2645:. I was the nominator for deletion. While I do not agree that "is more than probably notable in China" means he is notable in English Knowledge (XXG) (that sentence of mine was based on him being both a graduate of a European university and a member of a British medical college - something very unusual for a Chinese doctor, but still applicable to at least 10,000 people worldwide - and let's not forget that he lived in Hong Kong during his professional career and that Hong Kong had English as its official language, which makes it rather awkward that precisely that part of his life is still largely unaccounted for) I do agree that the article as far as sources are concerned is completely different from the article that was nominated. --
1353:- it is well-known to the closer and other UCFD regulars that a substantial group of editors have expressed concerns regarding the representativeness of UCFD "precedents" that have formed over the last few months, with too many of the same faces. XfDs should not be closed based on such highly contended precedents -- if there's merit to the precedent, then it should be discussed in more depth, not asserted against present consensus. Besides that, there isn't really any substantial history of professional organization cats being deleted. —
833:-- they teach a whole course simply on the topic of making court cases that seem similar look very different from each other. Wikipedians aren't lawyers, and might "paint with an over-broad brush." For this reason, simply citing "precedent" in a deletion discussion or closing is not good -- one must explain one's reasoning for how the precedent might apply, at a minimum; and even then, under WP:NOT, consensus is free to ignore precedent. Consensus here at DRV supports these propositions in finding this deletion incorrect. –
2085:
that was provided for the deletion was that we were trying to promote the game. That is not true, like said above, the article would have been much better if done from a mod or admin's view. Not only that but the article is purely meant for people who may wish to learn more about the game. IF you do decide to undelete it, please notify me so that I can post the article instead of letting someone else. This may be in the wrong format, and for that I'm sorry.
1460:), but it's a matter for individual consideration whether the particular circumstances – such as degree of redundancy, the nature of the organisation, the nature of membership in the organisation, and the potential for use of the category – justify retention or deletion. Precedent applies generally to all cases, but the degree to which it applies varies across different types of user categories. –
1015:. Other than the article of the association itself, there are no other articles to "collaborate" on, except those which we "presume" that those who are members "might" wish to collaborate on. Too many maybes and wishful thinking there. There are plenty of computing "by interest" categories with which to foster collaboration. Why duplicate them with this less-than-helpful category? -
1456:
note my deliberate use of "applies less to" in place of "are not affected by".) Whereas the former are simply MySpace-type hobby categories, the latter indirectly provide information about profession and, therefore, knowledge, skills, and access to sources. They do so rather inefficiently, when compared to actual profession categories (e.g.
2808:"Brent Blake" was deleted April 22, 2007, Because "Building the Worlds Largest Lava Lamp" was probably an hoax,Doubtful notability. Brent Blake and the project are real. See Seattle PI January 1, 2005 and Seattle PI January 26, 2006. Additionally see www.giantlavalamp.com PLEASE CONTACT ME AND REINSTATE THIS INFORMATION ON YOUR SITE.
2624:. I can't find anything in Knowledge (XXG) policy or guidelines which says that foreign-language sources should be regarded as any less reliable than ones in English, only that English language sources should be used if they are available and are of equal calibre. Also please note that the nominator himself said the subject
2506:- this probably needs a more thorough discussion. As it is, only three or four editors commented, and while some deletion debates can be correctly interpreted with numbers like that, this isn't as clear-cut a case. So let's give this more exposure and see if any improvements can be made in the meantime.
1371:
I think this argument is fallacious, since the situation depends on the type of precedent we're discussing. There have been 6 discussions for professional organisation categories, and one should not generalise any principles from those few discussions to all user categories, or to UCFDs in general. –
1229:
Well, as has been noted elsewhere, both "OTHERSTUFFEXISTS" and "ALLORNOTHING" are less applicable to
Category discussions than for other discussions, since categories are sets of sets of sets (ad infinitum). So usually, attempting to rename something contrary to the obvious "convention" of a category
78:
allows for the deletion of content the consensus here is clear that this article cannot be deleted per that policy because appropriate references are present. I would ask JzG to be careful not to allow his personal opinion about the worth of an article cloud his judgement about a BLP deletion - this
1455:
No, you're mostly correct. I think that the precedent for deleting fraternal society user categories applies less to user categories for membership in professional organisations, which is why I've not recommended deletion of these categories except when there are other special circumstances. (Please
1236:
have listed out "conventions" for every category. The same applies here, if in the past a categorisation scheme was deemed a "bad idea" (that's right, this wasn't a precedent of a single category folks, it was several, over several separate nominations), then - "per precedent" - this one is likely a
1039:
was put forth as a basis for deletion, but I couldn't determine from the discussion why this category was
Overcategorization. "Other societies/fraternal organisations have been recently deleted" is not a good reason to delete. More discussion was needed to determine a delete consensus. Relist with a
463:
is being used as a rather sorry excuse to delete anything that contains any negative information without regard to sourcing or context. The persistent abuse of admin privileges and refusal to make use of the AfD process to establish consensus rather tham impose one's rather arbitrary views is simply
200:
which was discussed around the same time, I think both articles have similar cases for inclusion. Match fixing is sadly a part of cricket and there have been about a dozen people who have been banned by their cricket boards as a result of being found guilty. Each person on my list had a reference to
2154:
The nominator of this review has no deleted contributions and has not participated in any of the previous versions of the articles - at least under this ID. Short of CheckUser, there's no way to tell if this was the same person under a different ID. Nothing in the pagehistories shows any evidence
2084:
I (Firstmate) represent
Pawngame as a mod, and I feel your deletion of the page should be reconsidered. The reason being that the previous writers did not consult the pawngame staff and rashly made the page. And because of this happening so many times, Texas Android deleted the page. Another reason
1429:
I do not oppose reopening the discussion for this category, but I think it's erroneous to claim a "shift in consensus". It's more accurate to state that professional organisation user categories are considered to be more useful than others of their class, and that there never was clear consensus on
1153:
followed the decision does not mean that was the basis for the decision. This was merely a comment in response to the comment on that and similar UCFDs from that time period which all had a comment posted to the effect that these nominations were not valid. My comment was meant only to show that,
610:
AfD closed prematurely (less than 24 hours after beginning) by a non-admin. Early non-admin closures are appropriate when the AfD discussion is weighing heavily to one side or the other. However, since the point of AfD is to bring the discussion to the wider Wiki community, a closure this rapidly
1286:
If, as
Swatjester suggests, there are a bunch of recent (e.g., within the past few weeks) CfDs like this were "precedent" is the basis for the deletion, please close this DRV with a statement that permits you to apply the close of this DRV to those CfDs. There's no reason to receive a flood of CfD
989:
I thought it was crystal clear. Collaboration in this context refers to editors in wikipedia working together to improve articles related to issues that members in the ACM can be expected to have expertise on. Is that clear enough now or do I need to define "context", "editors", and "improve"? I
611:
is premature particularly when the result is "no consensus." The closing user stated, "no consensus...looked likely to be reached." Since the editor cannot predict the future and the discussion was ongoing between multiple editors, the decision should be overturned and the discussion relisted.
1125:
the closure was on the basis of "nomination is in good faith and is valid. " which is certainly not a reason for deciding one way or the other. I note one of the comments at the discussion, repeated several times by the same person, was "If there is equally no reason to keep and no reason to
195:
and after querying this with the gentleman who deleted the article I've come to the sad conclusion that he seems disinterested in discussing it and giving me any specifics other then directing me to the BLP page. I've read BLP guidelines and I am still none the wiser as to why this article was
1445:
like you're saying that professional organizations (which both the ACM and IEEE are) are not affected by the precedent that was cited as the deletion rationale. I am not attempting to put words in your mouth, and I strongly doubt this is what you're actually saying, so could you clarify your
219:
Not only did each of the 10 people listed have a ref., there was a WP articles for each with further refs. WP isnt authority, but summarizing the content of WP articles which do give multiple reliable sources is sufficient. The BLP views of the delting admin in this case do not represent
1287:
appeals to redecide an issue already considered at DRV. Perhaps the close of this DRV can be applied by the DRV closer to CfDs listed on or after 14:09, 5 November 2007 and closed before 14:09, 20 November 2007 (the posting time of this DRV). Something similar to this was done in
197:
2202:
given that it's been through AfD at least twice and in each case the decision has been unanimous that it be deleted, I don't see this coming back, ever. And don't bother re-creating it under different titles, that's not exactly fooling anyone, you know.
1083:
This comment doesn't seem to apply to either me or the original nom (of the actual UCFD). Is it possible you replied to the wrong section? (For one thing this is a UCFD not an AfD, for another, I do not see how I nor the UCFD nom have anything to do with
2551:- Foreign language sources are certainly citable, but usually need a little bit more than English language sources. For those of us who do not read Chinese, we look for an editor who does, who is reliable themselves, and who vouches for the sources.
2251:. Nom obviously doesn't know how WP works. In addition to nothing be wrong with the AfDs...everything he is proposing is in violation of some policy...whether it be ownership of an article, conflict of interest, not adhering to a neutral POV, etc. --
1425:
with essentially the same issues is clearly headed for a keep (4 keep, 1 delete, plus the nom.). This clearly shows that the above-mentioned shift in consensus is real, so the discussion of this one should be reopened. 18:22, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
1068:. Nom obviously doesn't know how WP works. In addition to nothing be wrong with the AfDs...everything he is proposing is in violation of some policy...whether it be ownership of an article, conflict of interest, not adhering to a neutral POV, etc.
974:
Define collaboration in the context of a
Knowledge (XXG) category such as this without blue-linking me to an article. You have chosen a position with which to justify your stance; let us see you defend it in your own words if it means so much to
437:
This article adds nothing to a treatment in context in an article on match fixing in cricket, and serves to highlight the worst possible aspect of a player's career with no balancing good material whatsoever. Not really a wonderful idea, IMO.
909:
1420:
932:
Only reason given for delete is "precedence" (all other "votes" for delete cited nom). Collaboration (which no one challenged) seems more important than following a dubious precedence, as precedence seems to be just another name for
2608:(and relist) - I made a mistake here. I certainly rushed my decision here, and it was a lapse of judgement on my part. I apologise for the inconvenience caused to those involved, and I'll happily endorse my action being overturned.
2628:. Being notable in China is enough to make him notable in Knowledge (XXG), so that statement is tantamount to being a withdrawal of the nomination. The only other editor to support deletion provided no arguments in support.
1315:
That is not the case. There are 6 cases to which
Swatjester's comments apply, and most of them have not yet been closed. Most CFD discussions in the period 5 Nov - 20 Nov are unrelated to professional organisations. –
256:- BLP info was sources, so speedy BLP didn't apply. Although the list might be a selectively populated list with a narrow theme, a better BLP way to present the information might be through merging the list into
829:– Deletion overturned. The weight of precedent at Knowledge (XXG) is traditionally weak, under the terms of WP:NOT a court of law. This is good thing: precedent works at law because lawyers are very good at
1582:
875:
825:
1386:, there have been over 900 different contributors to UCFD - 925 (26 IP addresses). This argument has been tried before, and has been retracted on the face of evidence, looks like it's your turn... -
1253:: I tried to tell them at CfD they were being disruptive by nominating a shitton of articles based on "We deleted other things before", but nobody wanted to listen. Maybe now people will listen that
135:
130:
191:. I was not informed that it was going to be deleted and thus didn't have a chance to review the article and if required improve it so that it met wikipedia standards. The reason given seems to be
139:
1614:
239:
deletion and keep article. This is (unfortunately) one of the most important issues in cricket in recent years, and all of the entries are verifiable by reliable sources provided in the article.
2116:
1571:- "No reason was given to keep." - I presume that this is in response to the comments above his. Because he's right, at that point, there were no reasons given to keep, just "meta-reasons" to
164:
122:
2442:. The article should be kept as non-consensus in the deletion discussion. Four editors, not including the creator of this article, participated in the deletion discussion. Only two,
601:
2136:
per the AfD, as an improper nomination. The AfD seems to have been interpreted properly (don't see how it would've been speedied otherwise). It also mentioned the author may be a
1565:
isn't a "useful" comment either. At this point, who cares about the nomination? Explain why the category should be kept! So far in that discussion, not one person had done so.
1154:
as the closing admin, I had read that comment and found it, in fact, to be invalid, rather than the nomination being invalid. Furthermore, the balance was not tipped by the
2485:
48:
34:
1868:
178:
307:. Not a speedy. Not BLP. It's not exactly hard to find out if someone is banned for fixing matches. Whether they actually did or not, isn't up to the article. -
126:
1578:
So since all the others have been "given the weight that they were due", let's look at the nomination rationale: societies/fraternities have recently been deleted.
459:
As long as appropriate sources are provided for each of the individuals listed, there is no reason whatsoever to preclude the existence of the article. As usual,
2799:
2555:
comes across as someone who could be believed if they say there is enough reliable source material in the
Chinese language. Send back to AfD and post notices at
43:
1497:: deletion arguments were basically a combination of "no valid reason to keep", whatever that means, and, as Ben Hocking put it, "the deletionist equivalent of
892:
2429:
1795:
1501:". Additionally, I think that closing as delete where comments are split 50-50 requires more of a rationale than "nomination is in good faith and is valid".
1176:- It is bad enough when DRV nominators do not attempt to discuss with the closing admin first, but is it too much to ask that they at least be notified? --
2438:
The page was deleted as not notable. But the result of the discussion was just 1 for Keep, 1 for neutral, and 2 for delete. This cannot be interpreted as
2006:
923:
884:
407:
looks well sourced, about public figures (international cricketers), factual not speculative and a list about an unfortunatly important cricketing issue.
118:
70:
192:
1555:" - which, as has been illustrated here, is not true. (Especially since that same argument could be used against anyone, regardless of keep or delete.)
1533:
Mine: I quoted a line from the article, hopfully showing what it was (a "society"), and then explained that such societies have been recently deleted.
558:
553:
361:
I approve of JzG no nonsense stance and principles though whether someone has been banned for match fixing is a matter of fact and not opinion.
2466:
also said: "Whilst the addition of citations is commendable, unfortunately the fact that they are in
Chinese means that cannot be confirmed as
562:
994:
what collaboration means, haven't you? (On the off chance that you don't know what those articles might be, I'd recommend that you read the
2536:
2296:
2100:
587:
545:
2474:. They can be confirmed by other Wikipedian who can understand Chinese language. All of the citations are from reliable sources including
39:
776:
1937:
1628:
995:
786:
2556:
1864:
1230:
will get numerous "ALLORNOTHING" responses, which would be deemed appropriate, since the goal is to reduce bureaucratic overhead and
2140:, and their blank contribs seems to support that. I'd like to see the page histories temporarily restored so this can be confirmed.
2075:
1457:
733:
728:
1894:
1889:
737:
257:
21:
2756:
2751:
1898:
2590:- I simply cannot see a consensus to delete in that AfD, nor do I think the article warranted deletion per any other grounds.
1036:
990:
apologize for being somewhat snarky, but I fail to see how this wasn't clear from the outset. You've been here long enough to
2760:
2577:
2386:
2381:
1752:
1747:
1361:
1328:
1305:
1054:
762:
720:
274:
2560:
395:: apparently well-sourced, and if these are prominent cricketers, they're clearly public figures, so BLP is less stringent.
1205:
As one of the commenters who said it was invalid deletion reason, I would like to point out that, as far as I know, no one
2390:
1923:
1881:
1821:
1816:
1756:
1552:
1498:
2785:
2743:
2032:
2027:
1963:
1958:
1825:
1237:
bad idea too. It's very much a "valid" nomination statement, and one which is common throughout CfD, (not just UCFD). -
2830:
2722:
2682:
2352:
2312:
1718:
1673:
1288:
858:
804:
699:
655:
524:
484:
287:
per above. Consensus isn't quite dead yet... take this to AFD if anywhere but a speedy deletion was not a good call. --
101:
17:
2415:
2373:
2036:
1967:
1781:
1739:
2471:
2467:
1850:
1808:
2591:
2061:
2019:
1992:
1950:
1214:
934:
2650:
2531:
2511:
2292:
2145:
2119:
reveals that the article was repeatedly attacked by anon editors and had to be semi-protected during the AFD.
2096:
549:
2234:
as to its notability, write a version in your User space, and then come back here for further consideration.
680:– Incorrectly formed request for deletion. This forumis for reviewing resolved deletion debates. You will nee
2239:
790:
206:
2820:
2816:
2711:
2671:
2654:
2637:
2616:
2600:
2582:
2543:
2515:
2497:
2341:
2300:
2284:
2276:
2259:
2243:
2222:
2194:
2164:
2149:
2128:
2104:
2088:
1707:
1662:
1646:
1518:
1505:
1487:
1466:
1450:
1436:
1411:
1390:
1378:
1366:
1339:
1322:
1310:
1276:
1241:
1224:
1200:
1180:
1162:
1137:
1113:
1100:
1078:
1059:
1019:
1006:
984:
969:
956:
941:
842:
794:
688:
644:
620:
513:
473:
451:
432:
416:
399:
387:
370:
353:
336:
327:
With all the steroid scandals, this will be a useful resource. If its a BLP issue, improve, don't delete.
319:
291:
279:
248:
231:
210:
90:
2633:
1126:
delete, then the will of the nominator takes precedence" which is equally contrary to established policy.
244:
79:
clearly should have gone to AfD and that would probably be the best way forward. Closed and restored per
2439:
2288:
2092:
1220:
As for not discussing it with you first, I was unaware that this was a part of the process. I apologize.
2488:. Even English-speaking editors can read them. Therefore, the deletion should be re-considered. Thanks.
1407:
616:
2190:
1885:
1272:
288:
2812:
2747:
2272:
2257:
2180:
1743:
1262:
1111:
1076:
349:
87:
1812:
2646:
2526:
2507:
2455:
2447:
2443:
2141:
2023:
1954:
1515:
1403:
1213:
in good faith. However, "precedence" is an invalid deletion rationale as it equates to essentially
1197:
1177:
1159:
612:
541:
505:
1877:
2739:
2703:
2571:
2235:
1335:
and presume that this is just a case of someone used to AfD and is un-used to CFD discussions. -
1299:
1048:
724:
469:
412:
268:
202:
1735:
1483:
delete is conditional on "if that is to be the general policy with professional organizations".
1804:
684:
if you wish to nominate this article for deletion but will need to register an account first –
2667:
2629:
2493:
2160:
2124:
2015:
1946:
1694:
1502:
1462:
1432:
1374:
1318:
980:
952:
428:
396:
332:
240:
2662:- per original closer's rationale above. In any case, this does warrant further discussion.--
1093:
80:
2137:
1638:
discussion of the topic, rather than attempting to bypass discussion through variations on
1332:
1089:
1085:
681:
460:
75:
2476:
2377:
2268:
2252:
2175:
1703:
1558:
1548:
1536:
1484:
1447:
1257:
1221:
1106:
1097:
1071:
1003:
966:
938:
838:
345:
311:
198:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/List of international cricketers called for throwing
84:
2792:
2422:
2231:
2112:
2068:
1999:
1930:
1857:
1788:
916:
769:
594:
171:
2204:
1105:
Correct...I must have clicked edit on the wrong DRV. It was meant for the one below. --
846:
509:– since less than 2 hours had passed, the best solution was to speedy reopen the AFD –
383:
2470:." This statement is not fair. Chinese sources are clearly valid sources according to
2281:
Thank you I will make a copy of what I want in my user page, and Ill post back here.
201:
an article stating that the information I provided relating to their ban was correct.
2564:
1545:- comments about "reversing the trend", and wishing for a policy change of some kind.
1354:
1292:
1133:
1041:
962:
716:
676:
640:
465:
446:
440:
408:
366:
316:
308:
261:
227:
188:
2708:
2663:
2552:
2489:
2338:
2156:
2120:
1568:
976:
948:
685:
629:
G.R. Berry has now properly reverted the close on the ground that early closure as
510:
425:
328:
300:
2777:
2523:. Foreign language sources are certainly citable, granted that they are reliable.
2462:
deleted this article. This incorrectly interpreted the result of the debate. And
2454:
is not a notable physician. But I pointed out that Tang was a notable benefactor.
2407:
2053:
1984:
1915:
1842:
1773:
754:
579:
156:
2809:
2451:
2369:
2333:
1699:
1639:
834:
1421:
Category:Wikipedians in the
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers
1040:
nomination that is focused on
Wikipedian category points to be discussed. --
1659:
1643:
1387:
1336:
1238:
1016:
379:
1384:
1209:
claimed the nomination was in bad faith. Quite the contrary, I believe it
1158:
comment, so the decision should not be overturned on that basis either. --
2609:
2481:
2463:
2459:
1542:
1128:
635:
362:
222:
2117:
Knowledge (XXG):Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive307#PAWNGAME
1196:
are not particularly persuasive in the opposition of that precedent. --
845:(For further remarks explaining this closure, interested users may see
304:
1627:
typically deleted, someone may wish to note this part of the article:
633:
is never appropriate, no matter by whom-- which is certainly correct.
1402:- faulty reasoning for close per precedent-related arguments above.
2563:
solicitation those who read Chinese to participate in the AfD. --
2484:, etc. And some of theses Chinese sources have been translated in
2230:, two unanimous AfDs, one unanimous DRV to keep deleted. Provide
1331:
which has a more in-depth discussion regarding this. I think I'll
1188:- There is ample precedent for this decision. Keep rationales of
2811:
509-246-1692 Mail. Brent Blake P.O. Box 422, Soap Lake, WA 98851
876:
Category:Wikipedians in the Association for Computing Machinery
826:
Category:Wikipedians in the Association for Computing Machinery
1629:
Association_for_Computing_Machinery#Special_Interest_Groups
2458:
then kept silence and have not replied. The administrator
1642:
and other such actions, well-meant though they may be. -
1634:
I think the main thing I'd like is for there to actually
2773:
2769:
2765:
2403:
2399:
2395:
2049:
2045:
2041:
1980:
1976:
1972:
1911:
1907:
1903:
1838:
1834:
1830:
1769:
1765:
1761:
1423:
900:
896:
888:
880:
750:
746:
742:
575:
571:
567:
152:
148:
144:
2486:
Knowledge (XXG) talk:Articles for deletion/Tang Yuhan
1581:Check out these several nominations, starting with
1551:saying the nom was "the deletionist equivalent of
1255:that's not a valid reason for deletion!!!!!!!!!!!!
2111:I note that other forms of the article title are
999:
196:deleted. I would like to direct you to a AFD -
1514:That was not the rationale; please read up. --
187:This page was deleted a couple of days ago by
1623:And also since "overly broad" categories are
193:Knowledge (XXG):Biographies of living persons
8:
1591:Category:Wikipedians in the Hospitality Club
2721:The following is an archived debate of the
2351:The following is an archived debate of the
2337:– relisted with consent of closing admin –
1717:The following is an archived debate of the
1611:Category:National Honor Society Wikipedians
1151:"nomination is in good faith and is valid."
857:The following is an archived debate of the
698:The following is an archived debate of the
523:The following is an archived debate of the
100:The following is an archived debate of the
2707:– PROD deletion; automatically restored –
2696:
2326:
2115:after repeated deletions and a full AFD.
1687:
818:
669:
498:
119:List of cricketers banned for match fixing
71:List of cricketers banned for match fixing
63:
2446:and I, got substantially involved in it.
2626:"is more than probably notable in China"
1561:- "not a valid deletion reason". Well,
2557:Knowledge (XXG) talk:WikiProject China
2174:Was deleted as an A7, still is an A7.
1530:- Let's take each comment on-by-one:
299:- as above. Suitable subarticle for
7:
2450:'s main reason for deletion is that
1289:Multiple reality show categories DRV
2833:of the page listed in the heading.
2685:of the page listed in the heading.
2315:of the page listed in the heading.
1676:of the page listed in the heading.
1585:and continuing down that page with
1194:this is not a valid deletion reason
996:Association for Computing Machinery
807:of the page listed in the heading.
658:of the page listed in the heading.
487:of the page listed in the heading.
1329:User_talk:Swatjester/archive13#CFD
1037:Knowledge (XXG):Overcategorization
28:
2155:either way to the SPA question.
1658:per my several comments above. -
1607:Category:Wikipedians in Theta Chi
1458:Category:Wikipedian psychologists
1475:Make that 5 keeps and 1 delete,
785:notibility, see discussion page
258:Betting controversies in cricket
2829:The above is an archive of the
2681:The above is an archive of the
2311:The above is an archive of the
1672:The above is an archive of the
803:The above is an archive of the
654:The above is an archive of the
483:The above is an archive of the
18:Knowledge (XXG):Deletion review
2472:Knowledge (XXG):Citing sources
344:agreed as it is citable/cited.
1:
2821:22:46, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
2712:22:52, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
2672:12:47, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
2655:10:13, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
2638:09:53, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
2617:09:44, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
2601:07:31, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
2583:06:33, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
2544:06:07, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
2516:05:35, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
2498:02:42, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
2342:19:05, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
2301:21:00, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
2277:04:08, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
2260:03:56, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
2244:19:37, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
2223:14:55, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
2195:05:38, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
2165:22:25, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
2150:05:07, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
2129:04:23, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
2105:03:48, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
1708:14:33, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
1663:12:26, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
1647:12:26, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
1620:Looks like precedent to me...
1519:13:33, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
1506:18:41, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
1488:18:59, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
1467:19:22, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
1451:18:56, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
1437:18:31, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
1412:15:34, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
1391:11:49, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
1379:16:55, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
1367:03:49, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
1340:11:49, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
1323:16:55, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
1311:07:06, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
1277:01:10, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
1242:11:49, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
1225:01:00, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
1201:00:10, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
1181:00:08, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
1163:00:35, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
1138:23:05, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
1114:03:55, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
1101:23:19, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
1079:22:49, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
1060:19:18, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
1020:11:49, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
1007:15:28, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
985:14:28, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
970:14:20, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
957:14:16, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
942:14:09, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
843:14:25, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
795:17:47, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
689:18:45, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
645:23:01, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
621:22:47, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
514:22:57, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
474:20:25, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
452:20:21, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
433:20:12, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
417:18:57, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
400:18:34, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
388:17:47, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
371:10:34, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
354:03:06, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
337:02:36, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
320:01:51, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
292:23:57, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
280:23:41, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
249:23:31, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
232:23:25, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
211:23:15, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
91:20:30, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
1613:. Several of which refer to
1190:"time to reverse the trend"
2856:
2660:Speedy undelete and relist
1479:the nom. Furthermore, the
1430:them or their deletion. –
1149:- just because the phrase
947:Define "collaboration."--
2836:Please do not modify it.
2728:Please do not modify it.
2688:Please do not modify it.
2358:Please do not modify it.
2318:Please do not modify it.
1724:Please do not modify it.
1679:Please do not modify it.
1615:this previous discussion
1011:What you're missing is:
864:Please do not modify it.
810:Please do not modify it.
705:Please do not modify it.
661:Please do not modify it.
530:Please do not modify it.
490:Please do not modify it.
107:Please do not modify it.
40:Deletion review archives
1698:– Deletion endorsed. –
1587:Fraternal organisations
1419:The UCfD discussion on
2725:of the article above.
2355:of the article above.
2138:single-purpose account
1721:of the article above.
998:article and visit the
861:of the article above.
702:of the article above.
527:of the article above.
104:of the article above.
74:– While I accept that
2267:Per all of the above.
1595:Student organisations
1156:will of the nominator
682:articles for deletion
2643:Undelete and relist
2588:Undelete and relist
2549:Undelete and relist
2521:Undelete and relist
2504:Undelete and relist
2172:Endorse as deletor.
1553:WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS
1499:WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS
542:Dorothy Walker Bush
506:Dorothy Walker Bush
2200:Endorse, obviously
2843:
2842:
2695:
2694:
2559:and the relevant
2325:
2324:
2303:
2287:comment added by
2192:
2163:
2107:
2091:comment added by
1686:
1685:
1603:IQ org categories
1274:
817:
816:
668:
667:
497:
496:
450:
430:
2847:
2838:
2795:
2781:
2763:
2730:
2697:
2690:
2614:
2598:
2596:
2580:
2574:
2569:
2561:related projects
2539:
2534:
2529:
2468:Reliable Sources
2425:
2411:
2393:
2360:
2327:
2320:
2282:
2232:reliable sources
2220:
2217:
2214:
2211:
2191:
2188:
2187:
2184:
2178:
2159:
2134:Endorse deletion
2113:protected titles
2086:
2071:
2057:
2039:
2002:
1988:
1970:
1933:
1919:
1901:
1860:
1846:
1828:
1791:
1777:
1759:
1726:
1688:
1681:
1308:
1302:
1297:
1273:
1270:
1269:
1266:
1260:
1057:
1051:
1046:
919:
905:
904:
866:
819:
812:
772:
758:
740:
707:
670:
663:
597:
583:
565:
532:
499:
492:
444:
429:
314:
277:
271:
266:
174:
160:
142:
109:
64:
59:20 November 2007
53:
49:2007 November 21
35:2007 November 19
33:
2855:
2854:
2850:
2849:
2848:
2846:
2845:
2844:
2834:
2831:deletion review
2804:
2798:
2791:
2790:
2784:
2754:
2738:
2726:
2723:deletion review
2686:
2683:deletion review
2610:
2594:
2592:
2578:
2572:
2565:
2537:
2532:
2527:
2434:
2428:
2421:
2420:
2414:
2384:
2368:
2356:
2353:deletion review
2316:
2313:deletion review
2218:
2215:
2212:
2209:
2185:
2182:
2181:
2176:
2080:
2074:
2067:
2066:
2060:
2030:
2014:
2011:
2005:
1998:
1997:
1991:
1961:
1945:
1942:
1936:
1929:
1928:
1922:
1892:
1876:
1873:
1863:
1856:
1855:
1849:
1819:
1803:
1800:
1794:
1787:
1786:
1780:
1750:
1734:
1722:
1719:deletion review
1677:
1674:deletion review
1656:Endorse closure
1599:Save the Plants
1583:this discussion
1559:User:Swatjester
1549:User:Benhocking
1537:User:Scoutersig
1364:
1306:
1300:
1293:
1267:
1264:
1263:
1258:
1251:Strong overturn
1215:WP:ALLORNOTHING
1055:
1049:
1042:
1033:Overturn/relist
935:WP:ALLORNOTHING
928:
922:
915:
914:
908:
878:
874:
862:
859:deletion review
808:
805:deletion review
781:
775:
768:
767:
761:
731:
715:
703:
700:deletion review
659:
656:deletion review
606:
600:
593:
592:
586:
556:
540:
528:
525:deletion review
488:
485:deletion review
312:
275:
269:
262:
183:
177:
170:
169:
163:
133:
117:
105:
102:deletion review
62:
55:
54:
51:
46:
37:
31:
26:
25:
24:
12:
11:
5:
2853:
2851:
2841:
2840:
2825:
2824:
2806:
2805:
2802:
2796:
2788:
2782:
2733:
2732:
2717:
2716:
2715:
2714:
2693:
2692:
2677:
2676:
2675:
2674:
2657:
2647:Paul Pieniezny
2640:
2619:
2603:
2585:
2546:
2518:
2508:L337 kybldmstr
2477:People's Daily
2444:Paul Pieniezny
2436:
2435:
2432:
2426:
2418:
2412:
2363:
2362:
2347:
2346:
2345:
2344:
2323:
2322:
2307:
2306:
2305:
2304:
2289:Firstmate22222
2279:
2262:
2246:
2225:
2205:Andrew Lenahan
2197:
2169:
2168:
2167:
2142:L337 kybldmstr
2131:
2093:Firstmate22222
2082:
2081:
2078:
2072:
2064:
2058:
2012:
2009:
2003:
1995:
1989:
1943:
1940:
1934:
1926:
1920:
1874:
1871:
1861:
1853:
1847:
1801:
1798:
1792:
1784:
1778:
1729:
1728:
1713:
1712:
1711:
1710:
1684:
1683:
1668:
1667:
1666:
1665:
1653:
1652:
1651:
1650:
1649:
1632:
1621:
1618:
1579:
1566:
1556:
1546:
1540:
1534:
1524:
1523:
1522:
1521:
1516:After Midnight
1509:
1508:
1492:
1491:
1490:
1473:
1472:
1471:
1470:
1469:
1414:
1397:
1396:
1395:
1394:
1393:
1360:
1347:
1346:
1345:
1344:
1343:
1342:
1284:NOTE TO CLOSER
1280:
1279:
1248:
1247:
1246:
1245:
1244:
1218:
1198:After Midnight
1183:
1178:After Midnight
1168:
1167:
1166:
1165:
1160:After Midnight
1141:
1140:
1120:
1119:
1118:
1117:
1116:
1062:
1030:
1029:
1028:
1027:
1026:
1025:
1024:
1023:
1022:
937:in this case.
930:
929:
926:
920:
912:
906:
869:
868:
853:
852:
851:
850:
847:User talk:Jc37
831:distinguishing
815:
814:
799:
798:
783:
782:
779:
773:
765:
759:
710:
709:
694:
693:
692:
691:
666:
665:
650:
649:
648:
647:
608:
607:
604:
598:
590:
584:
535:
534:
519:
518:
517:
516:
495:
494:
479:
478:
477:
476:
454:
435:
424:well sourced.
419:
402:
390:
373:
356:
339:
322:
294:
282:
251:
234:
185:
184:
181:
175:
167:
161:
112:
111:
96:
95:
94:
93:
61:
56:
47:
38:
30:
29:
27:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
2852:
2839:
2837:
2832:
2827:
2826:
2823:
2822:
2818:
2814:
2810:
2801:
2794:
2787:
2779:
2775:
2771:
2767:
2762:
2758:
2753:
2749:
2745:
2741:
2737:
2736:
2735:
2734:
2731:
2729:
2724:
2719:
2718:
2713:
2710:
2706:
2705:
2701:
2700:
2699:
2698:
2691:
2689:
2684:
2679:
2678:
2673:
2669:
2665:
2661:
2658:
2656:
2652:
2648:
2644:
2641:
2639:
2635:
2631:
2627:
2623:
2620:
2618:
2615:
2613:
2607:
2604:
2602:
2599:
2589:
2586:
2584:
2581:
2575:
2570:
2568:
2562:
2558:
2554:
2550:
2547:
2545:
2542:
2541:
2540:
2535:
2530:
2522:
2519:
2517:
2513:
2509:
2505:
2502:
2501:
2500:
2499:
2495:
2491:
2487:
2483:
2479:
2478:
2473:
2469:
2465:
2461:
2457:
2453:
2449:
2445:
2441:
2431:
2424:
2417:
2409:
2405:
2401:
2397:
2392:
2388:
2383:
2379:
2375:
2371:
2367:
2366:
2365:
2364:
2361:
2359:
2354:
2349:
2348:
2343:
2340:
2336:
2335:
2331:
2330:
2329:
2328:
2321:
2319:
2314:
2309:
2308:
2302:
2298:
2294:
2290:
2286:
2280:
2278:
2274:
2270:
2266:
2263:
2261:
2258:
2256:
2255:
2250:
2247:
2245:
2241:
2237:
2236:Corvus cornix
2233:
2229:
2226:
2224:
2221:
2206:
2201:
2198:
2196:
2193:
2189:
2179:
2173:
2170:
2166:
2162:
2158:
2153:
2152:
2151:
2147:
2143:
2139:
2135:
2132:
2130:
2126:
2122:
2118:
2114:
2110:
2109:
2108:
2106:
2102:
2098:
2094:
2090:
2077:
2070:
2063:
2055:
2051:
2047:
2043:
2038:
2034:
2029:
2025:
2021:
2017:
2013:
2008:
2001:
1994:
1986:
1982:
1978:
1974:
1969:
1965:
1960:
1956:
1952:
1948:
1944:
1939:
1932:
1925:
1917:
1913:
1909:
1905:
1900:
1896:
1891:
1887:
1883:
1879:
1875:
1870:
1866:
1859:
1852:
1844:
1840:
1836:
1832:
1827:
1823:
1818:
1814:
1810:
1806:
1802:
1797:
1790:
1783:
1775:
1771:
1767:
1763:
1758:
1754:
1749:
1745:
1741:
1737:
1733:
1732:
1731:
1730:
1727:
1725:
1720:
1715:
1714:
1709:
1705:
1701:
1697:
1696:
1692:
1691:
1690:
1689:
1682:
1680:
1675:
1670:
1669:
1664:
1661:
1657:
1654:
1648:
1645:
1641:
1637:
1633:
1630:
1626:
1622:
1619:
1616:
1612:
1608:
1604:
1600:
1596:
1592:
1588:
1584:
1580:
1577:
1576:
1574:
1570:
1567:
1564:
1560:
1557:
1554:
1550:
1547:
1544:
1541:
1538:
1535:
1532:
1531:
1529:
1526:
1525:
1520:
1517:
1513:
1512:
1511:
1510:
1507:
1504:
1500:
1496:
1493:
1489:
1486:
1482:
1478:
1474:
1468:
1465:
1464:
1459:
1454:
1453:
1452:
1449:
1444:
1440:
1439:
1438:
1435:
1434:
1428:
1427:
1424:
1422:
1418:
1415:
1413:
1409:
1405:
1401:
1398:
1392:
1389:
1385:
1383:According to
1382:
1381:
1380:
1377:
1376:
1370:
1369:
1368:
1363:
1358:
1357:
1352:
1349:
1348:
1341:
1338:
1334:
1330:
1326:
1325:
1324:
1321:
1320:
1314:
1313:
1312:
1309:
1303:
1298:
1296:
1290:
1285:
1282:
1281:
1278:
1275:
1271:
1261:
1256:
1252:
1249:
1243:
1240:
1235:
1234:
1228:
1227:
1226:
1223:
1219:
1216:
1212:
1208:
1204:
1203:
1202:
1199:
1195:
1191:
1187:
1184:
1182:
1179:
1175:
1174:
1170:
1169:
1164:
1161:
1157:
1152:
1148:
1145:
1144:
1143:
1142:
1139:
1135:
1131:
1130:
1124:
1121:
1115:
1112:
1110:
1109:
1104:
1103:
1102:
1099:
1095:
1091:
1087:
1082:
1081:
1080:
1077:
1075:
1074:
1069:
1067:
1063:
1061:
1058:
1052:
1047:
1045:
1038:
1034:
1031:
1021:
1018:
1014:
1010:
1009:
1008:
1005:
1001:
997:
993:
988:
987:
986:
982:
978:
973:
972:
971:
968:
964:
963:collaboration
960:
959:
958:
954:
950:
946:
945:
944:
943:
940:
936:
925:
918:
911:
902:
898:
894:
890:
886:
882:
877:
873:
872:
871:
870:
867:
865:
860:
855:
854:
848:
844:
840:
836:
832:
828:
827:
823:
822:
821:
820:
813:
811:
806:
801:
800:
797:
796:
792:
788:
787:71.59.104.219
778:
771:
764:
756:
752:
748:
744:
739:
735:
730:
726:
722:
718:
717:Paul Yingling
714:
713:
712:
711:
708:
706:
701:
696:
695:
690:
687:
683:
679:
678:
677:Paul Yingling
674:
673:
672:
671:
664:
662:
657:
652:
651:
646:
642:
638:
637:
632:
628:
625:
624:
623:
622:
618:
614:
603:
596:
589:
581:
577:
573:
569:
564:
560:
555:
551:
547:
543:
539:
538:
537:
536:
533:
531:
526:
521:
520:
515:
512:
508:
507:
503:
502:
501:
500:
493:
491:
486:
481:
480:
475:
471:
467:
462:
458:
455:
453:
448:
443:
442:
436:
434:
431:
427:
423:
420:
418:
414:
410:
406:
403:
401:
398:
394:
391:
389:
385:
381:
377:
374:
372:
368:
364:
360:
357:
355:
351:
347:
343:
340:
338:
334:
330:
326:
323:
321:
318:
315:
310:
306:
302:
298:
295:
293:
290:
286:
283:
281:
278:
272:
267:
265:
260:as prose. --
259:
255:
252:
250:
246:
242:
238:
235:
233:
229:
225:
224:
218:
215:
214:
213:
212:
208:
204:
203:Crickettragic
199:
194:
190:
189:User talk:JzG
180:
173:
166:
158:
154:
150:
146:
141:
137:
132:
128:
124:
120:
116:
115:
114:
113:
110:
108:
103:
98:
97:
92:
89:
86:
82:
77:
73:
72:
68:
67:
66:
65:
60:
57:
50:
45:
44:2007 November
41:
36:
23:
19:
2835:
2828:
2807:
2727:
2720:
2702:
2687:
2680:
2659:
2642:
2630:Phil Bridger
2625:
2621:
2611:
2605:
2587:
2566:
2548:
2528:bibliomaniac
2525:
2524:
2520:
2503:
2475:
2437:
2357:
2350:
2332:
2317:
2310:
2264:
2253:
2248:
2227:
2208:
2199:
2171:
2133:
2083:
1878:Pawngame.com
1723:
1716:
1693:
1678:
1671:
1655:
1635:
1624:
1610:
1606:
1602:
1598:
1594:
1590:
1586:
1572:
1569:User:WaltCip
1562:
1527:
1503:David Mestel
1494:
1480:
1476:
1463:Black Falcon
1461:
1442:
1433:Black Falcon
1431:
1416:
1399:
1375:Black Falcon
1373:
1355:
1350:
1319:Black Falcon
1317:
1294:
1283:
1254:
1250:
1232:
1231:
1210:
1206:
1193:
1189:
1185:
1172:
1171:
1155:
1150:
1146:
1127:
1122:
1107:
1072:
1065:
1064:
1043:
1032:
1012:
1002:themselves.)
991:
931:
863:
856:
830:
824:
809:
802:
784:
704:
697:
675:
660:
653:
634:
631:no-consensus
630:
626:
609:
529:
522:
504:
489:
482:
456:
439:
421:
404:
397:David Mestel
392:
378:bad speedy.
375:
358:
341:
324:
301:match fixing
296:
284:
263:
253:
241:Phil Bridger
236:
221:
216:
186:
106:
99:
69:
58:
2813:Brent Blake
2740:Brent Blake
2704:Brent Blake
2283:—Preceding
2087:—Preceding
1485:Ben Hocking
1481:nominator's
1448:Ben Hocking
1222:Ben Hocking
1098:Ben Hocking
1013:duplicative
1004:Ben Hocking
967:Ben Hocking
939:Ben Hocking
220:consensus.
85:violet/riga
2452:Tang Yuhan
2370:Tang Yuhan
2334:Tang Yuhan
2269:Balloonman
2254:Smashville
1736:Pawn (MMO)
1640:ad hominem
1573:not delete
1446:position?
1327:See also:
1108:Smashville
1073:Smashville
346:Balloonman
2567:Jreferee
2440:consensus
1805:Pawn Game
1539:- per nom
1477:including
1295:Jreferee
1044:Jreferee
264:Jreferee
217:Overturn.
2622:Overturn
2606:Undelete
2482:Sina.com
2297:contribs
2285:unsigned
2101:contribs
2089:unsigned
2016:Pawngame
1947:PAWNGAME
1695:PAWNGAME
1543:User:DGG
1528:Comments
1495:Overturn
1404:Wikidemo
1400:Overturn
1356:xDanielx
1351:Overturn
1147:Response
1123:Overturn
613:Strothra
466:Alansohn
464:not on.
457:Overturn
422:overturn
409:Davewild
405:Overturn
393:Overturn
376:Overturn
359:Overturn
342:Overturn
297:Overturn
285:Overturn
254:Overturn
237:Overturn
20: |
2786:restore
2757:protect
2752:history
2709:GRBerry
2664:WaltCip
2612:Anthøny
2553:Neo-Jay
2490:Neo-Jay
2416:restore
2387:protect
2382:history
2339:GRBerry
2265:Endorse
2249:Endorse
2228:Endorse
2157:Rossami
2121:GRBerry
2062:restore
2033:protect
2028:history
1993:restore
1964:protect
1959:history
1924:restore
1895:protect
1890:history
1851:restore
1822:protect
1817:history
1782:restore
1753:protect
1748:history
1417:Comment
1186:Endorse
1173:COMMENT
1094:WP:NPOV
1066:Endorse
977:WaltCip
949:WaltCip
910:restore
889:history
763:restore
734:protect
729:history
686:Spartaz
588:restore
559:protect
554:history
511:GRBerry
426:Viridae
329:Mbisanz
325:Overtun
305:cricket
289:W.marsh
165:restore
136:protect
131:history
81:WP:SNOW
2761:delete
2391:delete
2186:Jester
2161:(talk)
2037:delete
1968:delete
1899:delete
1826:delete
1757:delete
1609:, and
1333:WP:AGF
1268:Jester
1090:WP:OWN
1086:WP:COI
975:you.--
738:delete
563:delete
461:WP:BLP
309:hahnch
140:delete
76:WP:BLP
2793:cache
2778:views
2770:watch
2766:links
2423:cache
2408:views
2400:watch
2396:links
2069:cache
2054:views
2046:watch
2042:links
2000:cache
1985:views
1977:watch
1973:links
1931:cache
1916:views
1908:watch
1904:links
1858:cache
1843:views
1835:watch
1831:links
1789:cache
1774:views
1766:watch
1762:links
1700:Xoloz
1443:seems
1092:, or
917:cache
897:watch
893:links
835:Xoloz
770:cache
755:views
747:watch
743:links
595:cache
580:views
572:watch
568:links
447:Help!
172:cache
157:views
149:watch
145:links
52:: -->
16:<
2817:talk
2774:logs
2748:talk
2744:edit
2668:talk
2651:talk
2634:talk
2512:talk
2494:talk
2456:Paul
2448:Paul
2404:logs
2378:talk
2374:edit
2293:talk
2273:talk
2240:talk
2183:SWAT
2146:talk
2125:talk
2097:talk
2050:logs
2024:talk
2020:edit
1981:logs
1955:talk
1951:edit
1912:logs
1886:talk
1882:edit
1839:logs
1813:talk
1809:edit
1770:logs
1744:talk
1740:edit
1704:talk
1660:jc37
1644:jc37
1625:also
1563:that
1408:talk
1388:jc37
1337:jc37
1265:SWAT
1239:jc37
1207:ever
1192:and
1134:talk
1017:jc37
992:know
981:talk
961:See
953:talk
924:UCFD
901:logs
885:talk
881:edit
839:talk
791:talk
751:logs
725:talk
721:edit
641:talk
627:Moot
617:talk
576:logs
550:talk
546:edit
470:talk
413:talk
384:talk
380:Tim!
367:talk
350:talk
333:talk
303:and
245:talk
228:talk
207:talk
153:logs
127:talk
123:edit
32:<
2819:)
2800:AfD
2464:AGK
2460:AGK
2430:AfD
2216:bli
2076:AfD
2007:AfD
1938:AfD
1869:DRV
1865:AfD
1796:AfD
1441:It
1291:--
1233:not
1211:was
1129:DGG
1096:…)
1000:ACM
777:AfD
636:DGG
602:AfD
441:Guy
363:MLA
223:DGG
179:AfD
88:(t)
83:.
22:Log
2776:|
2772:|
2768:|
2764:|
2759:|
2755:|
2750:|
2746:|
2670:)
2653:)
2636:)
2595:!=
2593:1
2514:)
2496:)
2480:,
2406:|
2402:|
2398:|
2394:|
2389:|
2385:|
2380:|
2376:|
2299:)
2295:•
2275:)
2242:)
2219:nd
2213:ar
2210:St
2207:-
2148:)
2127:)
2103:)
2099:•
2052:|
2048:|
2044:|
2040:|
2035:|
2031:|
2026:|
2022:|
1983:|
1979:|
1975:|
1971:|
1966:|
1962:|
1957:|
1953:|
1914:|
1910:|
1906:|
1902:|
1897:|
1893:|
1888:|
1884:|
1867:|
1841:|
1837:|
1833:|
1829:|
1824:|
1820:|
1815:|
1811:|
1772:|
1768:|
1764:|
1760:|
1755:|
1751:|
1746:|
1742:|
1706:)
1636:be
1605:,
1601:;
1597:,
1593:,
1589:,
1575:.
1410:)
1365:\
1136:)
1088:,
1070:--
1035:-
983:)
965:.
955:)
899:|
895:|
891:|
887:|
883:|
849:.)
841:)
793:)
753:|
749:|
745:|
741:|
736:|
732:|
727:|
723:|
643:)
619:)
578:|
574:|
570:|
566:|
561:|
557:|
552:|
548:|
472:)
415:)
386:)
369:)
352:)
335:)
247:)
230:)
209:)
155:|
151:|
147:|
143:|
138:|
134:|
129:|
125:|
42::
2815:(
2803:)
2797:|
2789:|
2783:(
2780:)
2742:(
2666:(
2649:(
2632:(
2597:2
2579:c
2576:/
2573:t
2538:5
2533:1
2510:(
2492:(
2433:)
2427:|
2419:|
2413:(
2410:)
2372:(
2291:(
2271:(
2238:(
2177:⇒
2144:(
2123:(
2095:(
2079:)
2073:|
2065:|
2059:(
2056:)
2018:(
2010:)
2004:|
1996:|
1990:(
1987:)
1949:(
1941:)
1935:|
1927:|
1921:(
1918:)
1880:(
1872:)
1862:|
1854:|
1848:(
1845:)
1807:(
1799:)
1793:|
1785:|
1779:(
1776:)
1738:(
1702:(
1631:.
1617:.
1406:(
1362:C
1359:/
1307:c
1304:/
1301:t
1259:⇒
1217:.
1132:(
1056:c
1053:/
1050:t
979:(
951:(
927:)
921:|
913:|
907:(
903:)
879:(
837:(
789:(
780:)
774:|
766:|
760:(
757:)
719:(
639:(
615:(
605:)
599:|
591:|
585:(
582:)
544:(
468:(
449:)
445:(
411:(
382:(
365:(
348:(
331:(
317:n
313:e
276:c
273:/
270:t
243:(
226:(
205:(
182:)
176:|
168:|
162:(
159:)
121:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.