:
that once it is fully assembled. And there may be fewer such rivers than you think, countries tend to be divided by single rivers or high points of ground.
3773:
Then someone should open a discussion about that category. Creation of one category as a means of discussing alleged problems with another category is
21:
2499:
to call attention to this and a tag that legitimately calls attention to the zone that the pseudoskeptics are attempting to unjustifiably efface.
1200:- and I believe it's a point-ful category, as outlined just above. Boundary-crossing rivers are the source of perennial (and notable) disputes.
2408:, apparently) may be a "target" of "pseudoskeptics" is not defining of that topic. We shouldn't categorize any subject by who criticizes it.
1730:
1690:
1671:
1618:
1023:
just for this. In the Middle East also, a water-poor area, international (dis-)agreements on water use are notable. And of course, there's the
2111:
17:
1663:
Uncontrolled criteria category. Appears to be just a fan favourite list that overlaps with existing parent categories for heavy metal music.
2362:"pseudosciences" by the hyper-skeptical or irrational/unscientific science proponents. Here's a helpful discernment explanation again from
1290:. This is certainly a relevant class of rivers. It is as, if not more, significant a category as any of the multitudinous subcategories of
2584:
Distinguishing these categories (pseudoscience and protoscience) is not being adequately achieved by those employing it as a marking tool.
292:
the material, feel free to do so, but it should be done before the CfD closes. Listification should not be a requirement of the close.
2435:
deletion of pseudoscience category don't work (and there is no reason to think that they should or that they will, primarily because it
343:
3097:
3060:
2872:
2340:
310:
2652:, more importantly to me, in zones where the boundaries of knowledge are in part being exemplified and socially "defined" (e.g. the
1835:
1800:
1784:
1120:
2875:) is unfairly labelled a Pseudoscience at Knowledge (XXG). This is grossly unfair and prejudicial to the religion of Spiritualism.
3416:
3199:
1490:
2014:
domination" (over smaller ones) (ref: dictionary.com), in this instance it is describing aggression and expansion/exclusion of
457:
2515:
2461:
1635:
1498:
2295:
labelling nomenclature for those doing the plastering of 'pseudoscience' all over that with which they contend would be the
1643:
465:
215:
2889:"New Ager" or "New Age pracititoner." Labelling her beliefs a "Pseudoscience" is inaccurate, prejudicial, and discourteous.
1985:
This category has no references to back up the claims it makes abouy pseudoskepticism being a hegemonic cultural attempt!
1263:
1551:
These are helpful and convincing points, in my opinion. I'd support a keep of the current name based on this information.
1061:
854:
448:
3304:
248:
3786:
3767:
3749:
3732:
3714:
3693:
3676:
3672:
3659:
3642:
3626:
3602:
3581:
3566:
3550:
3533:
3516:
3492:
3471:
3447:
3422:
3397:
3368:
3351:
3322:
3287:
3257:
3224:
3205:
3178:
3148:
3123:
3105:
2717:
2681:
2636:
2627:
What you seem to be saying is that the pseudoskeptics to whom your category refers are Knowledge (XXG) users, correct?
2622:
2553:
2531:
2477:
2452:
2417:
2384:
2348:
2329:
2312:
2282:
2261:
2228:
2208:
2186:
2160:
2133:
2002:
1957:
1932:
1868:
1855:
1824:
1792:
1711:
1626:
1555:
1523:
1462:
1445:
1428:
1413:
1391:
1367:
1328:
1305:
1276:
1239:
1225:
1174:
1157:
1132:
1093:
1083:
1068:
1054:
1036:
1005:
981:
963:
942:
923:
903:
891:
885:
844:
785:
764:
741:
684:
625:
607:
592:
575:
554:
536:
511:
492:
442:
381:
366:
351:
322:
301:
280:
261:
223:
200:
140:
123:
93:
3802:
2604:
topics/subjects etc. which are not properly examples. If a portion of WP is plastered by pseudoskeptics as part of the
1910:
1886:
1770:
1746:
1597:
1573:
1341:, i.e. what are national waters vs international waters. Lakes tend to have actual boundaries, as on the Great Lakes,
825:
801:
665:
641:
423:
399:
206:
180:
156:
74:
3459:
This category has way too many inherent assumptions on a variety of levels to be of any use. (Filll is a wise man).
3441:
3408:
3251:
3191:
3046:
Please feel free to carry this material to any other discussion page at Knowledge (XXG) where it might be appropriate.
2511:
deriving from an extant refusal page deriving from Truzzi and others and burgeoning as part of this cultural struggle.
528:
2931:"claimed to be or made to appear scientific," yet it is still classified at Knowledge (XXG) as a "Pseudscience." WHY?
2196:
2148:
1382:
951:
3488:
2730:
2726:
2610:
2440:
1965:
1948:
1924:
1378:
1291:
858:
699:
252:
1940:
1338:
3708:
1804:
239:
As a repository for biographical articles, this category is essentially circumvents the consensus reached in the
3801:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a
1885:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a
1745:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a
1572:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a
1494:
800:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a
640:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a
398:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a
155:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a
3745:
3244:
viewpoints of the category members, purporting them to be victims of a "hegemonic" conspiracy to silence them.
1909:
Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a
1843:
1839:
1769:
Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a
1596:
Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a
1045:
the Penguin/Pelican but don't have it for reference; it may even be in the OED...indeed, you'd expect it to be.
824:
Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a
664:
Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a
422:
Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a
179:
Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a
105:
73:
Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a
2271:
1864:, so something's gotta give here. "Fooian people" has been more common than "Fooians" in my own experience. â
1250:
1116:
690:
519:
I am always in favor of artist categories to contain categories like "X albums," "X members," and "X songs." â
1481:
3782:
3728:
3668:
3389:
2567:
criteria are adequately described by text such as has occasionally been posted within the discussion in the
1865:
1726:
1170:
1154:
1090:
1065:
1002:
707:
604:
532:
347:
3757:
3093:
false branding and/or effacement-deletion by pseudoskeptics with a convenient database management system.
2613:
would make the zone of contention more plain and allow a visible marker for that contested cultural divide.
3635:
3546:
3529:
3335:
3314:
3233:
3101:
3064:
2669:
2605:
2597:
2559:
2537:
2431:
2344:
2291:
You haven't really provided a better solution for the problem here. I think that an extension of Truzzi's
2238:
1267:
international rivers in almost all cases I can think of; maybe I'm wrong, but the exceptions will be rare.
1259:
773:
3689:
3484:
3270:
2734:
2714:
2568:
2363:
297:
3593:
activity. (At very least rename to meet normal captilization if by some gasp consensus is overturned.--
3685:
3764:
3702:
3639:
3623:
3514:
3509:
3135:
which should be the primary concern of all Wikipedians (the integrity of the knowledge, not just the
3119:
1477:
1316:
1209:
978:
872:
3741:
1998:
1990:
1929:
1789:
1668:
1664:
1552:
1302:
681:
486:
439:
197:
134:
90:
3615:
3273:. This category is a part of one editor's hegemonic cultural attempt to edit war changes here. --
3241:
101:
3778:
3724:
3598:
3347:
3144:
2677:
2618:
2527:
2448:
2380:
2308:
2257:
2249:
2204:
2182:
2129:
2055:
2032:
1722:
1705:
1519:
1424:
1409:
1363:
1272:
1221:
1195:
1166:
1128:
1079:
1050:
1032:
760:
571:
3774:
3611:
3590:
3480:
3237:
3187:
2672:
to these same categories. 'What is sauce for the goose is,' as they say, 'sauce for the gander.'
2519:
2465:
1541:
are legally designated, by treaty or domestic legislation, "international rivers", but they are
3338:
can be used to hegemonically provide incursions upon topics where it has no call, some kind of
2083:
topical areas of coverage within Knowledge (XXG) are citations from the authorities within the
3542:
3525:
3434:
strictly speaking, the 'keep's have come from a husband and wife couple, not "the same user".
3308:
2775:
2632:
2549:
2473:
2413:
2325:
2278:
2224:
1820:
1614:
1458:
1441:
1387:
1324:
737:
588:
377:
362:
318:
276:
257:
119:
3505:
3501:
3403:
2491:--'Other stuff exists': it isn't just that other stuff (in this case Category:Pseudoscience)
3339:
3282:
3266:
3008:
2710:
2593:
2496:
2495:
but that it is being used in a particular way. The remediating and compensatory response is
2292:
2156:
2037:
1851:
1686:
781:
550:
507:
293:
1546:
Tigris-Euphrates and Jordan...ditto the Tsangpo/Brahmaputra and Mekong....I don't think you
1419:
would be the term most English-speakers would recognize, that's what we should use, right?
3619:
3385:
3115:
2771:
2177:
is a fine idea, no objections if it is deemed appropriate form. Thanks for the suggestion.
950:
per information provided by Skookum1. I do still however wish to explore the viability of
524:
2542:
Category:Articles categorized as pseudo-science that User:Self-ref believes should not be
1695:
And don't forget ill-punctuated (unless, of course, this is for groups belonging to 80).
752:
342:. A category for all these critics is good regardless of one's viewpoint on the issue.
2733:. The strongest argument against it is that it is a negative -- but see, for comparison
3159:
2404:, even setting aside the host of POV and verifiability problems, that a topic (such as
2299:
solution, but of course this will not be workable, so identifying that with which they
1994:
1986:
1235:
1104:
959:
938:
919:
899:
881:
621:
3594:
3575:
3460:
3343:
3326:
3296:
3220:
3140:
2673:
2614:
2523:
2444:
2376:
2304:
2253:
2200:
2178:
2125:
1700:
1515:
1420:
1405:
1401:
1359:
1350:
1298:
1268:
1217:
1213:
1191:
1124:
1112:
1075:
1046:
1028:
756:
567:
566:- unnecessary eponymous overcategorization with a dearth of material to warrant it.
113:
To match the main article and avoid confusion with other common uses of the acronym
2928:
2628:
2545:
2469:
2409:
2322:
2275:
2221:
1816:
1454:
1437:
1342:
1320:
992:
passes through several countries can already be deduced from the other categories:
728:
584:
358:
314:
272:
3016:
2729:(and Occuli is correct, in proper Knowledge (XXG) form it should have been titled
2031:
Secondly, the argument for keeping this category is, initially, to be found at my
485:
Overly narrow category. Only categorizes the main band article and their albums.
2443:) don't work, what do you suggest as an alternative means of stemming this abuse?
375:
would include people who seek to reduce man-made emissions of greenhouse gases. â
3559:
3361:
3275:
2902:
2558:
You are quite correct that i don't like the inclusion of particular subjects to
2152:
1847:
1682:
1100:
933:
for these reasons I see these hierarchies being justified in their existence. __
777:
546:
503:
2321:
The articles in the pseudoscience category are pseudoscience, like it or not.
1212:
doesn't actually lie solely on US territory on any part of its course, and the
3437:
3381:
3247:
2924:
2748:
The deliberate campaign of effacement and deletion of pages by pseudo-skeptics
520:
288:
per last discussion and the discussion pointed out above. If anyone wants to
2018:
factions which are vying with one another outside and within Knowledge (XXG).
3656:
3652:
3190:. The comment above about all new age music being tagged is also incorrect.
2405:
1861:
1231:
1108:
955:
934:
915:
895:
877:
841:
617:
271:
per nom; it's an article masquerading as a category, hence dumping ground.
2779:
1903:
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories.
1763:
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories.
1590:
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories.
818:
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories.
658:
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories.
416:
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories.
173:
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories.
67:
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories.
3763:
Gotta run, but I suggest we split this conversation into two... Regards,
3215:
2790:
not have ever made claims of using the "scientific method." Long version:
1346:
2767:
2763:
2759:
2755:
2751:
1301:'s comments below convinced me that the current name is probably best.
3004:
2906:
2199:
based on the proper naming convention. Again thanks for the suggestion.
1400:
If the category will include rivers which form a boundary, such as the
2105:
discussion and strawpolling shall determine. The point in part of the
772:- the 2 possible articles are already adjacent in the parent category
1815:, merge either way - no opinion - significant overlap of categories.
989:
727:
Category contains one article only, with little scope for expansion.
2502:--'Disruption to illustrate a point': i was trying to find a way to
1230:
I think that is something we will have to deal with subsequently. __
616:
only one item and closing admin may venture to delete it as well. __
545:
I would agree if there were songs and band members with articles.
2514:
Therefore i think i have adequately refuted your assertions that
2805:
Pseudoscience category as a weapon in the hegemonic culture wars
1311:
No strong opinion as to whether it should be kept, but if kept
601:
to avoid mis-use based on a literal interpretation of the title
3081:
themselves or their activities as "science" or "scientific."
3000:
1497:
which govern the Great Lakes and Seway aetc., and I think the
1020:
977:, and the existence of the category. Seems useful. Regards,
114:
2237:
the sense of it is as a response to the overall abuse of the
3012:
338:. No one doubts that there is warming, just whether it is
3723:
invitation to POV-wars and is harmful to Knowledge (XXG).
3013:
Pentecostal Spiritual Assemblies of Christ - International
502:- one album, 2 articles in all, no need for 2 categories.
3795:
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion.
2661:
2036:
for attention and throughput, the hegemonic character of
1879:
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion.
1739:
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion.
1566:
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion.
794:
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion.
634:
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion.
392:
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion.
149:
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion.
2809:
In Knowledge (XXG), Pseudoscience is defined like this:
2270:
So this category exists because of "sour grapes"? Your
1111:) as opposed to use of a fully shared resource like the
2657:
2536:
You don't like the inclusion of particular subjects in
2248:
and whose abuse is becoming more and more apparent. As
2241:, which has been nominated for deletion unsuccessfully
1973:
1969:
1961:
1953:
1651:
1647:
1639:
1631:
1249:(I'm lost on this page so will make this comment here)
715:
711:
703:
695:
473:
469:
461:
453:
231:
227:
219:
211:
1258:
include virtually every little stream, because of the
755:
category with only one possible article to expand it.
3096:
Again, thanks for reading. cat yronwode a.k.a. "64"
1385:? Both were mentioned in the nomination statement. â
3805:). No further edits should be made to this section.
1913:). No further edits should be made to this section.
1889:). No further edits should be made to this section.
1773:). No further edits should be made to this section.
1749:). No further edits should be made to this section.
1600:). No further edits should be made to this section.
1576:). No further edits should be made to this section.
828:). No further edits should be made to this section.
804:). No further edits should be made to this section.
668:). No further edits should be made to this section.
644:). No further edits should be made to this section.
426:). No further edits should be made to this section.
402:). No further edits should be made to this section.
183:). No further edits should be made to this section.
159:). No further edits should be made to this section.
77:). No further edits should be made to this section.
2653:
1681:â ill-spelt, ill-parented, ill-conceived, empty.
1296:I agree that the proposed name is clearer/better.
3269:, which is being used as a pejorative label for
1025:Pulp mill conflict between Argentina and Uruguay
311:Category:Activists against Global warming theory
2656:, various computer network user boards such as
1404:, then Transnational would seem to make sense.
2787:False-branding of articles as "Pseudoscience":
1358:the Law of the Sea and its various colloraies.
1121:Category:International rivers in North America
373:Activists against anthropogenic global warming
133:per nom. Can't think of anything else to say.
3186:Absolute nonsense category, trying to make a
3059:Thanks for reading. cat yronwode a.k.a. "64"
1216:doesn't flow through any one country at all.
1204:though - will this category include boundary-
8:
2750:: This is easily demonstrated. See evidence
3232:appears to be simply a POV-'rebranding' of
603:due to the lack of band-member articles. â
251:(a very, very distant 2nd choice) to match
3775:disrupting Knowledge (XXG) to make a point
2486:I do appreciate your criticism. That said:
3017:Metropolitan Spiritual Churches of Christ
1190:I think Skookum1 is probably right here.
18:Knowledge (XXG):Categories for discussion
2709:questionable categories on the subject.
2170:for the above-mentioned reasons, though
1860:Incidentally the lead article is titled
3407:The only keeps are from the same user.
3213:inherently POV, and confusing as well.
2220:. The category makes no sense to me.
3558:Knowledge (XXG) is not a battleground.
3618:being given to mainstream views. . .
3614:attack using neologisms to disparage
3360:in an encyclopedia such as wikipedia.
2110:represent in a fair light and from a
1264:Category:Rivers which form boundaries
1165:-- this seems a pointless category.
7:
2571:article itself, such as by Wjbeaty:
1582:
1436:I support "transnational" as well.
1062:Category:Canada-United States border
449:Category:Bastard Sons of Johnny Cash
409:Category:Bastard Sons of Johnny Cash
3356:"critical, pro-science" has a call
2522:is applicable here. (oops unsigned)
249:Category:Global warming controversy
3325:(I was invited to comment here by
3009:Universal Hagar's Spiritual Church
2873:List of Spiritualist organizations
1627:Category:80's Metal muiscal groups
1583:Category:80's Metal muiscal groups
28:
2600:has forged a weapon of incursion
1920:The result of the discussion was:
1836:Category:Lists of Romanian people
1801:Category:Lists of Romanian people
1785:Category:Lists of Romanian people
1780:The result of the discussion was:
1756:Category:Lists of Romanian people
1607:The result of the discussion was:
1294:for the reasons meco points out.
835:The result of the discussion was:
675:The result of the discussion was:
433:The result of the discussion was:
207:Category:Global warming criticism
190:The result of the discussion was:
166:Category:Global warming criticism
84:The result of the discussion was:
3589:- Blatant attempt at disruptive
2358:, and they are being calumnized
1993:) 10:44, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
1491:Saint Lawrence Seaway Commission
1377:Which title is being supported:
1198:) 04:36, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
3344:-- self-ref (nagasiva yronwode)
3141:-- self-ref (nagasiva yronwode)
3067:) 07:39, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
2780:one sample of such a discussion
2674:-- self-ref (nagasiva yronwode)
2615:-- self-ref (nagasiva yronwode)
2524:-- self-ref (nagasiva yronwode)
2445:-- self-ref (nagasiva yronwode)
2377:-- self-ref (nagasiva yronwode)
2305:-- self-ref (nagasiva yronwode)
2254:-- self-ref (nagasiva yronwode)
2201:-- self-ref (nagasiva yronwode)
2179:-- self-ref (nagasiva yronwode)
2126:-- self-ref (nagasiva yronwode)
1315:, possibility of ambiguity per
2711:Chris Cunningham (not at work)
2197:Category:Pseudoskeptic targets
2149:Category:Pseudoskeptic targets
2085:respective fields of endeavour
1933:06:11, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
1793:06:17, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
1619:06:15, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
1556:22:17, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
1524:03:12, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
1499:International Joint Commission
1463:16:55, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
1446:17:11, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
1429:04:18, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
1414:17:02, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
1392:15:48, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
1383:Category:Trans-boundary rivers
1368:00:43, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
1329:14:17, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
1306:06:33, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
1277:00:43, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
1158:16:44, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
1133:04:58, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
1103:, meltwater management on the
1094:18:21, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
1084:18:00, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
1069:17:27, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
1055:03:17, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
964:06:59, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
952:Category:Trans-boundary rivers
845:01:25, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
685:05:32, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
443:06:20, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
201:06:25, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
94:06:28, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
1:
3787:21:26, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
3768:21:01, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
3750:15:42, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
3733:15:11, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
3715:13:59, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
3694:11:53, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
3677:18:05, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
3660:13:46, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
3643:12:24, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
3627:09:14, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
3603:08:44, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
3582:08:02, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
3567:05:10, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
3551:00:25, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
3534:23:41, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
3517:22:56, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
3493:21:47, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
3472:21:34, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
3448:08:33, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
3423:21:17, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
3398:21:13, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
3369:10:25, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
3352:21:22, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
3334:Previously explained. If the
3323:20:29, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
3288:19:35, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
3258:19:19, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
3225:18:49, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
3206:18:37, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
3179:18:35, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
3158:. This is complete nonsense.
3149:21:10, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
3124:18:33, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
3106:17:04, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
2731:Category:Pseudoskeptic target
2727:Category:Pseudoskeptic Target
2725:I am not happy with the name
2718:15:33, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
2682:20:57, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
2637:20:33, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
2623:20:22, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
2611:Category:Pseudoskeptic target
2554:18:17, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
2532:17:58, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
2478:15:59, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
2453:15:37, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
2441:Category:Pseudoskeptic Target
2418:15:28, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
2385:20:40, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
2349:17:48, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
2330:17:30, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
2313:17:02, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
2303:seems a suitable alternative.
2283:15:45, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
2262:14:56, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
2229:14:46, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
2209:16:55, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
2187:13:28, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
2161:12:17, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
2134:13:28, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
2003:10:44, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
1949:Category:Pseudoskeptic Target
1925:Category:Pseudoskeptic Target
1896:Category:Pseudoskeptic Target
1869:15:50, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
1856:13:25, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
1825:12:30, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
1731:00:42, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
1712:23:04, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
1691:13:28, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
1672:12:39, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
1489:and in language used by, the
1379:Category:Transnational rivers
1240:21:55, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
1226:13:46, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
1175:22:35, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
1037:13:38, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
1006:14:47, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
982:12:29, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
943:16:29, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
924:14:21, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
904:14:06, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
886:13:57, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
876:information in that article.
859:Category:Transnational rivers
855:Category:International rivers
811:Category:International rivers
786:13:10, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
765:21:06, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
742:15:22, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
626:22:01, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
608:14:28, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
593:12:52, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
576:21:05, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
555:23:22, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
537:20:15, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
512:17:56, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
493:17:09, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
382:16:03, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
367:23:17, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
352:09:39, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
323:18:23, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
302:21:49, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
281:21:32, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
262:19:18, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
141:14:19, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
124:19:35, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
30:
1941:categoryPseudoskeptic Target
1339:International Law of the Sea
1107:, irrigation removal on the
892:Category:International lakes
3084:What we are seeing here is
1805:Category:Lists of Romanians
1254:North American Can-US case
3822:
3303:category. This smacks of
1495:Boundary Waterss Agreement
1292:Category:Rivers by country
1208:rivers? For instance, the
253:Global warming controversy
247:(1st choice) or rename to
2274:with the other category?
1721:. Superfluous at best.
3798:Please do not modify it.
2078:(in many cases far more
1906:Please do not modify it.
1882:Please do not modify it.
1844:Category:Lists of people
1840:Category:Romanian people
1766:Please do not modify it.
1742:Please do not modify it.
1593:Please do not modify it.
1569:Please do not modify it.
1251:Category:Boundary rivers
1188:as International rivers
1117:Category:Boundary rivers
1014:By that argument, being
821:Please do not modify it.
797:Please do not modify it.
691:Category:Black Christmas
661:Please do not modify it.
651:Category:Black Christmas
637:Please do not modify it.
419:Please do not modify it.
395:Please do not modify it.
176:Please do not modify it.
152:Please do not modify it.
106:Category:ALF (TV series)
70:Please do not modify it.
2562:. I don't think that i
1482:Interprovincial highway
1262:and other agreements);
1183:to Transnational rivers
1021:international committee
3636:Category:Pseudoscience
3336:Category:Pseudoscience
3234:Category:Pseudoscience
3074:
3033:better yet, tell THEM.
2670:Category:Pseudoscience
2606:Category:Pseudoscience
2598:Category:Pseudoscience
2596:in like manner to how
2579:
2560:Category:Pseudoscience
2538:Category:Pseudoscience
2432:Category:Pseudoscience
2375:
2239:Category:Pseudoscience
1983:Nominator's rationale:
1810:Nominator's rationale:
1661:Nominator's rationale:
1260:Boundary Waters Treaty
1149:I've changed my mind.
864:Nominator's rationale:
774:Category:Slasher films
725:Nominator's rationale:
483:Nominator's rationale:
111:Nominator's rationale:
3758:categoryPseudoscience
2797:
2735:Category:Antisemitism
2574:
2371:
2364:Talk:Pseudoskepticism
1478:Trans-Canada Highway
1317:international waters
1210:Saint Lawrence River
873:Trans-boundary river
3305:WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS
3271:scientific skeptics
3236:or similar, giving
3669:Steven J. Anderson
3479:as a violation of
491:and his otters â˘
139:and his otters â˘
3579:
3421:
3393:
3204:
2776:Charles F. Haanel
2774:and the page for
1842:(and majority in
1708:
1535:Oppose/keep as-is
1199:
51:
50:
3813:
3800:
3740:. bad category.
3711:
3705:
3577:
3563:
3485:ScienceApologist
3469:
3466:
3463:
3446:
3419:
3415:
3413:
3394:
3391:
3365:
3319:
3318:
3311:
3267:pseudoskepticism
3256:
3202:
3198:
3196:
3184:(speedy?) DELETE
3176:
3175:
3172:
3169:
3166:
3163:
2705:. We don't need
2594:pseudoskepticism
2569:Pseudoskepticism
2497:pseudoskepticism
2040:is self-evident.
2038:pseudoskepticism
1978:
1977:
1908:
1884:
1768:
1744:
1706:
1656:
1655:
1595:
1571:
1548:
1547:
1189:
852:Propose renaming
823:
799:
735:
720:
719:
663:
639:
489:
488:Ten Pound Hammer
478:
477:
421:
397:
236:
235:
178:
154:
137:
136:Ten Pound Hammer
99:Propose renaming
72:
47:
36:
31:
3821:
3820:
3816:
3815:
3814:
3812:
3811:
3810:
3809:
3803:deletion review
3796:
3761:
3709:
3704:Masterpiece2000
3703:
3667:- obviously. --
3561:
3541:per WP:POINT --
3467:
3464:
3461:
3444:
3435:
3417:
3409:
3390:
3363:
3340:Pseudoskeptical
3316:
3315:
3309:
3254:
3245:
3200:
3192:
3173:
3170:
3167:
3164:
3161:
3160:
2772:Wallace Wattles
2272:I don't like it
1951:
1947:
1944:
1930:Good Olâfactory
1911:deletion review
1904:
1898:
1893:
1887:deletion review
1880:
1798:Suggest merging
1790:Good Olâfactory
1771:deletion review
1764:
1758:
1753:
1747:deletion review
1740:
1629:
1625:
1598:deletion review
1591:
1585:
1580:
1574:deletion review
1567:
1553:Good Olâfactory
1303:Good Olâfactory
1151:Keep, no rename
826:deletion review
819:
813:
808:
802:deletion review
795:
729:
693:
689:
682:Good Olâfactory
666:deletion review
659:
653:
648:
642:deletion review
635:
487:
451:
447:
440:Good Olâfactory
424:deletion review
417:
411:
406:
400:deletion review
393:
209:
205:
198:Good Olâfactory
181:deletion review
174:
168:
163:
157:deletion review
150:
135:
91:Good Olâfactory
75:deletion review
68:
62:
57:
52:
45:
34:
26:
25:
24:
12:
11:
5:
3819:
3817:
3808:
3807:
3791:
3790:
3789:
3760:
3756:Problems with
3754:
3753:
3752:
3742:Wednesday Next
3735:
3717:
3696:
3679:
3662:
3653:hmm recruiting
3646:
3645:
3629:
3605:
3584:
3569:
3553:
3536:
3519:
3495:
3474:
3468:sch•
3462:•Jim
3453:
3452:
3451:
3450:
3440:
3426:
3425:
3400:
3374:
3373:
3372:
3371:
3331:
3330:
3290:
3260:
3250:
3240:weight to the
3227:
3208:
3181:
3152:
3151:
3127:
3126:
3073:
3072:
3071:
3070:
3069:
3068:
3052:
3051:
3050:
3049:
3048:
3047:
3039:
3038:
3037:
3036:
3035:
3034:
3025:
3024:
3023:
3022:
3021:
3020:
2992:
2991:
2990:
2989:
2988:
2987:
2979:
2978:
2977:
2976:
2975:
2974:
2965:
2964:
2963:
2962:
2961:
2960:
2951:
2950:
2949:
2948:
2947:
2946:
2937:
2936:
2935:
2934:
2933:
2932:
2916:
2915:
2914:
2913:
2912:
2911:
2895:
2894:
2893:
2892:
2891:
2890:
2881:
2880:
2879:
2878:
2877:
2876:
2863:
2862:
2861:
2860:
2859:
2858:
2849:
2848:
2847:
2846:
2845:
2844:
2835:
2834:
2833:
2832:
2831:
2830:
2821:
2820:
2819:
2818:
2817:
2816:
2815:
2814:
2807:
2796:
2795:
2794:
2793:
2792:
2791:
2783:
2739:
2738:
2720:
2699:
2698:
2697:
2696:
2695:
2694:
2693:
2692:
2691:
2690:
2689:
2688:
2687:
2686:
2685:
2684:
2665:
2585:
2582:
2581:
2580:
2564:or anyone else
2512:
2509:their standard
2500:
2489:
2488:
2487:
2481:
2480:
2456:
2455:
2421:
2420:
2398:
2397:
2396:
2395:
2394:
2393:
2392:
2391:
2390:
2389:
2388:
2387:
2368:
2367:
2351:
2333:
2332:
2316:
2315:
2286:
2285:
2265:
2264:
2232:
2231:
2214:
2213:
2212:
2211:
2190:
2189:
2164:
2163:
2141:
2140:
2139:
2138:
2137:
2136:
2093:
2092:
2091:
2090:
2089:
2088:
2065:
2064:
2063:
2062:
2061:
2060:
2046:
2045:
2044:
2043:
2042:
2041:
2024:
2023:
2022:
2021:
2020:
2019:
2006:
2005:
1980:
1979:
1943:
1939:Problems with
1937:
1936:
1935:
1916:
1915:
1899:
1897:
1894:
1892:
1891:
1875:
1874:
1873:
1872:
1871:
1828:
1827:
1807:
1795:
1776:
1775:
1759:
1757:
1754:
1752:
1751:
1735:
1734:
1733:
1716:
1715:
1714:
1675:
1674:
1669:speak politely
1658:
1657:
1622:
1621:
1603:
1602:
1586:
1584:
1581:
1579:
1578:
1562:
1561:
1560:
1559:
1558:
1531:
1530:
1529:
1528:
1527:
1526:
1467:
1466:
1465:
1433:
1432:
1431:
1395:
1394:
1372:
1371:
1370:
1313:support rename
1308:
1281:
1280:
1279:
1243:
1242:
1177:
1160:
1146:
1145:
1144:
1143:
1142:
1141:
1140:
1139:
1138:
1137:
1136:
1135:
1057:
1009:
1008:
985:
984:
968:
967:
966:
945:
927:
926:
910:
909:
908:
907:
890:(There's also
861:
848:
847:
831:
830:
814:
812:
809:
807:
806:
790:
789:
788:
767:
745:
744:
722:
721:
687:
671:
670:
654:
652:
649:
647:
646:
630:
629:
628:
610:
595:
578:
560:
559:
558:
557:
540:
539:
521:Justin (koavf)
514:
496:
495:
480:
479:
445:
429:
428:
412:
410:
407:
405:
404:
388:
387:
386:
385:
384:
369:
336:global warming
332:Criticisms of
325:
304:
283:
265:
264:
237:
203:
186:
185:
169:
167:
164:
162:
161:
145:
144:
143:
127:
126:
108:
96:
80:
79:
63:
61:
58:
56:
53:
49:
48:
40:
29:
27:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
3818:
3806:
3804:
3799:
3793:
3792:
3788:
3784:
3780:
3779:Robert A.West
3776:
3772:
3771:
3770:
3769:
3766:
3759:
3755:
3751:
3747:
3743:
3739:
3736:
3734:
3730:
3726:
3725:Robert A.West
3721:
3718:
3716:
3712:
3706:
3700:
3697:
3695:
3691:
3687:
3684:per WP:POINT
3683:
3680:
3678:
3674:
3670:
3666:
3663:
3661:
3658:
3654:
3651:
3648:
3647:
3644:
3641:
3637:
3633:
3630:
3628:
3625:
3621:
3617:
3613:
3609:
3606:
3604:
3600:
3596:
3592:
3588:
3585:
3583:
3580:
3573:
3570:
3568:
3565:
3557:
3554:
3552:
3548:
3544:
3540:
3537:
3535:
3531:
3527:
3524:per WP:POINT
3523:
3520:
3518:
3515:
3513:
3512:
3507:
3503:
3499:
3496:
3494:
3490:
3486:
3482:
3478:
3475:
3473:
3470:
3458:
3455:
3454:
3449:
3445:
3443:
3439:
3433:
3430:
3429:
3428:
3427:
3424:
3420:
3414:
3412:
3406:
3405:
3401:
3399:
3395:
3387:
3383:
3379:
3376:
3375:
3370:
3367:
3359:
3355:
3354:
3353:
3349:
3345:
3341:
3337:
3333:
3332:
3328:
3327:User:Self-ref
3324:
3320:
3312:
3306:
3302:
3298:
3297:User:Self-ref
3294:
3291:
3289:
3286:
3285:
3280:
3279:
3278:
3272:
3268:
3264:
3261:
3259:
3255:
3253:
3249:
3243:
3239:
3235:
3231:
3228:
3226:
3222:
3218:
3217:
3212:
3209:
3207:
3203:
3197:
3195:
3189:
3185:
3182:
3180:
3177:
3157:
3154:
3153:
3150:
3146:
3142:
3138:
3134:
3129:
3128:
3125:
3121:
3117:
3113:
3110:
3109:
3108:
3107:
3103:
3099:
3094:
3090:
3087:
3082:
3078:
3066:
3062:
3058:
3057:
3056:
3055:
3054:
3053:
3045:
3044:
3043:
3042:
3041:
3040:
3031:
3030:
3029:
3028:
3027:
3026:
3018:
3014:
3010:
3006:
3002:
2998:
2997:
2996:
2995:
2994:
2993:
2985:
2984:
2983:
2982:
2981:
2980:
2971:
2970:
2969:
2968:
2967:
2966:
2957:
2956:
2955:
2954:
2953:
2952:
2943:
2942:
2941:
2940:
2939:
2938:
2930:
2926:
2923:Then we have
2922:
2921:
2920:
2919:
2918:
2917:
2908:
2904:
2901:
2900:
2899:
2898:
2897:
2896:
2887:
2886:
2885:
2884:
2883:
2882:
2874:
2869:
2868:
2867:
2866:
2865:
2864:
2855:
2854:
2853:
2852:
2851:
2850:
2841:
2840:
2839:
2838:
2837:
2836:
2827:
2826:
2825:
2824:
2823:
2822:
2811:
2810:
2808:
2806:
2803:
2802:
2801:
2800:
2799:
2798:
2788:
2784:
2781:
2777:
2773:
2769:
2765:
2761:
2757:
2753:
2749:
2745:
2744:
2743:
2742:
2741:
2740:
2736:
2732:
2728:
2724:
2721:
2719:
2716:
2712:
2708:
2704:
2701:
2700:
2683:
2679:
2675:
2671:
2666:
2663:
2659:
2655:
2651:
2647:
2642:
2641:
2640:
2639:
2638:
2634:
2630:
2626:
2625:
2624:
2620:
2616:
2612:
2607:
2603:
2599:
2595:
2591:
2586:
2583:
2578:
2573:
2572:
2570:
2565:
2561:
2557:
2556:
2555:
2551:
2547:
2543:
2539:
2535:
2534:
2533:
2529:
2525:
2521:
2517:
2513:
2510:
2505:
2501:
2498:
2494:
2490:
2485:
2484:
2483:
2482:
2479:
2475:
2471:
2467:
2463:
2460:
2459:
2458:
2457:
2454:
2450:
2446:
2442:
2438:
2433:
2429:
2425:
2424:
2423:
2422:
2419:
2415:
2411:
2407:
2403:
2400:
2399:
2386:
2382:
2378:
2374:
2370:
2369:
2365:
2361:
2357:
2352:
2350:
2346:
2342:
2337:
2336:
2335:
2334:
2331:
2327:
2324:
2320:
2319:
2318:
2317:
2314:
2310:
2306:
2302:
2298:
2294:
2293:pseudoskeptic
2290:
2289:
2288:
2287:
2284:
2280:
2277:
2273:
2269:
2268:
2267:
2266:
2263:
2259:
2255:
2251:
2247:
2244:
2240:
2236:
2235:
2234:
2233:
2230:
2226:
2223:
2219:
2216:
2215:
2210:
2206:
2202:
2198:
2194:
2193:
2192:
2191:
2188:
2184:
2180:
2176:
2173:
2169:
2166:
2165:
2162:
2158:
2154:
2150:
2147:or rename to
2146:
2143:
2142:
2135:
2131:
2127:
2122:
2117:
2113:
2108:
2104:
2099:
2098:
2097:
2096:
2095:
2094:
2086:
2081:
2076:
2071:
2070:
2069:
2068:
2067:
2066:
2057:
2052:
2051:
2050:
2049:
2048:
2047:
2039:
2034:
2030:
2029:
2028:
2027:
2026:
2025:
2017:
2012:
2011:
2010:
2009:
2008:
2007:
2004:
2000:
1996:
1992:
1988:
1984:
1981:
1975:
1971:
1967:
1963:
1959:
1955:
1950:
1946:
1945:
1942:
1938:
1934:
1931:
1927:
1926:
1921:
1918:
1917:
1914:
1912:
1907:
1901:
1900:
1895:
1890:
1888:
1883:
1877:
1876:
1870:
1867:
1866:CharlotteWebb
1863:
1859:
1858:
1857:
1853:
1849:
1845:
1841:
1837:
1833:
1830:
1829:
1826:
1822:
1818:
1814:
1811:
1808:
1806:
1802:
1799:
1796:
1794:
1791:
1787:
1786:
1781:
1778:
1777:
1774:
1772:
1767:
1761:
1760:
1755:
1750:
1748:
1743:
1737:
1736:
1732:
1728:
1724:
1723:Robert A.West
1720:
1717:
1713:
1710:
1709:
1702:
1698:
1694:
1693:
1692:
1688:
1684:
1680:
1677:
1676:
1673:
1670:
1666:
1665:The Real Libs
1662:
1659:
1653:
1649:
1645:
1641:
1637:
1633:
1628:
1624:
1623:
1620:
1617:
1616:
1611:
1608:
1605:
1604:
1601:
1599:
1594:
1588:
1587:
1577:
1575:
1570:
1564:
1563:
1557:
1554:
1550:
1549:
1544:
1540:
1536:
1533:
1532:
1525:
1521:
1517:
1512:
1508:
1504:
1500:
1496:
1492:
1487:
1483:
1479:
1475:
1471:
1468:
1464:
1460:
1456:
1453:Never mind.
1452:
1451:
1450:
1449:
1448:
1447:
1443:
1439:
1434:
1430:
1426:
1422:
1417:
1416:
1415:
1411:
1407:
1403:
1399:
1398:
1397:
1396:
1393:
1390:
1389:
1384:
1380:
1376:
1373:
1369:
1365:
1361:
1356:
1352:
1351:Lake Victoria
1348:
1344:
1340:
1336:
1333:
1332:
1331:
1330:
1326:
1322:
1318:
1314:
1309:
1307:
1304:
1300:
1297:
1293:
1289:
1287:
1282:
1278:
1274:
1270:
1265:
1261:
1257:
1252:
1248:
1245:
1244:
1241:
1237:
1233:
1229:
1228:
1227:
1223:
1219:
1215:
1214:Niagara River
1211:
1207:
1203:
1197:
1193:
1187:
1184:
1182:
1178:
1176:
1172:
1168:
1167:Peterkingiron
1164:
1161:
1159:
1156:
1155:CharlotteWebb
1152:
1148:
1147:
1134:
1130:
1126:
1122:
1118:
1114:
1110:
1106:
1102:
1097:
1096:
1095:
1092:
1091:CharlotteWebb
1087:
1086:
1085:
1081:
1077:
1072:
1071:
1070:
1067:
1066:CharlotteWebb
1063:
1058:
1056:
1052:
1048:
1043:
1040:
1039:
1038:
1034:
1030:
1026:
1022:
1017:
1013:
1012:
1011:
1010:
1007:
1004:
1003:CharlotteWebb
1000:
999:
995:
991:
987:
986:
983:
980:
976:
975:transnational
972:
969:
965:
961:
957:
953:
949:
946:
944:
940:
936:
931:
930:
929:
928:
925:
921:
917:
912:
911:
905:
901:
897:
893:
889:
888:
887:
883:
879:
874:
870:
869:
865:
862:
860:
856:
853:
850:
849:
846:
843:
839:
836:
833:
832:
829:
827:
822:
816:
815:
810:
805:
803:
798:
792:
791:
787:
783:
779:
775:
771:
768:
766:
762:
758:
754:
750:
747:
746:
743:
740:
739:
736:
733:
726:
723:
717:
713:
709:
705:
701:
697:
692:
688:
686:
683:
679:
676:
673:
672:
669:
667:
662:
656:
655:
650:
645:
643:
638:
632:
631:
627:
623:
619:
614:
611:
609:
606:
605:CharlotteWebb
602:
599:
596:
594:
590:
586:
582:
579:
577:
573:
569:
565:
562:
561:
556:
552:
548:
544:
543:
542:
541:
538:
534:
530:
526:
522:
518:
515:
513:
509:
505:
501:
498:
497:
494:
490:
484:
481:
475:
471:
467:
463:
459:
455:
450:
446:
444:
441:
437:
434:
431:
430:
427:
425:
420:
414:
413:
408:
403:
401:
396:
390:
389:
383:
380:
379:
374:
370:
368:
364:
360:
355:
354:
353:
349:
345:
344:58.174.73.247
341:
337:
335:
334:anthropogenic
329:
326:
324:
320:
316:
312:
308:
305:
303:
299:
295:
291:
287:
284:
282:
278:
274:
270:
267:
266:
263:
260:
259:
254:
250:
246:
242:
241:2008 August 7
238:
233:
229:
225:
221:
217:
213:
208:
204:
202:
199:
195:
191:
188:
187:
184:
182:
177:
171:
170:
165:
160:
158:
153:
147:
146:
142:
138:
132:
129:
128:
125:
122:
121:
116:
112:
109:
107:
103:
100:
97:
95:
92:
88:
85:
82:
81:
78:
76:
71:
65:
64:
59:
54:
44:
41:
39:
33:
32:
23:
19:
3797:
3794:
3762:
3737:
3719:
3698:
3681:
3664:
3649:
3631:
3607:
3586:
3571:
3555:
3543:MediaMangler
3538:
3526:Aunt Entropy
3521:
3510:
3497:
3476:
3456:
3436:
3431:
3410:
3402:
3377:
3357:
3310:siâây rabbit
3300:
3292:
3283:
3276:
3274:
3262:
3246:
3229:
3214:
3210:
3193:
3183:
3155:
3136:
3132:
3111:
3098:64.142.90.33
3095:
3091:
3085:
3083:
3079:
3075:
3061:64.142.90.33
2973:they do not.
2929:Tasseography
2804:
2786:
2747:
2722:
2706:
2702:
2649:
2645:
2601:
2589:
2575:
2563:
2508:
2503:
2492:
2436:
2427:
2401:
2372:
2359:
2355:
2341:64.142.90.33
2300:
2296:
2217:
2175:
2171:
2167:
2151:(or other).
2144:
2120:
2115:
2106:
2102:
2084:
2079:
2074:
2056:cat yronwode
2015:
1982:
1922:
1919:
1905:
1902:
1881:
1878:
1831:
1812:
1809:
1797:
1782:
1779:
1765:
1762:
1741:
1738:
1718:
1704:
1696:
1678:
1660:
1615:Black Falcon
1613:
1609:
1606:
1592:
1589:
1568:
1565:
1542:
1538:
1534:
1510:
1506:
1502:
1485:
1474:And I repeat
1473:
1469:
1435:
1388:Black Falcon
1386:
1374:
1354:
1343:Lake Lucerne
1334:
1312:
1310:
1295:
1285:
1283:
1255:
1246:
1205:
1201:
1185:
1180:
1179:
1162:
1150:
1041:
1015:
997:
996:
993:
974:
973:renaming to
970:
947:
867:
866:
863:
851:
837:
834:
820:
817:
796:
793:
769:
748:
738:
731:
724:
677:
674:
660:
657:
636:
633:
612:
600:
597:
580:
563:
516:
499:
482:
435:
432:
418:
415:
394:
391:
378:Black Falcon
376:
372:
339:
333:
331:
327:
306:
289:
285:
268:
258:Black Falcon
256:
244:
243:discussion.
192:
189:
175:
172:
151:
148:
130:
120:Black Falcon
118:
110:
102:Category:ALF
98:
86:
83:
69:
66:
60:Category:ALF
3765:Ben Aveling
3686:Nicolharper
3640:Ben Aveling
3634:. Fork of
3139:knowledge).
2903:Scientology
2829:sub-clause.
2426:Isn't that
2195:Revised to
2116:knowledge's
1480:; contrast
979:Ben Aveling
598:Weak delete
294:Vegaswikian
55:September 4
43:September 5
38:September 3
3620:dave souza
3610:- blatant
3511:Levine2112
3358:everywhere
3133:EFFACEMENT
3116:Smallbones
2945:adherents?
2925:Divination
2910:religions.
1817:Ian Cairns
1507:as defined
948:Keep as is
3616:WP:WEIGHT
3612:WP:POINTy
3242:WP:FRINGE
2504:remediate
2430:what the
2428:precisely
2406:astrology
2250:explained
2121:advocates
1995:Gillyweed
1987:Gillyweed
1862:Romanians
1783:merge to
1375:Question:
1109:Euphrates
583:per nom.
3595:ZayZayEM
3591:WP:POINT
3560:¡Maunus¡
3432:Comment:
3362:¡Maunus¡
3238:WP:UNDUE
3188:WP:POINT
2986:WHY NOT?
2644:extends
2520:WP:POINT
2516:WP:OTHER
2466:WP:POINT
2462:WP:OTHER
2356:disagree
2172:renaming
2107:creation
2080:artistic
2016:cultural
1701:Grutness
1516:Skookum1
1421:Franamax
1406:Franamax
1360:Skookum1
1355:a priori
1347:Bodensee
1299:Skookum1
1288:at least
1269:Skookum1
1218:Franamax
1206:defining
1202:Question
1192:Franamax
1125:Franamax
1105:Columbia
1076:Franamax
1047:Skookum1
1029:Franamax
757:Otto4711
568:Otto4711
340:man made
20: |
3650:comment
3578:LUMBAGO
3506:WP:PSCI
3502:WP:PSCI
3404:WP:SNOW
3301:another
3230:Delete:
3137:science
3005:Judaism
2907:Thelema
2813:status.
2629:Postdlf
2546:Postdlf
2470:Postdlf
2410:Postdlf
2323:Bubba73
2301:contend
2297:optimum
2276:Bubba73
2222:Bubba73
1962:history
1923:delete
1640:history
1486:because
1470:Comment
1455:Postdlf
1438:Postdlf
1402:Niagara
1335:Comment
1321:Postdlf
1286:/rename
1247:Comment
1113:Niagara
1042:Comment
971:Support
704:history
585:Eric444
462:history
359:Johnbod
315:Johnbod
290:listify
273:Postdlf
220:history
3738:Delete
3720:Delete
3699:Delete
3682:Delete
3665:Delete
3632:Delete
3608:Delete
3587:DELETE
3572:Delete
3556:Delete
3539:Delete
3522:Delete
3498:Delete
3477:Delete
3457:Delete
3411:Verbal
3378:Delete
3295:. On
3293:Delete
3277:Fyslee
3263:Delete
3211:Delete
3194:Verbal
3156:Delete
3112:Delete
2766:, and
2703:Delete
2662:Google
2493:exists
2402:Delete
2326:(talk)
2279:(talk)
2225:(talk)
2218:Delete
2153:Occuli
2145:Delete
1848:Occuli
1719:Delete
1697:Delete
1683:Occuli
1679:Delete
1610:delete
1503:by law
1493:, the
1181:Rename
1163:Delete
1016:within
998:Delete
990:Danube
868:Rename
778:Occuli
770:Delete
749:Delete
678:delete
613:Delete
581:Delete
564:Delete
547:Occuli
504:Occuli
500:Delete
436:delete
328:Rename
307:Rename
286:Delete
269:Delete
245:Delete
194:merits
131:Rename
87:rename
3508:. --
3481:point
3442:Stalk
3438:Hrafn
3382:Filll
3252:Stalk
3248:Hrafn
2999:As a
2658:Yahoo
2246:times
2059:all).
1970:watch
1966:links
1832:Merge
1813:Merge
1648:watch
1644:links
1101:Yukon
753:small
712:watch
708:links
470:watch
466:links
228:watch
224:links
46:: -->
16:<
3783:Talk
3746:talk
3729:Talk
3710:talk
3690:talk
3673:talk
3657:Geni
3624:talk
3599:talk
3547:talk
3530:talk
3489:talk
3418:chat
3386:talk
3348:talk
3317:talk
3284:talk
3221:talk
3201:chat
3145:talk
3120:talk
3102:talk
3065:talk
3015:and
3011:and
2768:here
2764:here
2760:here
2756:here
2752:here
2723:Keep
2715:talk
2678:talk
2633:talk
2619:talk
2602:into
2550:talk
2528:talk
2474:talk
2449:talk
2437:does
2414:talk
2381:talk
2345:talk
2309:talk
2258:talk
2205:talk
2183:talk
2168:Keep
2157:talk
2130:talk
2112:NPOV
2103:this
2075:love
2033:Talk
1999:talk
1991:talk
1974:logs
1958:talk
1954:edit
1852:talk
1838:per
1821:talk
1727:Talk
1707:wha?
1687:talk
1652:logs
1636:talk
1632:edit
1539:many
1520:talk
1459:talk
1442:talk
1425:talk
1410:talk
1364:talk
1325:talk
1284:Keep
1273:talk
1256:does
1236:talk
1232:meco
1222:talk
1196:talk
1186:Keep
1171:talk
1129:talk
1080:talk
1051:talk
1033:talk
1001:. â
960:talk
956:meco
954:. __
939:talk
935:meco
920:talk
916:Fram
900:talk
896:meco
882:talk
878:meco
842:jc37
838:Keep
782:talk
761:talk
730:The
716:logs
700:talk
696:edit
622:talk
618:meco
589:talk
572:talk
551:talk
517:Keep
508:talk
474:logs
458:talk
454:edit
363:talk
348:talk
319:talk
309:to :
298:talk
277:talk
232:logs
216:talk
212:edit
35:<
3392:wpc
3216:DGG
3086:not
3001:Jew
2785:(2)
2746:(1)
2707:two
2654:ODP
2650:and
2646:way
2590:can
2174:to
1846:).
1834:to
1803:to
1703:...
1612:. â
1543:not
1511:not
1381:or
1319:.
857:to
330:to
117:. â
115:ALF
104:to
22:Log
3785:)
3748:)
3731:)
3713:)
3692:)
3675:)
3655:.
3638:.
3622:,
3601:)
3549:)
3532:)
3491:)
3483:.
3465:62
3396:)
3388:|
3350:)
3329:.)
3321:)
3281:/
3223:)
3174:ru
3171:Gu
3168:ck
3165:ua
3147:)
3122:)
3104:)
2762:,
2758:,
2754:,
2713:-
2680:)
2660:,
2635:)
2621:)
2552:)
2530:)
2518:+
2476:)
2464:+
2451:)
2416:)
2383:)
2360:as
2347:)
2328:,
2311:)
2281:,
2260:)
2227:,
2207:)
2185:)
2159:)
2132:)
2001:)
1972:|
1968:|
1964:|
1960:|
1956:|
1928:.
1854:)
1823:)
1788:.
1729:)
1699:.
1689:)
1650:|
1646:|
1642:|
1638:|
1634:|
1522:)
1472:-
1461:)
1444:)
1427:)
1412:)
1366:)
1349:,
1345:,
1327:)
1275:)
1238:)
1224:)
1173:)
1131:)
1119:,
1082:)
1053:)
1035:)
962:)
941:)
922:)
902:)
884:)
840:-
784:)
776:.
763:)
751:-
732:JP
714:|
710:|
706:|
702:|
698:|
680:.
624:)
591:)
574:)
553:)
535:âŻ
510:)
472:|
468:|
464:|
460:|
456:|
438:.
365:)
350:)
321:)
300:)
279:)
230:|
226:|
222:|
218:|
214:|
196:.
89:.
3781:(
3777:.
3744:(
3727:(
3707:(
3688:(
3671:(
3597:(
3576:P
3564:¡
3562:Ć
3545:(
3528:(
3487:(
3384:(
3366:¡
3364:Ć
3346:(
3313:(
3219:(
3162:Q
3143:(
3118:(
3100:(
3063:(
2676:(
2631:(
2617:(
2548:(
2526:(
2472:(
2447:(
2412:(
2379:(
2366::
2343:(
2307:(
2256:(
2243:2
2203:(
2181:(
2155:(
2128:(
1997:(
1989:(
1976:)
1952:(
1850:(
1819:(
1725:(
1685:(
1667:-
1654:)
1630:(
1518:(
1457:(
1440:(
1423:(
1408:(
1362:(
1323:(
1271:(
1234:(
1220:(
1194:(
1169:(
1127:(
1078:(
1049:(
1031:(
958:(
937:(
918:(
906:)
898:(
880:(
780:(
759:(
734:S
718:)
694:(
620:(
587:(
570:(
549:(
533:M
531:âş
529:C
527:âŽ
525:T
523:â¤
506:(
476:)
452:(
361:(
346:(
317:(
296:(
275:(
234:)
210:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.