Knowledge (XXG):Deletion review/Log/2007 June 21

3555:. How in hell do 6 deletes, 6 keeps, 1 weak keep and 4 strong keeps amount to a decision to delete? I'm new to all this but surely the onus is on the party proposing change to prove their assertions that the categories are divisive or POV-pushing. Neither of these points was demonstrated in the debate, indeed the deletionists' comments seemed to add a fair amount of heat but little light. The fact that userpages and userboxes provide alternative ways of showing affiliation doesn't constitute an argument against categories doing this too. Some people prefer one method, some another, and if one is ok, all are. I raised this point and I don't think it was answered anywhere in the debate. Neither was the point that deleting categories isn't going to make a blind bit of difference if people are determined to seek out users of a particular persuasion for non-encyclopedic purposes. (Just follow "What links here" from the relevant userbox template!) This is clearly an unfinished debate. We establish our arguments through consensus, or what are these discussions for? 2841:: I would like to point out that the same arguments (divisiness, non-encyclopeadicity) were also brought up for "Category:Wikipedians by language" and "Category:Wikipedians by religion", and that both these categories were kept. I don't think the "divisiveness" rationale holds any more for this category than it does for either of the two aforementioned ones: stating one's political grounds should simply be seen as a statement of where one is coming from, and seen in that light, self-labeling by political ideology (we're talking voluntary self-labeling here, let's be clear: no one is forced to use these categories against their wish) can indeed be encyclopaedically useful to achieve NPOV on politically charged issues. I also think that not addressing a point raised by someone else should not be automatically construed as "implicitly accepting the point"; there are a variety of other possible interpretations.-- 1306:). In both cases, the nominations for deletion were swiftly and unanimously rejected. What I think many of us are looking for here is an explanation of what makes ISU's band so non-notable that it can be speedily deleted, while two similar marching band articles are given the enthusiastic endorsement of the Knowledge (XXG) community. I don't think the ISUCF"V"MB article was perfect by any means, but neither were those two. The people responding to the nomination said as much. But they also said that it was better to give the article a chance to find more sources and improve itself rather than simply deleting it. Some consistency would be greatly appreciated. When two college marching band articles are speedily kept and one is speedily deleted when they seem to have roughly equivalent merit, I think an explanation is in order. 1323:

games and festivals, appears on national television during rivalry games and bowl games (five/seven years) (plus associated pep band performances for basketball games and tournaments), records and sells albums locally and even nationally to alumni and those interested in marching bands, and is always a present part of the culture of Iowa State's enrollment (28k) and alumni. Iowa State's marching band has a greater membership than Kansas State's band, yet they have an article, and is larger than the Hawkeye marching band--though they have an article (and probably the rest of the Big 10 too). ISU's newspaper has a page, VEISHEA has a page, the Cyclones athletic teams have a page, what makes any of these any more important than the athletic bands? Takes as much time and effort.

3950:

more weight, especially enough to knock down the "keep" side (surely we all can point to a time when someone has pointed out some policy even when it didn't apply well). Unfortunately, Carl appears to have taken care to deconstruct the arguments from the keep side without doing the same for the opposing side. Thus, this decision does not represent consensus at all. If Carl feels some points regarding divisiveness and encyclopedic significance are less worthy than others, that's fine. However, the closing statement of a deletion request is not the place for him to say that. That instead belongs on a talk page, where more detailed conversation can occur. --

3102:) ignoring that there is a consensus of voices (11:5) to keep these user categories, and that an undefeated rationale has been presented to explain why these specific user categories are encyclopedic and serve to build the encyclopedia (as it gives a reference as to the political affiliations of some users, which can in turn be used on some politically-oriented articles which are prone to debate to buld a better NPOV for those articles). While it may not always do so, the contention that these categories are divisive has not been properly sustained: how are they divisive? Are there any concrete examples, or are some editors just stating they are 3081:

categories, however, only the ones that were the subject of this debate. I fear BrownHairedGirl and Ramdrake are looking for consistency that does not exist. Ramdrake's concerns about freedom of expression are excessive for this debate; we are not considering free expression, user space, or article talk pages, only a few user categories. There is consensus, however, the opinions expressed on article talk pages must serve the purpose of building the encyclopedia, rather than merely advocating a particular position. The purpose of this debate was to discuss whether these user categories contribute to the encyclopedia. — Carl

4621:(now archived). I believe that in addition to the blocks given some new participants, a few of the established users should have been given behavior cautions. However, the other admins that looked at the situation didn't do so, which means I might be wrong about that. Looking at the AFD discussion, there clearly is not a consensus to delete there. I note that the opinions on June 20 are all from established editors, and that portion of the discussion has a clear keep consensus. My evaluation of the opinions of the established editors throughout the entire discussion comes down to a no consensus result as well. So I 2730:, this is not a social networking site, and categories must contribute to the encyclopedia – is a fundamental policy concern, mirrored by Dmcdevit's deletion log entry. Only BrownHairedGirl and Haemo spoke directly in favor of the categories as a tool for collaboration. DGG agreed with BrownHairedGirl but went on to say that, for this purpose, the categories could be replaced by watching a person's edits. That argument, that other methods would be sufficient, was not addressed by any deletion rationale. A suggestion to rename, rather than delete, seems not to have consensus. — Carl 392:

analysis. I suppose you could write a stub using the credits from the DVD box and IMDB to say "This movie exists and here are the cast/crew credits" but you can't report on the director's motives, or critcal reaction, or analysis of claims, or debunking, because there isn't any. (I would love to do it but that would be original research.) Stubs are supposed to be expandable, at least in principle, so until there is some followup to this--i.e. someone takes it seriously enough to write about it--there doesn't seem to be much we can do.

3286:. The closing admin's analysis is incorrect, and the decision seems to misinterpret policy and guidelines. WP:NPOV only applies to the main namespace, per the second paragraph, and so does not apply. (It might apply to categories which apply to the main namespace, but not to userspace or even talkspace categories.) Being "divisive" is only part of speedy criterion T1, not to general or category deletion criteria. The categories not being encyclopedic (WP:NOT) is irrelevant, as they 2458:- This isn't just counting numbers, but I will take issue with BHG's analysis... 6 Delete (Black Falcon, Picaroon, Tony (I think his comment is quite clear - not a non-vote), MER-C, Dmcdevit (who as the reversed deleter counts as nominator on this one) and me (AM)), 2 Keep (Mike S. and DGG), 2 split (Haggawaga - Oegawagga and Brain40), so 6-4 on the parent and 7-2-1 on the children. Add to this that the delete arguments are based in official policy of 3599:, half the people making arguments for it and half against it. Carl, who as far as I can tell has never been UCFD before, just showed up and closed them all the way he wanted them done. As I said on ANI, consensus is a mandate, not a guideline. Overturn this, close it as no consensus, and sometime down the road, we'll have another debate about it, though with luck, it'll be one that actually pays attention to the people registering their opinions.-- 2683:. The editor who cited it seemed to regard a link to logout as a helpful argument (it seems to me to be a non-argument), and suggested that "categorization should only be used to the extent that it aids in writing an encyclopedia". Galloglass's response addressed that "aids in writing" point very clearly: he said "there is nothing messianic or even proselytizing about any of these cats, just a simple statement of where the user is coming from". -- 2150:. Are some wikipedia admins being too free in their use of speedy deletion? IMO they should only be used for deletions that are uncontroversial and unlikely to be contested by any significant no of editors. Speedy deletions based on the admin's personal judgement is against the whole spirit of adminship, janitorwork. Perhaps it's time we had a large-scale discussion to re-evaluate the community's attitude towards speedy deletion? 2368:- Unlike the other split nominations, when I split these from the "political ideology" UCFD nom (which is now under discussion below), it was only due to there being several related subcats. Now, the discussion was nearly unanimous that the sub-cats should be (should have been) deleted. Perhaps the best path for the parent cat (Monarchist) is to have it fall under whatever happens in the discussion below. - 4655:) made (and to be clear, I'd never heard of the subject before seeing the AFD). I closed the AFD with a rather detailed explanation of my reasoning, but in summation it appears there were several newly-minted single purpose accounts who's opinions I discounted and that lead to a clear no-consensus in regards to the opinions favoring deletion or retention. There were also arguments that this did not meet 3997:— Certainly not helpful to the writing of the encyclopedia; if anything, it severely inflames tensions. The "I like it" "rationales" for overturning this deletion do not appeal to me. We need to be strict with the use of the category system; after all, it was created to categorize the encyclopedic content, and its misuse for categorizing users by political affiliation is nothing short of abuse. -- 1273:

marching band page. If you read the reasons given for voting for deletion, they are very weak reasons, that really warrant a clean up, not a delete. "Clubs are not notable" is one, so not a single club is notable? And its not a 'club' really either. "Oh, dear. This article could have, and should have, attracted a db-club tag; please make it go away" Well that's just an all around wonderful reason.

1035:

conferences (please note that more band articles than this almost certainly exist, I was just trying to get a good sample). Also, please note that most of the following articles cite few (if any) sources outside of the individual university's domain. If the Iowa State University band is not worthy of inclusion in Knowledge (XXG), please also delete the articles on the list below. Thank you.

3983:

why people ought to be joining primarily, but it is a factor--we can & should call this a community. One ed. doesnt think it helps social function; hundreds think otherwise. There are better things to do than trying to delete inoffensive categories. I think it might be a good idea to ask the individual users here for comments--it affects them, it does not affect the deletors--or me.

3014:(←) Yes, I do believe that the delete rationales brought up relevant policy concerns; if they did not, the nomination would have been speedily closed as keep. There were two concerns, as I indicated in the closing statement: that the categories are unencyclopedic (WP:NOT), and that they are divisive (WP:NPOV). Note that WP:NPOV applies to "All Knowledge (XXG) articles 2853:. By "implicitly accept" I mean comments such as "This is hardly divisive anyways", "However I have to break the news to you, we don't live in a POV free world and every one of us has a POV.", "My point is, people claim these are divisive, that's politics!", "Who actually has a problem with these types of categories because they themselves find them polemic?". — Carl 2348:. I did not count votes to decide. The policy concerns raised by Dmcdevit when he deleted the categories were mirrored by three others (MER-C, After Midnight, Black Falcon). The first three keep rationales do not address these concerns at all. The one remaining keep rationale is, I believe, outweighed by the strong arguments of the deletion rationales. — Carl 3693:

possible exception to ignore consensus, except if there are very strong reasons (such as a copyright violation) to act otherwise (and so far, nobody has claimed that, that I'm aware). I believe it is obvious that there was a rough consensus on the side of keep (in any case, there was no consensus to delete), and the closing admin closed this one in error.--

2669:, as a mistaken closure. There was a clear consensus that the categories should stay, and the claim that they are divisive was clearly addressed (if anything, they reveal an editor's biases). Many of the "delete" arguments were trivial and should have been discarded in assessing the debate, such as the terse "Bilge. Delete." (why???) 1464:- Yeah, a better name would be nice, but noting the similarity of deletion cases that Bassgoonist brought up, I don't see how this article should be under attack for deletion. I don't really see it as a private club either, it has hundreds of members and hundreds of thousands of dollars in endorsements and plays VERY publicly. 2723:

this in her opinion above on this page. Mike Selinker and Sefringle stated an opinion to keep but didn't address the deletion rationales at all. I also considered Dmcdevit's original deletion log entry as an argument for deletion, since it was listed by BrownHairedGirl with her procedural listing of the categories.

3543:. Like all things on Knowledge (XXG), policy is interpreted through the lens of consensus. Whether or not these are divisive or unencyclopedic is an interpretation that should be made through discussion and consensus. The CFD does not demonstrate such a consensus and hence the closure is in error. 3982:

there are many WPedians in these categories, all of whom apparently find it appropriate. The thought that a dozen people here or a CDS can tell the general group what to do in circumstances like this is just paternalism. WP is not myspace, but there are distinct social aspects in WP; that isn't

2984:

they might be divisive. It hard for anyone to engage in detailed argument against bare assertions, but the counter-arguments were just as solid as the assertions. I am concerned that you appear to have approached this closure with a presumption that the deleters had found a policy which was relevant,

2922:

I don't believe that "one more" moderate keep rationale would have changed the outcome of the debate. Several more keep rationales that addressed the policy concerns would have changed it. The situation is different with the closed debate on Wikipedians by religion, where I believe quite a few of the

2821:

I don't necessarily disagree with you. However, what I was talking about above was an attempt to possibly discern what those who commented were attempting to convey. I just am wondering if possibly at least one aspect of the discussion was ignored or at least deemed as "irrelevant", even if it seemed

2803:

I believe the distinction between permissible user boxes and permissible user categories illustrates that user categories do not have the broad latitude given to user space. I agree that the idea behind that particular rationale is that these categories should be protected because they are related to

1549:

To make a comparison to another section (the athletic guidelines) of Knowledge (XXG), Div-I bands are about as high as you can go marching band wise. Very few other marching bands that involve older people perform in front of the crowds that they do. The only really higher level in my mind would be

363:

When describing a film or book, I think the film or book is a reliable source about itsself. So the content is not a problem. The article was deleted for lack of notability almost a year ago. I think that arguably that decision was correct *then*, but obviously the situation has evolved. PS: The last

3634:

a simple majority. Lately it seems that "it's not a vote" is used to advocate for positions that fail to achieve even a mere majority when given widespread discussion. The expectation is that a consensus for deletion should be shown, and setting aside personal feelings and opinions about policy, I

3486:

The split between CFD and UCFD occurred not for any policy reasons. but simply because UCFDs tend to be an area of specialization which many CFD users care to not participate in. Also, CFDs and UCFDs together overwhelmed one page, so there was too much discussion to process through for some users.

3327:

I can't help but notice that this time, the votes in favor of endorsement bring very little to the discussion except stuff like "good call". Very serious objections have been raised against deletion of the category, however, those in favor seem to have run out of arguments ("good call" isn't exactly

2874:

user category could be divisive; there was no evidence that these ones are more divisive than (for example) user categories by religion or nationality or sports club or taste in music, and several arguments that they do make a useful contribution to the encyclopedia by helping editors to declare any

1322:

I don't even know how you can consider an article on Iowa State's marching band for deletion. It's the largest, most public, and most popular performance band on a major Division 1 university with an endowment of half a billion dollars. The band performs in front of hundreds of thousands annually at

3949:

as many times as the delete side, but that does not mean the keep side should automatically be discounted as ignoring points outright and not refuting the other side. Similarly, one should not automatically assume that because various policies were linked from the delete side, their statements hold

3226:

Endorse, as this closure is well within the administrator's discretion, and he has given a solid reasoning for the close. And we have here yet another disrespectful listing here, against the recommendations at the top of this page, with no attempt at any prior discussion or resolution before it was

2066:

Article was deleted without review or debate. For the record, I am not affiliated with either this company or any of it's competitiors. From what I remember, the article was stubby but still a valid article about a notable technology corporation. There was probably some POV text that should have

1402:

would be a more appropriate name. The director of the group has suggested this to me, and I strong agree this is more appropriate. The longer name I really consider more of a nickname than the groups official name. Moreover, it would be easier to find without football and "varsity" in the title. We

391:

Unfortunately there are no reliable sources that discuss, analyze or comment on this movie as far as I can find. I just did a LexisNexis search, and in the last two years there was a brief description in a college newspaper, and a number of showtimes listing, but no critical commentary, reviews or

263:

isn't negotiable. Right now the article is only going to say Terrorstorm has over a million views. That's not enough. There have to be indepedant multiple reliable sources. If they don't exist neither can the article. I'm willing to review this if the sources later emerge - nudge me on my talk if I

2970:

The Wikipedians by religion debate has a 24:7 consensus to keep. Not sure how you could read that it reached "no consensus", although admittedly some editors in favor of deletion were very argumentative (and took up a lot of space). In any case, in the specific case of the Wikipedians by political

2722:

Several of the rationales didn't raise or refute policy concerns (BMF81, Tony Sidaway, Sefringle). Some of the keep rationales implicity agreed with the assessment that these categories could be divisive (Geoglass, Michaellinear, Arthur Rubin, tariqabjotu). BrownHairedGirl also implicitly accepts

1339:

I'm sorry, this was my last edit before going to be bed and it didn't come out quite right. My point was that if the anon felt that the other articles were equally unacceptable it was down to them to list them rather then expecting others to do so. That said, I did look at a couple of the articles

835:

This band recorded the theme song for a TV, they are also the band for a division I-A football program. I feel no good reason was given for deletion, but nobody noticed that it was up for deletion other than a few people who knew nothing of the subject. It could use more sources, but I will gladly

2952:

The Wikipedians by religion debate, which I looked through in some detail, appeared to me to have no consensus, and the arguments there appeared stronger than in the political ideologies debate. It is also possible that people felt more strongly about the religious categories, and not as strongly

1476:

The Iowa State Cyclone Football "Varsity" Marching Band is a notable organization and the deletion of its article is unwarranted. The organization is question is by no means a private club, and it has multiple performances each year. It also has received airtime on National TV, and recorded the

1011:

But many of the marching bands that ARE being kept don't meet a single one of those criteria, they have their own unique reasons for being notable, as does the Iowa State Marching Band, and there's also recording the theme for a TV show. I believe the reason for the note on that criteria is for a

3080:

The current consensus on WP is that not all user categories are unencyclopedic, and decisions must be made on a case by case basis. Presumably, this means that not all categories are considered by consensus to be divisive. The purpose of this UCFD debate was not to make a decision about all user

2942:

The point is, the outcome of the debate was a clear consensus to "Keep". And since the Wikipedians by religion debate was on the same page, it is entirely possible that people avoided repeating themselves in this debate, as they saw the same points in need of being addressed. Politics, religion,

3692:

The deletion guidelines allow closing admins to discount votes coming from an attempt at vote stacking, especially from anons and SPAs. I recognize nearly all the names here as being rather long-term contributors to Knowledge (XXG). Please note that the deletion guidelines don't allow any other

3205:

Yes, that's correct, in the same manner that the concept of user pages can be considered divisive, but not too divisive to be deleted. That is, they're not divisive at all, but people were citing divisiveness just to beef up the delete rationale; there was no evidence that these categories have

1272:

We're not talking about a few loosely scattered pages here. There are a significant number of those pages that may have no apparently notability to many people, but the entire community of people that edit and maintain marching band pages have always shown up to vote against the deletion of any

3227:

listed here. Deletion review does not exist to refight the closures you dislike. These categories are all clearly of no value to the encyclopedia, are uselessly divisive by organizing users according to POV. Others seem to think this should have been decided on the basis of votecounting alone.

434:

deletion. Popularity != notability as many are fond of saying. If we have no sources to go on then no notability is established and the article fails inclusion criteria. For us, as wikipedia editors, to say "X number of views is rather unique and thus notable" is quite against the spirit of

1034:

notable in certain circles, and many of the bands in this list have not "done" much of anything special other than march and play music during football games to entertain fans. Please note that the entire Big Ten conference is represented on here, as well as many schools from the other major

2894:

PS, it also seems quite perverse to take MichaelLinnear's comment that "This is hardly divisive anyways" as an acceptance that these categs are divisive. "Hardly" can mean either "just a very little bit" or (in a commonly-used British, sarcastic sense) "absolutely not at all", as in

2719:. The keep/delete ratio is not the determining factor here, in my opinion. I thought that all the participants engaged in the discussion in good faith, but my assessment of the debate is that the rationales for keeping the categories don't outweigh the arguments in favor of deletion. 350:

Notability for Knowledge (XXG) purposes is about the availablility of reliable sources from which to write an article. Views don't help. Got anything along the lines of independent reviews published in traditional (at the very least, non-blog, non-wiki, non-user submitted) media?

2749:

I don't know... I think I would interpret several of those differently, tariqabjotu in particular. And there were several comments reaffirming the latitude that we tend to give userspace, as well, which wasn't addressed in the closure (since one could presume that such comments

2943:

language, ethnicity are all matters of identity, and yes we are all different. I don't see how one can find any of these categories "divisive", unless one also finds the fundamental act of affirming one's identity "divisive" (for crying out loud, we're not all robots!).--

3531:, so we don't actually know if the consensus has changed. The closer has also shown no awareness of the prior discussions reasons for keeping. Overall, I therefore conclude that we have to overturn because no clear consensus for deletion has been established. 2478:, though I disagree with Tony that these are T1 speedies. First, XfD is not a vote, so the numbers are not that important. The deletion arguments consisted not only of claims that the categories are divisive, but also that they violate the letter and spirit of 4230:

I deleted this page as an uncontested prod, and I agree with the original prod reasoning that it had no references, and most of the article was some kind of essay instead of explaining what tkph is. I was later contacted by someone who gave some references:

2308:"; assessing the arguments we have the deleters claim that he categories are divisive versus DGG's argument that as with the political ideology categories (see DRV below), these categories "puts the user into context". Neither arguments seems overwhelming. 3969:

Closure took no accout of what had been said in the discussion. Closing admin merely imposed their own opinion without taking any note of the arguments in favour of retention, implying as they were of no note as they were not in agreement with their own.

4402:– speedy close as the improper forum for peer review. Calton is correct that "the article wasn't deleted" alone isn't a speedy close rationale, but it seems like a clear request for content and conduct dispute mediation that doesn't belong in DRV. – 2875:

bias. The arguments on both sides might usefully have been developed further, but the fundamental arguments for deletion (viz that the categories are divisive) are countered by Arthur Rubin's point that "stated bias is better than unstated bias". --

2655:

Debate was closed contrary to a rough 2:1 (11:5) consensus to keep, and the points the closing admin says were not addressed in favor of deletion were in fact addressed. Thus, I can only conclude the "Delete All" verdict is in this case in error

1840: 1835: 4725:, despite my speedy close being overturned, this should still be speedily closed. This DRV was nominated for a content dispute and a conduct dispute, which are sorta-kinda-maybe related to the AFD, but more than likely aren't, especially given 1844: 1489:, AfD clearly misunderstood the notability of this organization, but the article as deleted was not very good. I think we'd be better off writing a new one from scratch, under a proper title. I'd support the creation of a decent new article. 3874:

if the categories had no collaborative value besides for social networking. The argument has been made in these pages time and again that political ideology is a valid category for collaborating on politically-related articles. If you put

1869: 1827: 4551:

were used to dismiss contributors who clearly stated their opinion on the status of boh3m3(Ben_Going). This article lacks Knowledge (XXG):What Knowledge (XXG) is not on several levels. I am asking for a review / expert attention on

4287: 543:

With "Terror Storm" written on his T-shirt, singer Matthew Bellamy took to a white piano at one point. Afterwards he said they were getting a vibe from the crowd, and in the words of their own song they really seemed invincible.

3039:

user categories are unencyclopedic (editors are not themselves encyclopedic) and potentially divisive (by attributing to some wikipedians attributes not shared by others)? My point is that the nominators did not explain why

3669:

It is not at all true that you need "more than just a majority" of expressed opinions to support the close. If that were the case, vote-stacking would be trivial. There is a global consensus in favor of policies such as

1026:- Looking around Knowledge (XXG) for about 15 minutes, I found the following articles about individual college marching bands. This is by no means an exhaustive list, it's just meant to show that marching band articles 1371: 875:

bands on Knowledge (XXG), then a college band should be OK, too. The band means a lot to a lot of people. It is very well-known to certain circles, just like anything else around. {{Shawn B. Gealow|12.208.92.127}}

607:. There should be enough to make a very small subsection in the Alex Jones article. Also this might soon be moot as the film is coming out on DVD next month and should pick up a lot more sources when that happens. - 4560:

who is trying to vandalize this review, article and harass me personally regarding this topic/debate. Thank you. I do have further arguments, however wanted to keep this on review/topic and to the point.

3161:

The only such query I see is from tariqabjotu, but in his second statement it's clear that he realizes that they can be considered divisive, although he feels they are not too divisive to be kept. — Carl

198:

I would like to propose that we now restore the page, since the film has been shown on video google 1.027.655 times (1500 views a day). I believe that makes it notable enough to be included on wikipedia.

3149:

mistaken closure, not the consensus. There were repeated requests during the discussion for those proposing deletion to show just how they have been or could be divisive--there was never any response.

1703: 186: 75: 3048:

user categories? You appear to have inferred a case which the advocates of deletion did not actually make, but insisted in your closure that nothing positive should be inferrred from the keep votes. --

2067:

been marked as such (or cleaned up) instead of deleted. I request undeletion on the grounds that the subject is notable and any POV in the article can easily be neutralized by myself or other editors.

180: 1823: 1781: 1776: 404:

If mainstream ignores a video or book, does that mean that Knowledge (XXG) cannot have an article about it even when there is a large fan-crowd? 1.000.000 views is rather unique for a google video. —

4270: 3508: 2112:. Based on the Google cache, the article has a little too much technical and marketing jargon, but the company is certainly notable (Apex and Cybex were both around for years before the merger). 4618: 1422:) is titled with the full name, and the full name is what is used when introducing the band at football games. If "ISUCF'V'MB" is only a nickname, the band does a pretty good job of hiding it. 239:

Only notability is at stake, not the quality of the article. I presume the 1.000.000 viewers are independent of each other and of Alex Jones. And I presume Google is correct in its counting. —

2632: 2117: 4680:

The problem is this guy who started this DRV wants to keep the article but thinks this is a place where he can get a review of the article's quality itself (something that is provided at

3516: 4125:

for now. If anyone wants to pull content from this history behind the redirect and merge it into Tire, or specify a more direct redirect location, they are free to do so editorially. –

1883: 3527:(no consensus). Now, it has been a year, so consensus might have changed. Failure in this UCFD to address the keep arguments made in those discussions makes this discussion violate 3119:

My closing decision did not rely on counting votes. You appear to feel the arguments in the keep direction were stronger than I do; perhaps we should allow others to comment. — Carl

3520: 3740: 3652:; general agreement among editors. "Not a vote" doesn't mean "ignore the discussion and close according to your own personal whims". Without consensus the AfD defaults to keep. " 2409: 658: 4726: 2113: 3524: 4254: 4262: 3487:

Finally, clean up of CFDs usually involves simple deletes and renames which are easily processed as opposed to UCFDs which require more editing of templates port-decision. --

3346:

We hear you. However, please note that using rude language (and failing to give a rationale for your position) doesn't give your opinion any more weight than anyone else's.--

1012:

band that records a theme for a tv show, and then does nothing else of note. Seeing as this is not the case, we can certainly keep the article around, it just needs some TLC.

826: 3657: 3460:

were "divorced", didn't that in effect make "user category namespace" distinct from plain " main category namespace", just like "user space" is distinct from "main space"?--

1284:

Furthermore, there is a list of university marching bands, this one belongs on it. The article just needed a lot of junk removed, and left with real encyclopedic material.

4275: 1660: 1655: 1509:

Basically what happened is a lot of people in the group saw the article, and not being experienced contributors started adding all manner of non-notable material to it.

871:

There is absolutely no grounds for deletion here. If you are to delete this article, you may as well go and delete all articles from any band in any college. If I see

3018:" (my emphasis). As I have said, not only several oppose rationales but several keep rationales implicitly accepted that the categories violate the NPOV policy. — Carl 1327: 4684:, not here) and can complain about how keep voters in the AfD were treated. The close was correct because this is not the place where he can get what he's asking for. 4659:, but as I noted in my closing there seemed to be sufficient sourcing that indicated a possibility the subject meet the spirit of the guideline if not the letter (and 2277: 1664: 1340:

listed and they were both shy of references and citations. If there is original research in the articles it needs to come out and the information needs to be sourced.

1173: 921:

for a school band to get an article of its own, it would have to be pretty darn special. Supposedly doing the theme song to "Coach" (a marching-band tune) isn't even

4327:, where there's already a nice section on tire performance metrics just perfect for it. These sorts of things don't seem to make very good standalone articles: even 1303: 1079: 878:

Knowledge (XXG) is not a source. I'm not going to go searching an article for sources you say are there. A band's official website is not an independent source per

534:

Isn't it a bit too much too ask, for our establishment to discuss an anti-establishment video in order to assert notability so we can write an article about it? --X

3941:

Radical usurptions of !vote counts should only occur when points by one side are completely amiss. That is not the case here. The keep side may not have linked to

1689: 1647: 4750:

that the consensus was closer to keep; still, despite overwhelming press citations and YouTube stats, I never could find an article with his name in the title.

4520: 174: 2780:

Agreed, but I believe that the commenters' meaning could easily be inferred, in this case. Especially since it's been made clear that all Wikipedian categories

1298:

Spartaz, regarding your suggestion that similar articles also be nominated for deletion, it seems that Bassgoonist has done just that, with two separate bands (

1084: 3469:

I would say that anything in namespace 2 ("User") or 3 ("User talk") is in user space, and nothing else is. UCFD versus CFD is unrelated to namespaces. — Carl

48: 34: 4239:

which is a term used in the mining industry for measuring tire wear on trucks and loaders. Could you please reconsider? Here are some references to the term:

1183: 4526: 3306:

people choose to add these categories to their pages. NPOV is for commenting on third parties, not oneself. Let people pigeonhole themselves as they wish. -

1913: 1733: 2985:

and had indicated how it was relevant: it appears to me that neither your closure rationale nor your subsequent explanations here test that assumption. --

1523:

I think a speedy overturn might be of use here. The original article wasn't a total loss, there is still some useful material there, does any admin agree?

1399: 1217: 2646: 3735: 2404: 2120:(for a company that didn't exist in 1999). Notability is there, notability is asserted in the intro, and the jargon used is understandable in context. -- 653: 1831: 43: 2980:

Carl, the "policy concerns" were remarkably flimsy: an assertion that the categories were divisive, without (so far as I can see) any explanation of

3595:

in this just let a discussion go to the end, and then close it according to the will of those who voted? In this case, the discussion was clearly a

1069: 3067:

Carl, if the user categories are deemed to be "encyclopaedic content", then article talk pages are even more so to be encyclopaedic, which means

3435:

With due respect to your opinion, my belief is that the category namespace is not user space, and WP:NOT covers the category namespace. — Carl

4064:

nobody has shown (by diffs or other real-life Knowledge (XXG) examples) that this category is against the project's goal or in any way divisive

316:

I don't really get what it is that you would like to have? An independent source stating that 1.000.000 people have viewed the documentary? —

4294:

However, personal essays are still unsuitable for Knowledge (XXG). The article would then consist of a definition plus a list of references.

3372: 3057: 2994: 2912: 2884: 2692: 2446: 2317: 2094:. Deleting the "Products and services" section would have addressed the issue of "spam". I do not think the article otherwise qualifies as a 1601: 1141: 1131: 1119: 1099: 3702:

It simply isn't a vote; the final count doesn't matter. My opinion remains that the global consensus on WP:NOT is what matters here. — Carl

783: 778: 299:

page hits alone do not establish notability. If Knowledge (XXG) were to say a million hits made it notable that would be self-synthesis, ie

787: 39: 2300:

debate was closed as delete all, but vote count was one terse non-vote ("Bilge.Delete"), 4 "delete all", 2 "keep all", and 2 to keep the

1136: 1114: 1651: 2607: 1912:

Looking at the logs, this was protected while the artist was also deemed unincludable. We've now changed our opinion on the artist (

1732:

Looking at the logs, this was protected while the artist was also deemed unincludable. We've now changed our opinion on the artist (

812: 770: 2615: 4671:). That said, I'm fine with letting this DRV run course if someone wants to contend that my decision was somehow out of process.-- 2057: 1344: 369: 4251: 2971:

ideology, I don't see that there was a consensus to delete either (which is not to be mistaken with a no-consensus to restore).--

1788: 1737: 1608: 1222: 978:(But if this is the only claim, it is probably more appropriate to have a mention in the main article and redirect to that page.) 4221: 3848:

Wikipedians have their own user pages, but they may be used only to present information relevant to working on the encyclopedia.

2598: 2554: 21: 4694: 4581: 131: 126: 3750:. As such categories are expressly forbidden by policy, any attempts to change this ought be directed to the appropriate page. 2304:

but delete the subcats. On a vote-count the result was therefore either "no consensus" or "delete the sub-categories but keep

2336:

as no consensus, whichever is appropriate under the circumstances (if someone would be kind enough to point it out for me).--

135: 2953:

about the politics categories – we can't answer hypothetical questions about why editors didn't give their opinion. — Carl

227:

Does this film have independent multiple reliable sources that can be used to verify the article and establish notability?

4652: 4477: 4472: 4423: 4267: 2252: 1643: 1596: 1551: 1239: 4571:

Uh what exactly is it that you want? This article was never deleted, so there's no need to bring it to deletion review.

4481: 1212: 160: 118: 4765: 4443: 4377: 4144: 4096: 3653: 2581: 2533: 2226: 2182: 1980: 1931: 1806: 1755: 1626: 1575: 749: 704: 531: 97: 17: 2260: 2014: 2009: 1200: 1151: 2305: 2301: 2243: 2203: 1535:

Even out of my usual subject, it is clear that the AfD ignored the nature of the article and the nature of the band.

1146: 603: 4506: 4464: 3071:(since opinions are by definition the expression of a POV and aren't NPOV). Surely, that can't be what you meant?-- 2018: 3368: 3053: 3044:

are more unencylopedic or more divisive than others: if those arguments are sufficient, why not just mass-delete

2990: 2908: 2880: 2688: 2442: 2313: 1195: 4178: 4173: 3525:

Knowledge (XXG):Categories for deletion/Log/2006 June 19#Category:Wikipedians by politics and all subcategories

2043: 2001: 774: 4681: 3883:

user categories as they can all be used for social networking. Pardon my French, but this is a clear case of

3879:

in front of the collaborative value of the category (any category, for that matter), you might as well delete

3521:

Knowledge (XXG):Categories for deletion/Log/2006 January 4#Category:Wikipedians by (subjective categorization)

2679:

sounds impressive, it is not a policy or a guideline or even an essay: it is merely a set of links, mostly to

1358:- college marching bands of 1A teams are inherently notable, but please find a better name for the article. -- 1089: 4543:" for deletion was addressed, various users and contributors comments were censored and removed. Terms like 4182: 1902: 1722: 2566:

This is obviously a gray area of policy and both sides made competent points in the deletion discussion. –

3813: 3771: 3427: 3338: 3316: 3295: 2804:

personal expression, but I don't believe personal expression is a primary goal of user categories. — Carl

2486:. Political opinions are fine in userspace, but they shouldn't spill over into the category namespace. -- 2429: 1299: 1074: 3528: 3337:

They're cruft, crap, bilge, nonsense, useless for constructing an encyclopedia. Hello! Anybody there? --

3179:

Carl, didn't you just agree to let the other editors comment? Must you argue with each comment in turn?--

462: 4604:. There may be valid grounds to close this early, but "the article wasn't deleted" ain't one of them. -- 4207: 4165: 1109: 393: 3635:

really have no idea how someone can honestly conclude such a consensus was demonstrated in this case.

3248:

to Knowledge (XXG), in the light of the explanation around the beginning of this debate as to how they

2162: 896: 685:

Notability established, the contents can easily be verified though google video, creator is notable. --

4754: 4738: 4717: 4699: 4675: 4629: 4612: 4586: 4565: 4432: 4366: 4350: 4310: 4133: 4085: 4070: 4054: 4038: 4026: 4005: 3989: 3974: 3961: 3931: 3915: 3891: 3858: 3837: 3816: 3799: 3774: 3754: 3742: 3714: 3697: 3686: 3664: 3639: 3625: 3603: 3583: 3571: 3559: 3547: 3535: 3491: 3481: 3464: 3447: 3430: 3403: 3377: 3350: 3341: 3332: 3319: 3310: 3298: 3278: 3264: 3235: 3217: 3200: 3183: 3174: 3156: 3131: 3114: 3093: 3075: 3062: 3030: 2999: 2975: 2965: 2947: 2935: 2917: 2889: 2865: 2845: 2816: 2798: 2775: 2758: 2742: 2709: 2697: 2660: 2570: 2522: 2509: 2492: 2470: 2432: 2423: 2411: 2395: 2381: 2372: 2360: 2340: 2322: 2215: 2171: 2154: 2142: 2136:

G11 is only for articles where there is no salvageable content and this does not seem to be the case.

2128: 2104: 2086: 2071: 1969: 1920: 1906: 1795: 1744: 1726: 1615: 1564: 1541: 1527: 1513: 1502: 1481: 1468: 1446: 1426: 1423: 1407: 1382: 1379: 1362: 1310: 1307: 1288: 1277: 1260: 1039: 1036: 999: 964: 944: 909: 906: 886: 866: 850: 840: 738: 693: 677: 660: 644: 632: 611: 588: 560: 527: 506: 484: 453: 451: 422: 413: 396: 383: 355: 338: 325: 307: 288: 268: 248: 231: 218: 122: 86: 3364: 3049: 2986: 2904: 2876: 2787: 2684: 2438: 2309: 1403:

would of course have the full name at the start of the article, with a full explanation in the body.

1178: 1104: 4599:

made in deletion-related discussions. This includes appeals to restore pages that have been deleted

4047: 3821:

As I have stated, I don't believe any part of the Category: namespace is userspace. See the lede of

3396: 3194:

they can be considered divisive, although he (tariqajotu) feels they are not too divisive to be kept

2564:"Radical usurptions of !vote counts should only occur when points by one side are completely amiss". 2463: 4733: 4690: 4577: 3636: 3544: 3488: 3400: 2467: 1498: 1494: 1248: 4751: 4747: 4746:

I didn't realize this was still here. Nice to see some editors' watching my back. I agree with

4714: 4557: 4363: 3855: 3600: 3307: 3232: 2420: 2125: 1897: 1717: 883: 847: 608: 599: 335: 304: 665:

No real opinion whether this should be a protected redirect or salted, but its alternate titles

4169: 1324: 4646: 4415: 3809: 3767: 3423: 3315:

Endorse close. Should have been straightforward T1 speedies. It's an encyclopedia, folks. --

3291: 2567: 2488: 2100: 2068: 1478: 856: 690: 674: 556: 523: 409: 321: 284: 244: 214: 3822: 3784: 3517:

Knowledge (XXG):Categories for deletion/Log/2005 December 18#Category:Wikipedians by politics

3457: 2291: 1375: 900:

Independent source telling story of band's re-naming in 1978 (written by a non band member):

766: 725: 203: 4609: 4082: 4035: 4034:. No valid reason for deletion. Original decision was reached simply out of editor's taste. 3952: 3922: 3751: 3208: 2763:

These categories are not in user space, as Black Falcon stated higher in the debate. — Carl

2559: 2519: 1524: 1510: 1443: 1404: 1285: 1274: 961: 863: 837: 4660: 4656: 4638: 4014: 3946: 3942: 3876: 3867: 3843: 3780: 3671: 3509:

Knowledge (XXG):User categories for discussion/Archive/March 2007#Wikipedians by Politics I

3453: 3419: 3412: 3408: 3392: 3356: 3253: 3099: 2790:

and must show that in their naming. So we could easily suggest that such subcats are being

2727: 2680: 2676: 2672: 2483: 2479: 2459: 2095: 1244: 4236: 4022: 3971: 3850:" Perhap you should read it and not make big bolded statements about them that are wrong. 3649: 2505: 1785: 1605: 1094: 960:(not rules) for inclusion for a musical group is performing the theme song for a TV show. 74:– Deletion endorsed. The redlink has been replaced with a redirect to match the result of 4513: 4214: 2639: 2284: 2050: 1876: 1696: 976:

That is indeed correct, but far from the whole story. What it says right after that is "

819: 492: 365: 331: 300: 167: 303:. Unless you can point to a published source of this information deletion was correct. - 4730: 4685: 4672: 4572: 4468: 4332: 4328: 3846:, the policy cited above in his explanation, is most definitely about the user space: " 3674:, and it is that global consensus that I was considering when closing this CfD. — Carl 3661: 3568: 3206:

actually caused problems. I'm not sure how that reason was not good enough for you. --

2896: 1965: 1490: 981: 926: 901: 734: 570: 548: 501: 466: 380: 4246: 3844:

WP:NOT#Knowledge (XXG) is not a blog.2C webspace provider.2C or social networking site

3762:. Perhaps you can name the policy. I can't find anyone so far naming a policy which 3190:

We need to draw the "divisive line" somewhere, but these categories are not across it.

2705:, as per BrownHairedGirl's points, which sum up the debate much better than I could.-- 1370:- Agreed on the name. The article should probably be under the full name of the band ( 879: 569:(which for all we know might be something else entirely)??? I really don't think so. 260: 4562: 4307: 4067: 3888: 3851: 3832: 3794: 3709: 3694: 3681: 3630:

Yes, which is why adherring to a consensus based approach ought to require agreement

3620: 3614: 3580: 3556: 3476: 3461: 3442: 3347: 3329: 3275: 3261: 3228: 3197: 3180: 3169: 3126: 3111: 3088: 3072: 3025: 2972: 2960: 2944: 2930: 2860: 2842: 2811: 2770: 2737: 2706: 2657: 2392: 2378: 2355: 2337: 2121: 1465: 1163: 627: 621: 4642: 4626: 4407: 3532: 2005: 1917: 1893: 1741: 1713: 1341: 1257: 1253: 686: 670: 641: 552: 519: 518:

About reviewers: "TerrorStorm review" has almost as many hits as "Yentl review". —

515: 419: 405: 352: 317: 280: 265: 240: 228: 210: 4601:

as well as appeals to delete pages which were not deleted after a prior discussion

4498: 4199: 2035: 1861: 1681: 804: 152: 1916:). Is there any independent, reliable coverage to demonstrate some notability? 4605: 4259: 4127: 3258:

Deletion Review is to be used if the closer interpreted the debate incorrectly.

2900: 2419:

these are NOT divisive. They let people pigeonhole themselves as they see fit. -

2209: 2151: 1740:. Is there any independent, reliable coverage to demonstrate some notability? 666: 619:, allow redirect. Insufficient independent sources but a plausible search term. 440: 114: 80: 70: 605: 4051: 4018: 2501: 1359: 2428:

Endorse close. Good call. Should have been straightforward T1 speedies. --

1420: 860: 4553: 4460: 4398: 4017:; Not encyclopedic; does not help the project. Good call by closing admin. 3998: 2823: 2795: 2755: 2369: 2080:

A fundamentally straight-forward article that should not have been speedied.

1962: 1556: 1168: 731: 496: 330:

You do understand that you going to the website and looking up the views is

4279:

Formulas for calculating TKPH, Tyres1, Specialist exporters of earthmovers

2391:

No grounds to overturn the closing admin's judgment about the discussion.

1439: 859:

the band is mentioned here, with two sources. The band's official webpage

4295: 3985: 3911: 3887:. Apologies in advance to all those whom these words may have offended.-- 3828: 3790: 3705: 3677: 3507:

I recall prior discussions about these types of category. An example is

3472: 3438: 3260:

and the contention of this DRV is that this is precisely the case here.--

3165: 3152: 3122: 3084: 3021: 2956: 2926: 2856: 2807: 2766: 2733: 2351: 2167: 2138: 2082: 1537: 1256:

00:06, 22 June 2007 (UTC)Last point struck - see below for explanation.

1997: 1952: 895:

Independent source regarding band's recording of the Coach theme song:

2903:". Either way, it's not an acceptance of the claim of divisiveness. -- 78:, as this is the same subject matter yet simply a different title. – 4282: 279:

I don't believe verification is what was at stake, am I mistaken? —

4280: 3511:(keep). That was not linked in the UCfD discussion. Nor were the 3290:

to editing the encyclopedia, by making biases readily apparent. —

76:

Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Terror Storm (3rd nomination)

435:

reliable sourcing and avoiding OR - we have to wait until someone

3909:(following Arthur Rubin) as decided without any basis in policy. 3069:

no one has the right to discuss their opinions on Knowledge (XXG)

4536: 4359: 4324: 4161: 4122: 4117: 4050:, especially when this junk is contrary to the project's goals. 1438:

but on what I would consider is a more proper/official webpage (

418:

If 10^6 views is actually notable a reliable source should say.

4617:

I've linked above the prior DRV and the AFD. I also link here

2437:

For goodness sake, Tony, T1 is for templates not categories. --

4243: 3567:- I don't see a "rough consensus for deletion" here at all. — 3106:

divisive (which is but one undemonstrated POV)? If there are '

1372:

Iowa State University Cyclone Football "Varsity" Marching Band

4593:

Knowledge (XXG):Deletion review considers disputed deletions

1824:

Eyelash Curlers & Butcher Knives (What's The Difference?)

1782:

Eyelash Curlers & Butcher Knives (What's the difference?)

1777:

Eyelash Curlers & Butcher Knives (What's The Difference?)

4266:

Maximising the life of haul tryck tyres in surface mining,

3515:

prior discussions for the (as then extant) entire group at

3355:

Tony's reliance on T1 doesn't impress either. Please read

3110:

concrete examples, why haven't they been brought forward?--

364:

version of the article before deletion can be viewed here:

2754:

in opposition to the supposition that WP:NOT applies.) -

204:

http://video.google.nl/videoplay?docid=786048453686176230

4066:, despite editors requesting proof of this repeatedly.-- 532:

Wikipedia_talk:Notability#Let.27s_give_our_power_away.3F

514:

It is briefly mentioned in two scholar.google articles.

4591:

I have reopened this: as the top of the DRV page says,

4494: 4490: 4486: 4195: 4191: 4187: 2623: 2619: 2611: 2603: 2268: 2264: 2256: 2248: 2031: 2027: 2023: 1857: 1853: 1849: 1677: 1673: 1669: 800: 796: 792: 148: 144: 140: 3648:

than just a majority to delete something. You need a

379:

It has the notability if the evidence you say is true.

366:

http://www.talk2000.nl/mediawiki/index.php/TerrorStorm

195:

1.000.000 plus views - notable? Dear Fellow Editors,

2466:

and I think that we have a well reasoned decision. --

3654:

These processes are not decided through a head count

3098:

You seem to be (I'd say 'wilfully', but I'd fail to

2923:

keep rationales address the policy concerns. — Carl

1554:, which could be counted as the "pros" of the area. 549:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/5290674.stm

4242:Ton Kilometer Per Hour Application, SAE Standards, 3656:... If there is no consensus, the page is kept". " 3529:

Knowledge (XXG):Consensus#"Asking the other parent"

1419:- I disagree. The official web site for the band ( 3779:The policies I cited in my closing comments were 2870:Carl, the point you miss here is that just about 565:So you want us to keep around an article because 3734:as per closing admin's rationale. Very valid. — 1174:Arizona State University Sun Devil Marching Band 4077:As per my comment on the religious categories, 2514:As per mo comment on the religious categories, 1442:) it is just called the Cyclone Marching Band. 1304:Michigan State University Spartan Marching Band 1080:Michigan State University Spartan Marching Band 516:http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=terrorstorm 4286:Tyre Optimisation: Operations and Maintenance 3612:Absolutely not. Because this is not a vote. 1247:the bands yourself if you think they meet the 846:Find the sources and then maybe we can talk. - 334:which Knowledge (XXG) doesn't permit, right? - 1085:Northwestern University Wildcat Marching Band 1030:exist. Marching bands, in and of themselves, 370:User:Xiutwel/TerrorStorm for testing purposes 8: 4713:votes. There is nothing for DRV to review. - 3644:Yes, it's not a vote. Which means you need 3188:Besides, tariqabjotu's second comment read: 1184:University of Washington Husky Marching Band 1049:List hidden to make discussion more readable 857:Coach_(TV_series)#Minnesota_State_University 4442:The following is an archived debate of the 4258:Calculating Ton-Kilometre per Hour (TKPH), 4143:The following is an archived debate of the 3808:apply to userspace and user categories. — 3192:How can you interpret that as meaning that 2580:The following is an archived debate of the 2225:The following is an archived debate of the 1979:The following is an archived debate of the 1805:The following is an archived debate of the 1625:The following is an archived debate of the 1400:Iowa State University Cyclone Marching Band 1218:University of Montana Grizzly Marching Band 748:The following is an archived debate of the 96:The following is an archived debate of the 4539:needs a clear review by peers. While the " 4391: 4274:Tyre management software, Klinge Software 4110: 3418:apply to userspace, as noted above and in 2726:Picaroon's deletion rationale – that, per 2599:Category:Wikipedians by political ideology 2555:Category:Wikipedians by political ideology 2547: 2196: 1945: 1769: 1589: 1055: 861:http://www.music.iastate.edu/org/marching/ 718: 63: 4709:clear consensus to keep, discounting the 4046:per Cyde. Policy and common sense trump 1736:). Other versions were also deleted at 602:I have found a few more passing sources 4764:The above is an archived debate of the 4376:The above is an archived debate of the 4095:The above is an archived debate of the 2675:as the argument unaddressed, but while 2532:The above is an archived debate of the 2456:Endorse deletion of parent and children 2181:The above is an archived debate of the 1930:The above is an archived debate of the 1754:The above is an archived debate of the 1574:The above is an archived debate of the 1440:http://www.music.iastate.edu/ensembles/ 1070:The Ohio State University Marching Band 703:The above is an archived debate of the 3274:Valid Cfd discussion and valid close. 4637:, I became aware of the AFD from the 1602:Plastic Surgery Slumber Party (album) 1142:The University of Texas Longhorn Band 1132:Kansas State University Marching Band 1120:University of Minnesota Marching Band 1100:University of Wisconsin Marching Band 7: 2822:that it might be a pervading POV. - 495:discussing the video are lacking. -- 3866:Obviously, for the umpteenth time, 2161:there is presently a discussion at 1137:The Pride of Oklahoma Marching Band 1115:Indiana University Marching Hundred 1059:Expand this box to see discussions 2794:as we treat pages in userspace. - 2330:Overturn and restore main category 2165:and additional voices are welcome. 1378:redirecting to that if necessary. 28: 4235:Hi, you deleted an article about 3579:per closing admin's comments. -- 596:Changing from Endorse to redirect 4358:and redirect to a subheading of 3766:applies to these categories. — 3328:a valid endorsement argument).-- 2899:is hardly as big a rock star as 2118:3500 Google News Archive results 1738:Plastic Surgery Slumber Party EP 1223:The Ohio University Marching 110 4244:Society of Automotive Engineers 2306:Category:Monarchist Wikipedians 2302:Category:Monarchist Wikipedians 2244:Category:Monarchist Wikipedians 2204:Category:Monarchist Wikipedians 348:Endorse on the evidence offered 18:Knowledge (XXG):Deletion review 4062:I must point out that so far, 3016:and other encyclopedic content 2114:33 current Google News results 1: 4556:, as well as wikipedia peers 4268:University of New South Wales 3252:to Knowledge (XXG). Besides, 1644:Plastic Surgery Slumber Party 1597:Plastic Surgery Slumber Party 3920:DGG, you already !voted. -- 2462:and the keeps are basically 1213:Pride of Dixie Marching Band 4682:Knowledge (XXG):Peer review 4121:– Undeleted, redirected to 3658:When in doubt, don't delete 3591:Oh, for Pete's sake. Can't 1201:Pride of the Southland Band 4791: 4635:Comment from closing admin 4356:Undelete as contested prod 2098:(blatant advertising). -- 1477:theme song for a TV show. 1152:Goin' Band from Raiderland 652:as per Guy and GRBerry. — 4755:02:44, 22 June 2007 (UTC) 4739:19:30, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 4718:19:14, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 4700:15:46, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 4676:14:45, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 4630:13:17, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 4613:12:42, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 4587:07:09, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 4566:03:15, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 4433:04:09, 22 June 2007 (UTC) 4367:19:12, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 4351:05:40, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 4311:04:47, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 4134:09:51, 28 June 2007 (UTC) 4086:13:54, 27 June 2007 (UTC) 4071:10:33, 27 June 2007 (UTC) 4055:09:22, 27 June 2007 (UTC) 4039:08:42, 27 June 2007 (UTC) 4027:04:58, 27 June 2007 (UTC) 4006:23:50, 25 June 2007 (UTC) 3990:23:06, 25 June 2007 (UTC) 3975:15:31, 25 June 2007 (UTC) 3962:01:27, 24 June 2007 (UTC) 3932:01:27, 24 June 2007 (UTC) 3916:21:10, 23 June 2007 (UTC) 3892:23:04, 23 June 2007 (UTC) 3859:22:05, 23 June 2007 (UTC) 3838:21:59, 23 June 2007 (UTC) 3817:21:54, 23 June 2007 (UTC) 3800:21:49, 23 June 2007 (UTC) 3775:20:40, 23 June 2007 (UTC) 3755:19:45, 23 June 2007 (UTC) 3743:14:06, 23 June 2007 (UTC) 3715:18:37, 23 June 2007 (UTC) 3698:18:29, 23 June 2007 (UTC) 3687:18:15, 23 June 2007 (UTC) 3665:17:50, 23 June 2007 (UTC) 3640:00:02, 23 June 2007 (UTC) 3626:15:39, 22 June 2007 (UTC) 3604:15:04, 22 June 2007 (UTC) 3584:10:55, 22 June 2007 (UTC) 3572:05:20, 22 June 2007 (UTC) 3560:01:21, 22 June 2007 (UTC) 3548:00:09, 22 June 2007 (UTC) 3536:20:16, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 3492:12:53, 26 June 2007 (UTC) 3482:22:33, 22 June 2007 (UTC) 3465:22:29, 22 June 2007 (UTC) 3448:22:23, 22 June 2007 (UTC) 3431:22:10, 22 June 2007 (UTC) 3404:19:51, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 3378:23:36, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 3351:23:02, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 3342:22:48, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 3333:19:48, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 3320:19:41, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 3311:19:10, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 3299:19:03, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 3279:18:37, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 3265:18:34, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 3236:18:28, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 3218:01:47, 24 June 2007 (UTC) 3201:18:16, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 3184:18:00, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 3175:17:40, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 3157:16:51, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 3132:16:48, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 3115:16:34, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 3094:16:22, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 3076:16:18, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 3063:16:12, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 3031:15:58, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 3000:15:26, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 2976:15:20, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 2966:15:14, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 2948:15:02, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 2936:14:54, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 2918:14:49, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 2890:14:44, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 2866:14:43, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 2846:14:31, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 2817:14:58, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 2799:14:50, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 2776:14:46, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 2759:14:36, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 2743:14:22, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 2710:14:06, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 2698:14:01, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 2661:13:24, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 2571:21:35, 30 June 2007 (UTC) 2523:13:57, 27 June 2007 (UTC) 2510:04:57, 27 June 2007 (UTC) 2493:22:14, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 2471:19:47, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 2433:19:40, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 2424:19:11, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 2412:18:37, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 2396:18:33, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 2382:14:48, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 2373:14:47, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 2361:14:35, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 2341:14:16, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 2323:14:13, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 2216:09:49, 28 June 2007 (UTC) 2172:21:07, 23 June 2007 (UTC) 2155:18:29, 23 June 2007 (UTC) 2143:21:50, 22 June 2007 (UTC) 2129:05:33, 22 June 2007 (UTC) 2105:18:35, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 2087:16:43, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 2072:16:21, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 1970:07:53, 27 June 2007 (UTC) 1921:17:24, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 1907:16:45, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 1796:18:04, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 1745:17:23, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 1727:16:45, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 1616:18:04, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 1565:22:09, 23 June 2007 (UTC) 1542:21:48, 22 June 2007 (UTC) 1528:19:02, 22 June 2007 (UTC) 1514:14:33, 22 June 2007 (UTC) 1503:14:20, 22 June 2007 (UTC) 1482:13:10, 22 June 2007 (UTC) 1469:07:03, 22 June 2007 (UTC) 1447:18:26, 22 June 2007 (UTC) 1427:16:48, 22 June 2007 (UTC) 1408:16:34, 22 June 2007 (UTC) 1383:11:45, 22 June 2007 (UTC) 1363:06:16, 22 June 2007 (UTC) 1345:06:11, 22 June 2007 (UTC) 1328:03:58, 22 June 2007 (UTC) 1311:05:23, 22 June 2007 (UTC) 1289:04:47, 22 June 2007 (UTC) 1278:00:21, 22 June 2007 (UTC) 1261:06:11, 22 June 2007 (UTC) 1196:The Pride of the Sunshine 1147:Fightin' Texas Aggie Band 1040:00:03, 22 June 2007 (UTC) 1000:14:25, 22 June 2007 (UTC) 965:00:11, 22 June 2007 (UTC) 945:23:08, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 910:22:05, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 887:21:59, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 867:21:50, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 851:21:41, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 841:20:59, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 739:05:36, 29 June 2007 (UTC) 694:23:27, 26 June 2007 (UTC) 678:13:17, 24 June 2007 (UTC) 661:14:00, 23 June 2007 (UTC) 645:15:58, 22 June 2007 (UTC) 633:15:38, 22 June 2007 (UTC) 612:14:27, 22 June 2007 (UTC) 589:13:12, 22 June 2007 (UTC) 561:08:05, 22 June 2007 (UTC) 528:00:04, 22 June 2007 (UTC) 507:23:06, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 485:23:03, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 454:23:01, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 423:00:03, 22 June 2007 (UTC) 414:22:14, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 397:22:02, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 384:21:52, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 356:21:42, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 339:22:01, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 326:21:57, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 308:21:40, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 289:21:57, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 269:21:39, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 249:21:34, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 232:21:25, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 219:21:13, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 87:09:48, 28 June 2007 (UTC) 4771:Please do not modify it. 4449:Please do not modify it. 4383:Please do not modify it. 4331:is a barely-there stub. 4150:Please do not modify it. 4102:Please do not modify it. 3842:That is patently false. 3256:states in point 2 that: 3244:these categories are of 2717:Comment by closing admin 2671:The closing admin cited 2587:Please do not modify it. 2539:Please do not modify it. 2346:Comment by closing admin 2232:Please do not modify it. 2188:Please do not modify it. 1986:Please do not modify it. 1937:Please do not modify it. 1812:Please do not modify it. 1761:Please do not modify it. 1632:Please do not modify it. 1581:Please do not modify it. 1090:Big Red Marching Machine 755:Please do not modify it. 710:Please do not modify it. 439:writes about it first. 103:Please do not modify it. 40:Deletion review archives 3885:shit or get off the pot 3363:, not to categories. -- 2207:– Deletion endorsed. – 673:should both match it. — 567:somebody wore a t-shirt 4768:of the article above. 4744:Speedy endorse closure 4723:Speedy endorse closure 4595:and disputed decisions 4446:of the article above. 4380:of the article above. 4147:of the article above. 4099:of the article above. 2584:of the article above. 2536:of the article above. 2229:of the article above. 2185:of the article above. 1983:of the article above. 1934:of the article above. 1809:of the article above. 1758:of the article above. 1629:of the article above. 1578:of the article above. 1300:Cavalier Marching Band 1075:Michigan Marching Band 752:of the article above. 707:of the article above. 100:of the article above. 4252:Goodyear Tire Company 3804:Quite. They clearly 3240:Please explain fully 2558:– Overturn deletion. 2484:not a political forum 2482:: Knowledge (XXG) is 1110:Hawkeye Marching Band 4032:Overturn and restore 3737:Nearly Headless Nick 2788:Category:Wikipedians 2703:Overturn and restore 2667:Overturn and restore 2406:Nearly Headless Nick 2403:, good job, Carl. — 2377:Seems fair to me. -- 1179:The Pride of Arizona 1105:Penn State Blue Band 836:work to improve it. 655:Nearly Headless Nick 2562:puts it perfectly: 1240:WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS 4619:an AN/I discussion 4558:user:Ichormosquito 1712:Album and song by 1209:Other Conferences 600:Alex Jones (radio) 4778: 4777: 4390: 4389: 4109: 4108: 4025: 3836: 3798: 3713: 3685: 3624: 3480: 3446: 3376: 3173: 3130: 3092: 3061: 3029: 2998: 2964: 2934: 2916: 2888: 2864: 2815: 2774: 2741: 2696: 2546: 2545: 2508: 2450: 2359: 2321: 2195: 2194: 1944: 1943: 1768: 1767: 1588: 1587: 1232: 1231: 717: 716: 631: 559: 526: 505: 412: 332:original research 324: 301:original research 287: 247: 217: 4782: 4773: 4736: 4711:blocked puppets' 4698: 4585: 4516: 4502: 4484: 4451: 4430: 4426: 4422: 4418: 4414: 4410: 4406: 4392: 4385: 4362:per Starblind. - 4348: 4345: 4342: 4339: 4304: 4301: 4298: 4217: 4203: 4185: 4152: 4130: 4111: 4104: 4044:Endorse deletion 4021: 4011:Endorse deletion 4003: 3995:Endorse deletion 3958: 3955: 3928: 3925: 3826: 3788: 3738: 3703: 3675: 3632:above and beyond 3618: 3523:(no consensus), 3470: 3436: 3389:Endorse deletion 3367: 3357:WP:CSD#Templates 3214: 3211: 3163: 3120: 3082: 3052: 3042:these categories 3019: 2989: 2954: 2924: 2907: 2879: 2854: 2805: 2764: 2731: 2687: 2642: 2628: 2627: 2589: 2548: 2541: 2504: 2441: 2407: 2349: 2312: 2287: 2273: 2272: 2234: 2212: 2197: 2190: 2053: 2039: 2021: 1988: 1946: 1939: 1879: 1865: 1847: 1814: 1793: 1770: 1763: 1699: 1685: 1667: 1634: 1613: 1590: 1583: 1563: 1561: 1056: 997: 994: 991: 988: 942: 939: 936: 933: 822: 808: 790: 757: 719: 712: 656: 650:Endorse deletion 638:endorse deletion 625: 617:Endorse deletion 586: 583: 580: 577: 555: 522: 499: 493:Reliable sources 490:Endorse deletion 482: 479: 476: 473: 459:Endorse deletion 447: 444: 408: 320: 283: 243: 213: 170: 156: 138: 105: 83: 64: 53: 33: 4790: 4789: 4785: 4784: 4783: 4781: 4780: 4779: 4769: 4766:deletion review 4734: 4688: 4623:endorse closure 4575: 4531: 4525: 4519: 4512: 4511: 4505: 4475: 4459: 4447: 4444:deletion review 4428: 4424: 4420: 4416: 4412: 4408: 4404: 4381: 4378:deletion review 4346: 4343: 4340: 4337: 4302: 4299: 4296: 4226: 4220: 4213: 4212: 4206: 4176: 4160: 4148: 4145:deletion review 4128: 4100: 4097:deletion review 3999: 3956: 3953: 3926: 3923: 3748:Endorse closure 3736: 3732:Endorse closure 3650:rough consensus 3452:But then, when 3365:BrownHairedGirl 3359:: it refers to 3212: 3209: 3050:BrownHairedGirl 2987:BrownHairedGirl 2905:BrownHairedGirl 2877:BrownHairedGirl 2786:be sub-cats of 2685:BrownHairedGirl 2651: 2645: 2638: 2637: 2631: 2601: 2597: 2585: 2582:deletion review 2537: 2534:deletion review 2476:Endorse closure 2439:BrownHairedGirl 2405: 2401:Endorse closure 2310:BrownHairedGirl 2296: 2290: 2283: 2282: 2276: 2246: 2242: 2230: 2227:deletion review 2210: 2186: 2183:deletion review 2062: 2056: 2049: 2048: 2042: 2012: 1996: 1984: 1981:deletion review 1935: 1932:deletion review 1888: 1882: 1875: 1874: 1868: 1838: 1822: 1810: 1807:deletion review 1789: 1759: 1756:deletion review 1708: 1702: 1695: 1694: 1688: 1658: 1642: 1630: 1627:deletion review 1609: 1579: 1576:deletion review 1557: 1555: 1095:Marching Illini 995: 992: 989: 986: 940: 937: 934: 931: 831: 825: 818: 817: 811: 781: 765: 753: 750:deletion review 708: 705:deletion review 654: 584: 581: 578: 575: 545: 480: 477: 474: 471: 445: 442: 191: 185: 179: 173: 166: 165: 159: 129: 113: 101: 98:deletion review 81: 62: 55: 54: 51: 46: 37: 31: 26: 25: 24: 12: 11: 5: 4788: 4786: 4776: 4775: 4760: 4759: 4758: 4757: 4741: 4720: 4704: 4703: 4702: 4632: 4615: 4589: 4533: 4532: 4529: 4523: 4517: 4509: 4503: 4454: 4453: 4438: 4437: 4436: 4435: 4388: 4387: 4372: 4371: 4370: 4369: 4353: 4333:Andrew Lenahan 4329:Miles per hour 4292: 4291: 4290: 4289: 4284: 4277: 4272: 4264: 4256: 4250:TKPH formula, 4248: 4228: 4227: 4224: 4218: 4210: 4204: 4155: 4154: 4139: 4138: 4137: 4136: 4107: 4106: 4091: 4090: 4089: 4088: 4075: 4074: 4073: 4041: 4029: 4008: 3992: 3977: 3964: 3936: 3935: 3934: 3904: 3903: 3902: 3901: 3900: 3899: 3898: 3897: 3896: 3895: 3894: 3840: 3745: 3728: 3727: 3726: 3725: 3724: 3723: 3722: 3721: 3720: 3719: 3718: 3717: 3642: 3637:Dragons flight 3607: 3606: 3586: 3574: 3562: 3550: 3545:Dragons flight 3538: 3502: 3501: 3500: 3499: 3498: 3497: 3496: 3495: 3494: 3489:After Midnight 3484: 3401:After Midnight 3386: 3385: 3384: 3383: 3382: 3381: 3380: 3335: 3313: 3301: 3281: 3269: 3268: 3267: 3224: 3223: 3222: 3221: 3220: 3203: 3186: 3144: 3143: 3142: 3141: 3140: 3139: 3138: 3137: 3136: 3135: 3134: 3065: 3012: 3011: 3010: 3009: 3008: 3007: 3006: 3005: 3004: 3003: 3002: 2940: 2939: 2938: 2897:Vladimir Putin 2836: 2835: 2834: 2833: 2832: 2831: 2830: 2829: 2828: 2827: 2826: 2746: 2745: 2724: 2713: 2712: 2700: 2670: 2653: 2652: 2649: 2643: 2635: 2629: 2592: 2591: 2576: 2575: 2574: 2573: 2544: 2543: 2528: 2527: 2526: 2525: 2512: 2495: 2473: 2468:After Midnight 2453: 2452: 2451: 2426: 2414: 2398: 2386: 2385: 2384: 2363: 2343: 2298: 2297: 2294: 2288: 2280: 2274: 2237: 2236: 2221: 2220: 2219: 2218: 2193: 2192: 2177: 2176: 2175: 2174: 2158: 2157: 2145: 2131: 2107: 2089: 2064: 2063: 2060: 2054: 2046: 2040: 1991: 1990: 1975: 1974: 1973: 1972: 1942: 1941: 1926: 1925: 1924: 1923: 1890: 1889: 1886: 1880: 1872: 1866: 1817: 1816: 1801: 1800: 1799: 1798: 1766: 1765: 1750: 1749: 1748: 1747: 1710: 1709: 1706: 1700: 1692: 1686: 1637: 1636: 1621: 1620: 1619: 1618: 1586: 1585: 1570: 1569: 1568: 1567: 1544: 1530: 1517: 1516: 1506: 1505: 1484: 1471: 1458: 1457: 1456: 1455: 1454: 1453: 1452: 1451: 1450: 1449: 1430: 1429: 1411: 1410: 1388: 1387: 1386: 1385: 1352: 1351: 1350: 1349: 1348: 1347: 1332: 1331: 1316: 1315: 1314: 1313: 1292: 1291: 1281: 1280: 1264: 1263: 1238:Please review 1230: 1229: 1228: 1227: 1226: 1225: 1220: 1215: 1206: 1205: 1204: 1203: 1198: 1189: 1188: 1187: 1186: 1181: 1176: 1171: 1166: 1157: 1156: 1155: 1154: 1149: 1144: 1139: 1134: 1125: 1124: 1123: 1122: 1117: 1112: 1107: 1102: 1097: 1092: 1087: 1082: 1077: 1072: 1061: 1060: 1054: 1053: 1052: 1051: 1043: 1042: 1020: 1019: 1018: 1017: 1016: 1015: 1014: 1013: 1003: 1002: 982:Andrew Lenahan 968: 967: 948: 947: 927:Andrew Lenahan 914: 904: 903: 898: 892: 891: 890: 889: 876: 853: 833: 832: 829: 823: 815: 809: 760: 759: 744: 743: 742: 741: 729:– Overturn. – 715: 714: 699: 698: 697: 696: 680: 663: 647: 635: 614: 593: 592: 591: 571:Andrew Lenahan 542: 541: 540: 535: 509: 487: 467:Andrew Lenahan 456: 429: 428: 427: 426: 425: 386: 374: 373: 372: 345: 344: 343: 342: 341: 293: 292: 291: 274: 273: 272: 271: 264:don't notice. 252: 251: 234: 207: 206: 193: 192: 189: 183: 177: 171: 163: 157: 108: 107: 92: 91: 90: 89: 61: 56: 47: 38: 30: 29: 27: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 4787: 4774: 4772: 4767: 4762: 4761: 4756: 4753: 4752:Ichormosquito 4749: 4745: 4742: 4740: 4737: 4732: 4728: 4724: 4721: 4719: 4716: 4712: 4708: 4705: 4701: 4696: 4692: 4687: 4683: 4679: 4678: 4677: 4674: 4670: 4666: 4662: 4658: 4654: 4651: 4648: 4644: 4640: 4636: 4633: 4631: 4628: 4624: 4620: 4616: 4614: 4611: 4607: 4603: 4602: 4597: 4596: 4590: 4588: 4583: 4579: 4574: 4570: 4569: 4568: 4567: 4564: 4559: 4555: 4550: 4546: 4542: 4538: 4528: 4522: 4515: 4508: 4500: 4496: 4492: 4488: 4483: 4479: 4474: 4470: 4466: 4462: 4458: 4457: 4456: 4455: 4452: 4450: 4445: 4440: 4439: 4434: 4431: 4427: 4419: 4411: 4401: 4400: 4396: 4395: 4394: 4393: 4386: 4384: 4379: 4374: 4373: 4368: 4365: 4361: 4357: 4354: 4352: 4349: 4334: 4330: 4326: 4322: 4318: 4315: 4314: 4313: 4312: 4309: 4305: 4288: 4285: 4283: 4281: 4278: 4276: 4273: 4271: 4269: 4265: 4263: 4261: 4257: 4255: 4253: 4249: 4247: 4245: 4241: 4240: 4238: 4234: 4233: 4232: 4223: 4216: 4209: 4201: 4197: 4193: 4189: 4184: 4180: 4175: 4171: 4167: 4163: 4159: 4158: 4157: 4156: 4153: 4151: 4146: 4141: 4140: 4135: 4132: 4131: 4124: 4120: 4119: 4115: 4114: 4113: 4112: 4105: 4103: 4098: 4093: 4092: 4087: 4084: 4080: 4076: 4072: 4069: 4065: 4061: 4058: 4057: 4056: 4053: 4049: 4045: 4042: 4040: 4037: 4033: 4030: 4028: 4024: 4020: 4016: 4012: 4009: 4007: 4004: 4002: 3996: 3993: 3991: 3988: 3987: 3981: 3978: 3976: 3973: 3968: 3965: 3963: 3960: 3959: 3948: 3944: 3940: 3937: 3933: 3930: 3929: 3919: 3918: 3917: 3914: 3913: 3908: 3905: 3893: 3890: 3886: 3882: 3878: 3873: 3869: 3865: 3862: 3861: 3860: 3857: 3853: 3849: 3845: 3841: 3839: 3834: 3830: 3824: 3820: 3819: 3818: 3815: 3811: 3807: 3803: 3802: 3801: 3796: 3792: 3786: 3782: 3778: 3777: 3776: 3773: 3769: 3765: 3761: 3758: 3757: 3756: 3753: 3749: 3746: 3744: 3741: 3739: 3733: 3730: 3729: 3716: 3711: 3707: 3701: 3700: 3699: 3696: 3691: 3690: 3688: 3683: 3679: 3673: 3668: 3667: 3666: 3663: 3659: 3655: 3651: 3647: 3643: 3641: 3638: 3633: 3629: 3628: 3627: 3622: 3617: 3616: 3611: 3610: 3609: 3608: 3605: 3602: 3601:Mike Selinker 3598: 3594: 3590: 3587: 3585: 3582: 3578: 3575: 3573: 3570: 3566: 3563: 3561: 3558: 3554: 3551: 3549: 3546: 3542: 3539: 3537: 3534: 3530: 3526: 3522: 3518: 3514: 3510: 3506: 3503: 3493: 3490: 3485: 3483: 3478: 3474: 3468: 3467: 3466: 3463: 3459: 3455: 3451: 3450: 3449: 3444: 3440: 3434: 3433: 3432: 3429: 3425: 3421: 3417: 3414: 3410: 3407: 3406: 3405: 3402: 3398: 3394: 3390: 3387: 3379: 3374: 3370: 3366: 3362: 3358: 3354: 3353: 3352: 3349: 3345: 3344: 3343: 3340: 3336: 3334: 3331: 3326: 3323: 3322: 3321: 3318: 3314: 3312: 3309: 3305: 3302: 3300: 3297: 3293: 3289: 3285: 3282: 3280: 3277: 3273: 3272:Endorse close 3270: 3266: 3263: 3259: 3255: 3251: 3247: 3243: 3239: 3238: 3237: 3234: 3230: 3225: 3219: 3216: 3215: 3204: 3202: 3199: 3195: 3191: 3187: 3185: 3182: 3178: 3177: 3176: 3171: 3167: 3160: 3159: 3158: 3155: 3154: 3148: 3145: 3133: 3128: 3124: 3118: 3117: 3116: 3113: 3109: 3105: 3101: 3097: 3096: 3095: 3090: 3086: 3079: 3078: 3077: 3074: 3070: 3066: 3064: 3059: 3055: 3051: 3047: 3043: 3038: 3035:Carl, surely 3034: 3033: 3032: 3027: 3023: 3017: 3013: 3001: 2996: 2992: 2988: 2983: 2979: 2978: 2977: 2974: 2969: 2968: 2967: 2962: 2958: 2951: 2950: 2949: 2946: 2941: 2937: 2932: 2928: 2921: 2920: 2919: 2914: 2910: 2906: 2902: 2898: 2893: 2892: 2891: 2886: 2882: 2878: 2873: 2869: 2868: 2867: 2862: 2858: 2852: 2849: 2848: 2847: 2844: 2840: 2837: 2825: 2820: 2819: 2818: 2813: 2809: 2802: 2801: 2800: 2797: 2793: 2789: 2785: 2784: 2779: 2778: 2777: 2772: 2768: 2762: 2761: 2760: 2757: 2753: 2748: 2747: 2744: 2739: 2735: 2729: 2725: 2721: 2720: 2718: 2715: 2714: 2711: 2708: 2704: 2701: 2699: 2694: 2690: 2686: 2682: 2678: 2674: 2668: 2665: 2664: 2663: 2662: 2659: 2648: 2641: 2634: 2625: 2621: 2617: 2613: 2609: 2605: 2600: 2596: 2595: 2594: 2593: 2590: 2588: 2583: 2578: 2577: 2572: 2569: 2565: 2561: 2557: 2556: 2552: 2551: 2550: 2549: 2542: 2540: 2535: 2530: 2529: 2524: 2521: 2517: 2513: 2511: 2507: 2503: 2499: 2496: 2494: 2491: 2490: 2485: 2481: 2477: 2474: 2472: 2469: 2465: 2461: 2457: 2454: 2448: 2444: 2440: 2436: 2435: 2434: 2431: 2427: 2425: 2422: 2418: 2415: 2413: 2410: 2408: 2402: 2399: 2397: 2394: 2390: 2389:Endorse close 2387: 2383: 2380: 2376: 2375: 2374: 2371: 2367: 2364: 2362: 2357: 2353: 2347: 2344: 2342: 2339: 2335: 2331: 2327: 2326: 2325: 2324: 2319: 2315: 2311: 2307: 2303: 2293: 2286: 2279: 2270: 2266: 2262: 2258: 2254: 2250: 2245: 2241: 2240: 2239: 2238: 2235: 2233: 2228: 2223: 2222: 2217: 2214: 2213: 2206: 2205: 2201: 2200: 2199: 2198: 2191: 2189: 2184: 2179: 2178: 2173: 2170: 2169: 2164: 2160: 2159: 2156: 2153: 2149: 2146: 2144: 2141: 2140: 2135: 2132: 2130: 2127: 2123: 2119: 2115: 2111: 2108: 2106: 2103: 2102: 2097: 2093: 2090: 2088: 2085: 2084: 2079: 2076: 2075: 2074: 2073: 2070: 2069:Austin Murphy 2059: 2052: 2045: 2037: 2033: 2029: 2025: 2020: 2016: 2011: 2007: 2003: 1999: 1995: 1994: 1993: 1992: 1989: 1987: 1982: 1977: 1976: 1971: 1968: 1967: 1964: 1959: 1955: 1954: 1950: 1949: 1948: 1947: 1940: 1938: 1933: 1928: 1927: 1922: 1919: 1915: 1911: 1910: 1909: 1908: 1904: 1900: 1899: 1898:milk the cows 1895: 1885: 1878: 1871: 1863: 1859: 1855: 1851: 1846: 1842: 1837: 1833: 1829: 1825: 1821: 1820: 1819: 1818: 1815: 1813: 1808: 1803: 1802: 1797: 1794: 1792: 1787: 1783: 1779: 1778: 1774: 1773: 1772: 1771: 1764: 1762: 1757: 1752: 1751: 1746: 1743: 1739: 1735: 1731: 1730: 1729: 1728: 1724: 1720: 1719: 1718:milk the cows 1715: 1705: 1698: 1691: 1683: 1679: 1675: 1671: 1666: 1662: 1657: 1653: 1649: 1645: 1641: 1640: 1639: 1638: 1635: 1633: 1628: 1623: 1622: 1617: 1614: 1612: 1607: 1603: 1599: 1598: 1594: 1593: 1592: 1591: 1584: 1582: 1577: 1572: 1571: 1566: 1562: 1560: 1553: 1548: 1545: 1543: 1540: 1539: 1534: 1531: 1529: 1526: 1522: 1519: 1518: 1515: 1512: 1508: 1507: 1504: 1500: 1496: 1492: 1488: 1485: 1483: 1480: 1475: 1472: 1470: 1467: 1463: 1460: 1459: 1448: 1445: 1441: 1437: 1434: 1433: 1432: 1431: 1428: 1425: 1421: 1418: 1415: 1414: 1413: 1412: 1409: 1406: 1401: 1398:I think that 1397: 1394: 1393: 1392: 1391: 1390: 1389: 1384: 1381: 1377: 1373: 1369: 1366: 1365: 1364: 1361: 1357: 1354: 1353: 1346: 1343: 1338: 1337: 1336: 1335: 1334: 1333: 1329: 1326: 1321: 1318: 1317: 1312: 1309: 1305: 1301: 1297: 1294: 1293: 1290: 1287: 1283: 1282: 1279: 1276: 1271: 1268: 1267: 1266: 1265: 1262: 1259: 1255: 1252: 1250: 1246: 1243:Feel free to 1241: 1237: 1234: 1233: 1224: 1221: 1219: 1216: 1214: 1211: 1210: 1208: 1207: 1202: 1199: 1197: 1194: 1193: 1191: 1190: 1185: 1182: 1180: 1177: 1175: 1172: 1170: 1167: 1165: 1164:Stanford Band 1162: 1161: 1159: 1158: 1153: 1150: 1148: 1145: 1143: 1140: 1138: 1135: 1133: 1130: 1129: 1127: 1126: 1121: 1118: 1116: 1113: 1111: 1108: 1106: 1103: 1101: 1098: 1096: 1093: 1091: 1088: 1086: 1083: 1081: 1078: 1076: 1073: 1071: 1068: 1067: 1065: 1064: 1063: 1062: 1058: 1057: 1050: 1047: 1046: 1045: 1044: 1041: 1038: 1033: 1029: 1025: 1022: 1021: 1010: 1007: 1006: 1005: 1004: 1001: 998: 983: 979: 975: 972: 971: 970: 969: 966: 963: 959: 955: 952: 951: 950: 949: 946: 943: 928: 924: 920: 917: 916: 915: 912: 911: 908: 902: 899: 897: 894: 893: 888: 885: 881: 877: 874: 870: 869: 868: 865: 862: 858: 855:For starters 854: 852: 849: 845: 844: 843: 842: 839: 828: 821: 814: 806: 802: 798: 794: 789: 785: 780: 776: 772: 768: 764: 763: 762: 761: 758: 756: 751: 746: 745: 740: 737: 736: 733: 728: 727: 723: 722: 721: 720: 713: 711: 706: 701: 700: 695: 692: 688: 684: 681: 679: 676: 672: 668: 664: 662: 659: 657: 651: 648: 646: 643: 639: 636: 634: 629: 624: 623: 618: 615: 613: 610: 606: 604: 601: 597: 594: 590: 587: 572: 568: 564: 563: 562: 558: 554: 550: 547: 546: 539: 536: 533: 529: 525: 521: 517: 513: 510: 508: 503: 498: 494: 491: 488: 486: 483: 468: 464: 460: 457: 455: 452: 449: 448: 438: 433: 430: 424: 421: 417: 416: 415: 411: 407: 403: 400: 399: 398: 395: 390: 387: 385: 382: 378: 375: 371: 367: 362: 359: 358: 357: 354: 349: 346: 340: 337: 333: 329: 328: 327: 323: 319: 315: 312: 311: 310: 309: 306: 302: 298: 294: 290: 286: 282: 278: 277: 276: 275: 270: 267: 262: 259: 256: 255: 254: 253: 250: 246: 242: 238: 235: 233: 230: 226: 223: 222: 221: 220: 216: 212: 205: 202: 201: 200: 196: 188: 182: 176: 169: 162: 154: 150: 146: 142: 137: 133: 128: 124: 120: 116: 112: 111: 110: 109: 106: 104: 99: 94: 93: 88: 85: 84: 77: 73: 72: 68: 67: 66: 65: 60: 57: 50: 45: 41: 36: 23: 19: 4770: 4763: 4743: 4722: 4710: 4706: 4668: 4664: 4649: 4641:report that 4634: 4622: 4600: 4598: 4594: 4592: 4548: 4544: 4540: 4534: 4448: 4441: 4403: 4397: 4382: 4375: 4355: 4336: 4320: 4316: 4293: 4229: 4149: 4142: 4126: 4116: 4101: 4094: 4078: 4063: 4059: 4043: 4031: 4010: 4000: 3994: 3984: 3979: 3966: 3951: 3938: 3921: 3910: 3906: 3884: 3880: 3871: 3870:would apply 3863: 3847: 3810:Arthur Rubin 3805: 3768:Arthur Rubin 3763: 3759: 3747: 3731: 3645: 3631: 3613: 3597:no consensus 3596: 3592: 3588: 3576: 3564: 3552: 3540: 3512: 3504: 3424:Arthur Rubin 3415: 3388: 3360: 3339:Tony Sidaway 3324: 3317:Tony Sidaway 3303: 3292:Arthur Rubin 3287: 3283: 3271: 3257: 3249: 3245: 3241: 3207: 3193: 3189: 3151: 3146: 3107: 3103: 3068: 3045: 3041: 3036: 3015: 2981: 2871: 2850: 2838: 2791: 2782: 2781: 2751: 2716: 2702: 2666: 2654: 2586: 2579: 2568:IronGargoyle 2563: 2553: 2538: 2531: 2515: 2497: 2489:Black Falcon 2487: 2475: 2455: 2430:Tony Sidaway 2416: 2400: 2388: 2365: 2345: 2333: 2329: 2299: 2231: 2224: 2208: 2202: 2187: 2180: 2166: 2147: 2137: 2133: 2109: 2101:Black Falcon 2099: 2091: 2081: 2077: 2065: 1985: 1978: 1961: 1957: 1951: 1936: 1929: 1896: 1894:Jeffree Star 1891: 1811: 1804: 1790: 1780:– Exists at 1775: 1760: 1753: 1716: 1714:Jeffree Star 1711: 1631: 1624: 1610: 1600:– exists at 1595: 1580: 1573: 1558: 1546: 1536: 1532: 1520: 1486: 1479:Davidmarkman 1473: 1461: 1435: 1416: 1395: 1367: 1355: 1319: 1295: 1269: 1242: 1235: 1048: 1031: 1027: 1023: 1008: 985: 977: 973: 957: 953: 930: 922: 918: 913: 905: 872: 834: 754: 747: 730: 724: 709: 702: 682: 671:Terror Storm 649: 637: 620: 616: 595: 574: 566: 537: 530:/ See also: 511: 489: 470: 463:WP:BIGNUMBER 458: 441: 436: 431: 401: 388: 376: 360: 347: 313: 296: 295: 261:Verification 257: 236: 224: 208: 197: 194: 102: 95: 79: 69: 59:21 June 2007 58: 49:2007 June 22 35:2007 June 20 4535:article on 4260:Bridgestone 4083:Mike Rosoft 4013:. Violates 3752:Proabivouac 3104:potentially 2901:Mick Jagger 2560:Tariqabjotu 2520:Mike Rosoft 2500:Good call. 1525:Bassgoonist 1511:Bassgoonist 1444:Bassgoonist 1424:Etphonehome 1405:Bassgoonist 1380:Etphonehome 1330:TheMuad'Dib 1325:TheMuad'Dib 1308:Etphonehome 1286:Bassgoonist 1275:Bassgoonist 1037:Etphonehome 962:Bassgoonist 956:one of the 907:Etphonehome 873:high school 864:Bassgoonist 838:Bassgoonist 667:Terrorstorm 394:Thatcher131 115:TerrorStorm 71:TerrorStorm 4549:meatpuppet 4545:sockpuppet 4048:WP:ILIKEIT 3972:Galloglass 3397:WP:ILIKEIT 3288:contribute 3250:are useful 2464:WP:ILIKEIT 1552:Drum Corps 1521:Suggestion 1376:ISUCF"V"MB 958:guidelines 767:ISUCF"V"MB 726:ISUCF"V"MB 4686:NeoChaosX 4673:Isotope23 4665:guideline 4573:NeoChaosX 4554:Ben_Going 4541:consensus 4461:Ben Going 4399:Ben Going 4019:≈ jossi ≈ 4001:Cyde Weys 3907:Overthrow 3825:. — Carl 3787:. — Carl 3662:Omegatron 3589:Overturn. 3569:Omegatron 3391:- Policy 3361:templates 2502:≈ jossi ≈ 2078:Overthrow 1491:Night Gyr 1169:UCLA Band 640:per Guy. 461:see also 381:Yamaka122 44:2007 June 4653:contribs 4563:Sexyorge 4317:Undelete 4079:undelete 4068:Ramdrake 3967:Overturn 3939:Overturn 3889:Ramdrake 3852:Dmcdevit 3764:actually 3695:Ramdrake 3581:Kbdank71 3565:Overturn 3557:Gnostrat 3553:Overturn 3541:Overturn 3519:(keep), 3505:Overturn 3462:Ramdrake 3416:entirely 3373:contribs 3348:Ramdrake 3330:Ramdrake 3325:Comment: 3304:Overturn 3284:Overturn 3276:FloNight 3262:Ramdrake 3246:no value 3229:Dmcdevit 3198:Ramdrake 3181:Ramdrake 3147:Overturn 3112:Ramdrake 3073:Ramdrake 3058:contribs 2995:contribs 2973:Ramdrake 2945:Ramdrake 2913:contribs 2885:contribs 2843:Ramdrake 2707:Ramdrake 2693:contribs 2658:Ramdrake 2516:undelete 2447:contribs 2417:Overturn 2393:FloNight 2379:Ramdrake 2338:Ramdrake 2318:contribs 2134:Overturn 2122:Dhartung 2110:Overturn 2092:Overturn 1958:Overturn 1892:song by 1547:Overturn 1533:Overturn 1474:Overturn 1466:Fephisto 1462:Overturn 1374:), with 1356:Overturn 1320:Overturn 1249:Deletion 1066:Big Ten 683:Undelete 389:Comment. 377:overturn 314:Question 225:Question 20:‎ | 4707:Endorse 4643:GRBerry 4627:GRBerry 4537:vlogger 4507:restore 4478:protect 4473:history 4208:restore 4179:protect 4174:history 4060:Comment 3980:Comment 3864:Comment 3823:WP:USER 3785:WP:NPOV 3760:Comment 3577:Endorse 3533:GRBerry 3458:WP:UCFD 3395:trumps 2851:Comment 2839:Comment 2792:treated 2633:restore 2612:history 2498:Endorse 2366:Comment 2328:Either 2278:restore 2257:history 2148:Comment 2096:CSD G11 2044:restore 2015:protect 2010:history 1998:Avocent 1953:Avocent 1918:GRBerry 1870:restore 1841:protect 1836:history 1742:GRBerry 1690:restore 1661:protect 1656:history 1487:Comment 1436:Comment 1417:Comment 1396:Comment 1368:Comment 1342:Spartaz 1296:Comment 1270:Comment 1258:Spartaz 1254:Spartaz 1236:Comment 1160:Pac 10 1128:Big 12 1024:Comment 954:Comment 919:Endorse 813:restore 784:protect 779:history 687:Striver 675:Cryptic 642:JoshuaZ 553:Xiutwel 538:Comment 520:Xiutwel 512:Comment 432:Endorse 420:JoshuaZ 406:Xiutwel 402:Comment 361:comment 353:GRBerry 318:Xiutwel 297:Endorse 281:Xiutwel 266:Spartaz 258:Endorse 241:Xiutwel 229:Spartaz 211:Xiutwel 161:restore 132:protect 127:history 4748:User:N 4669:policy 4667:not a 4661:WP:BIO 4657:WP:BIO 4639:WP:ANI 4606:Calton 4482:delete 4183:delete 4129:Daniel 4023:(talk) 4015:WP:NOT 3957:abjotu 3947:WP:ENC 3943:WP:NOT 3927:abjotu 3877:WP:NOT 3868:WP:NOT 3814:(talk) 3806:do not 3781:WP:NOT 3772:(talk) 3672:WP:NOT 3593:anyone 3454:WP:CFD 3428:(talk) 3420:WP:NOT 3413:WP:NOT 3409:WP:NOT 3393:WP:NOT 3369:(talk) 3296:(talk) 3254:WP:DRV 3213:abjotu 3100:WP:AGF 3054:(talk) 2991:(talk) 2909:(talk) 2881:(talk) 2728:WP:NOT 2689:(talk) 2681:WP:NOT 2677:WP:ENC 2673:WP:ENC 2506:(talk) 2480:WP:NOT 2460:WP:NOT 2443:(talk) 2334:relist 2314:(talk) 2211:Daniel 2163:WT:CSD 2152:Loom91 2019:delete 1845:delete 1665:delete 1251:policy 788:delete 557:(talk) 524:(talk) 410:(talk) 322:(talk) 285:(talk) 245:(talk) 237:Answer 215:(talk) 136:delete 82:Daniel 4735:desat 4663:is a 4514:cache 4499:views 4491:watch 4487:links 4323:into 4321:Merge 4215:cache 4200:views 4192:watch 4188:links 4052:MER-C 3954:tariq 3924:tariq 3660:." — 3621:Help! 3513:three 3422:. — 3411:does 3210:tariq 2640:cache 2620:watch 2616:links 2285:cache 2265:watch 2261:links 2051:cache 2036:views 2028:watch 2024:links 1877:cache 1862:views 1854:watch 1850:links 1791:juice 1786:Mango 1697:cache 1682:views 1674:watch 1670:links 1611:juice 1606:Mango 1360:BigDT 1009:Reply 974:Reply 923:close 820:cache 805:views 797:watch 793:links 628:Help! 168:cache 153:views 145:watch 141:links 52:: --> 16:< 4731:Core 4729:. -- 4727:this 4695:walk 4691:talk 4647:talk 4610:Talk 4582:walk 4578:talk 4547:and 4495:logs 4469:talk 4465:edit 4360:Tire 4325:Tire 4319:and 4308:Talk 4237:TKPH 4196:logs 4170:talk 4166:edit 4162:Tkph 4123:Tire 4118:tkph 4081:. - 4036:Owen 3945:and 3872:only 3833:talk 3795:talk 3783:and 3710:talk 3682:talk 3646:more 3477:talk 3456:and 3443:talk 3399:. -- 3170:talk 3127:talk 3089:talk 3026:talk 2961:talk 2931:talk 2861:talk 2824:jc37 2812:talk 2796:jc37 2783:must 2771:talk 2756:jc37 2738:talk 2624:logs 2608:talk 2604:edit 2518:. - 2370:jc37 2356:talk 2292:UCfD 2269:logs 2253:talk 2249:edit 2126:Talk 2032:logs 2006:talk 2002:edit 1960:. – 1903:Talk 1858:logs 1832:talk 1828:edit 1723:Talk 1678:logs 1652:talk 1648:edit 1559:Kwsn 1495:talk 1302:and 1245:list 1192:SEC 880:WP:V 801:logs 775:talk 771:edit 691:talk 669:and 502:talk 497:Aude 437:else 149:logs 123:talk 119:edit 32:< 4625:. 4527:AfD 4521:DRV 4344:bli 4222:AfD 3986:DGG 3912:DGG 3881:ALL 3829:CBM 3812:| 3791:CBM 3770:| 3706:CBM 3678:CBM 3615:Guy 3473:CBM 3439:CBM 3426:| 3371:• ( 3294:| 3242:how 3196:?-- 3166:CBM 3153:DGG 3123:CBM 3108:any 3085:CBM 3056:• ( 3046:all 3037:all 3022:CBM 2993:• ( 2982:how 2957:CBM 2927:CBM 2911:• ( 2883:• ( 2872:any 2857:CBM 2808:CBM 2767:CBM 2752:are 2734:CBM 2691:• ( 2647:CfD 2445:• ( 2352:CBM 2332:or 2316:• ( 2168:DGG 2139:DGG 2083:DGG 2058:AfD 1914:DRV 1884:AfD 1784:. 1734:DRV 1704:AfD 1538:DGG 1032:are 993:bli 938:bli 882:. - 827:AfD 622:Guy 598:to 582:bli 478:bli 446:yan 443:Ark 175:AfD 22:Log 4693:, 4608:| 4580:, 4497:| 4493:| 4489:| 4485:| 4480:| 4476:| 4471:| 4467:| 4347:nd 4341:ar 4338:St 4335:- 4306:| 4198:| 4194:| 4190:| 4186:| 4181:| 4177:| 4172:| 4168:| 3831:· 3793:· 3708:· 3689:^ 3680:· 3475:· 3441:· 3168:· 3125:· 3087:· 3024:· 2959:· 2929:· 2859:· 2810:· 2769:· 2736:· 2622:| 2618:| 2614:| 2610:| 2606:| 2354:· 2267:| 2263:| 2259:| 2255:| 2251:| 2124:| 2116:, 2034:| 2030:| 2026:| 2022:| 2017:| 2013:| 2008:| 2004:| 1966:13 1963:Sr 1956:– 1905:) 1860:| 1856:| 1852:| 1848:| 1843:| 1839:| 1834:| 1830:| 1725:) 1680:| 1676:| 1672:| 1668:| 1663:| 1659:| 1654:| 1650:| 1604:. 1501:) 1499:Oy 1028:do 996:nd 990:ar 987:St 984:- 980:" 941:nd 935:ar 932:St 929:- 925:. 803:| 799:| 795:| 791:| 786:| 782:| 777:| 773:| 735:13 732:Sr 689:- 585:nd 579:ar 576:St 573:- 551:— 481:nd 475:ar 472:St 469:- 465:. 450:• 368:/ 209:— 151:| 147:| 143:| 139:| 134:| 130:| 125:| 121:| 42:: 4715:N 4697:) 4689:( 4650:· 4645:( 4584:) 4576:( 4530:) 4524:| 4518:| 4510:| 4504:( 4501:) 4463:( 4429:ȶ 4425:ᶓ 4421:ρ 4417:ɱ 4413:ɨ 4409:ɽ 4405:Ƙ 4364:N 4303:P 4300:I 4297:J 4225:) 4219:| 4211:| 4205:( 4202:) 4164:( 3856:t 3854:· 3835:) 3827:( 3797:) 3789:( 3712:) 3704:( 3684:) 3676:( 3623:) 3619:( 3479:) 3471:( 3445:) 3437:( 3375:) 3308:N 3233:t 3231:· 3172:) 3164:( 3129:) 3121:( 3091:) 3083:( 3060:) 3028:) 3020:( 2997:) 2963:) 2955:( 2933:) 2925:( 2915:) 2895:" 2887:) 2863:) 2855:( 2814:) 2806:( 2773:) 2765:( 2740:) 2732:( 2695:) 2650:) 2644:| 2636:| 2630:( 2626:) 2602:( 2449:) 2421:N 2358:) 2350:( 2320:) 2295:) 2289:| 2281:| 2275:( 2271:) 2247:( 2061:) 2055:| 2047:| 2041:( 2038:) 2000:( 1901:( 1887:) 1881:| 1873:| 1867:( 1864:) 1826:( 1721:( 1707:) 1701:| 1693:| 1687:( 1684:) 1646:( 1497:/ 1493:( 884:N 848:N 830:) 824:| 816:| 810:( 807:) 769:( 630:) 626:( 609:N 504:) 500:( 336:N 305:N 190:) 187:3 184:| 181:2 178:| 172:| 164:| 158:( 155:) 117:(

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

Knowledge (XXG)

:Deletion review/Log/2007 June 21 - Knowledge (XXG)

Index