Knowledge (XXG)

:Deletion review/Log/2008 October 16 - Knowledge (XXG)

Source 📝

339:
album charting in two different decades, seven years apart. And if you had google-searched the correct title, the one displayed at allmusic, as well as man other sites, you would have found links to verifing information at Amazon, Yahoo Music, MTV, CMT, VH1, MSN Music, and others. The notability guidelines for music, though poorly writtent, clearly identify charting alone as indicating notability. Why don't you just own up to our errors? You said there was no allmusic page, but there was one. You said the allmusic page was blank, but, as you now concede, it wasn't (It's incomplete, which is different.) You googled the wrong title, thereby missing a clear set of reliable sources. (And if you believe Amazon is less reliable than allMusic, you don't recognize that allMusic is just another retailer, with snazzier web pages but less coverage overall than Amazon.) It's disturbing to see someone so plainly willing to remove verifiable, useful information from Knowledge (XXG) in lieu of acknowledging his own mistakes.
940:
of seeing the article deleted. The justification of deletion for the original category was based on the same absence of sources in the corresponding list. Now that there is a corresponding list with ample reliable and verifiable sources to support the entries included, there is no policy reason to delete the category. Nor should the argument that categories can't have sources be given any weight, as this is a design feature of the category system that would argue for the deletion of every single category in Knowledge (XXG). While other categories for fictional characters have been deleted, those where there is clear evidence that the characteristic is defining and for which there are sources to support the association for individual characters, have generally been kept in compliance with relevant Knowledge (XXG) policy. Not only
307:
most web commentary. The album is also listed in the Rolling Stone discography for the Judds (without other comment, since RS isn't prone to review Christmas albums by country artists. The track list is verified at sites like Amazon.com. And while Google search results aren't impressive, they're an order of magnitude larger than you claim when you search under the correct title (there is a small error in the way it was listed in Knowledge (XXG)), and it's hardly surprising that there aren't many web resources devoted to 20-year-old Christmas albums. Frankly, you need to search more carefully; your incorrect assertions about the allmusic content should chasten you. Since your ratification of our own nomination was based on clear factual error, you should correct your error, not compound it.
1434:) rather than by more concrete, specific traits. Concepts such as these are reliably definable in the general, but application to specific examples is meaningless without explanation or sourcing, which makes categories inappropriate as a means of grouping such purported examples. Lists remain preferred when it's a matter of documenting literary analysis, because it matters who is identifying the characters as such and why; such concepts regarding a character's role are often applied inconsistently, as 1273:
show that. Also, I would recommend against splitting or parenting this category with a "real world" category...anti-hero is mainly a fictional term and is applied to real individuals in a figurative sense--not really an NPOV classification. I make no comments here about the category itself, but if this DRV is close, sort this comment into the "endorse" column rather than "overturn".
1071:
If your issue is your uncertainty as to whether this is for fictional characters, I fully support a rename to go along with the restoration of the category. I think you may want to reconsider what it is that you're endorsing. I had been trying to improve the sources in the list and the corresponding article before the decision was made to pull the plug on the category.
1454:. The reasons are still valid that were given in all of those CFDs as to why such character roles/types don't work as categories, and so should be documented only through sourced lists, if at all. Per CSD G4, speedy deletion was appropriate because "any changes in the recreated page do not address the reasons for which the material was deleted." 944:, it appears that it already has. Based on the sources provided, this category should be kept. I have no objection to a relist at CfD in which the current category as constructed is reconsidered anew, disregarding the previous CfD results in light of the enormous number of sources available to support the character trait as defining. 1272:
I don't see anything egregiously wrong with the deletion, although a G4 of a category is always harder to uphold than for an article (How is a category significantly different from it's deleted form so as to obviate the deletion rationale?). If consensus has changed on this category, then a CfD will
1070:
I would refocus if this wasn't what I thought was being done already. This is (or more accurately, was) a category about fictional characters that corresponds to the list of such fictional characters. I did not create the category, but I would have included the word "Fictional" in the title if I had.
542:
and I did so. If you really want it back that much, you could have just asked me to restore it and I would have done so with no questions asked. You didn't need to go through this method. Either way you decide, I don't care what you do with the article. If you decide to restore it, I give any and all
321:
Please try to assume some good faith. By "blank" I meant that Allmusic has neither an album cover nor track listing. How many sources do you find on Google? I find nothing other than discogs.com and Amazon, and we shouldn't be using Amazon as a source anyway. I tried everything: Google Books and News
1326:
an NPOv classification. There are thousands of people who have been referred to as a "pain in the ass" by reliable sources, but we probably shouldn't take it at face value. I know that's not what you're suggesting, I'm just trying to clarify my side. As for the naming issue, I would say just have
1298:
makes no reference to antiheros being fictional. While antihero may be mainly a fictional term, it has a strong secondary real world meaning to the point where people may start intermixing fictional and non fictional characters in the same Knowledge (XXG) category. However, that's a naming issue. --
1246:
I am basing my comment on the stated function of DRV, which is to assess the correctness of the action taken by the closing administrator. You have not demonstrated that the closing administrator has acted outside his discretion in deleting the category, nor have you presented any new information to
987:
I'm not the one asking for it to be recreated. You are. You're the one that needs to come up for an answer to the reason it got deleted in the first place, not me. And I'd love to hear your reasoning behind "a wonderful justification to get rid of the entire category system". Have they all been
939:
represents a recreation of the deleted article and provides a list of characters, each one supported by reliable and verifiable sources, with nearly 200 sources for more than 100 fictional antiheroes. Not a single Knowledge (XXG) editor would challenge this article's recreation with a rational hope
504:
per Minos. But the fix is obviously in, as Kurt would say, removing accurate information on a false pretext is acceptable to all the posters here but us, while pointing out the false pretext is seen as a mortal sin. You need to recognize that Knowledge (XXG) privileges aggressive feral children of
962:
closure. I haven't seen any arguments that overcome the original reason for deletion. That the list is sourced is great, but that just means that the list is sourced; it doesn't mean the category should exist. A category "is a binary system - you're in or you're out - without the possibility of
373:
It was answered in the comment you responded to. Just cut and paste it out of the allmusic page that you claimed didn't exist. Now stop pretending that criticism of your errors is an "attack." You shouldn't have closed the AFD to being with, which is a policy violation since you are the nominator,
338:
Please don't make false insinuations or pretend to be a victim. I said nothing implying bad faith, although your less than appropriate responses will make it easy for some people to infer it. You now acknowledge that the allmusic site is not blank, and, I hope, acknowledge that the site shows the
306:
The allmusic link is not blank; you must have a browser problem. The charting information is verified, unsurprisingly, by the "charts" tab, which demonstrates that the album charted in two different decades, in 1987 and 1994. Presumably the original 1987 release is sufficiently long ago to evade
1429:
as closer. I do not believe that consensus has changed regarding this category, or others like it. Instead, there remains a strong consensus to delete or listify categories that attempt to classify fictional characters by such broad types or roles they supposedly play within fiction (see, e.g.,
1403:
Good point. Also, for pages qualifying for speedy delete there is a suggestion to consider whether it could be improved, reduced to a stub, merged or redirected elsewhere or be handled with some other action short of deletion. The category could not be handled per any of the examples listed. It
374:
and since you badgered the main author into acquiescing to deletion with grossly inaccurate claims, you ought to assume the responsibility for cleaning up your own mistakes, rather than citing his accepting your inaccuracies in good valid as justification for your failure to correct your error.
1037:
being full of reliable and verifiable sources, it looks like someone entered the name of the fictional character and "anti-hero" in a google search and provided a link to whatever blog or website happened to come to the top of the search. And, instead of using citation templates such as
592:
under criterion G7. The page had two edits prior to the addition of the AfD tag and the contributor of both those edits recommended deletion in the AfD. If someone thinks that they have sources and can write a better article, you are free to do so. The page is not protected.
1247:
demonstrate that the consensus regarding using words like "hero," "villain," "anti-hero" and the like in category names has changed. A 2-2 discussion prior to the speedy delete does not demonstrate a change in consensus, despite your misleading attempts to claim that it does.
972:
You've provided a wonderful justification to get rid of the entire category system in Knowledge (XXG), lock, stock and barrel. Why is this argument relevant for this category? Can you offer any Knowledge (XXG) policy justification for the continued deletion of this category?
610:
Lack of sources aside, I still stand by the fact that this was a valid G7, otherwise I wouldn't have tagged it. Rossami is right, Caldorwards4 was the only editor of the page, and since they called for a delete in the afd discussion, I figured G7 applied.
1691:
The deletion reason supplied was "Lacks notability, possible hoax and no references. Dicdef." I fixed all four problems at the last minute, but the article was deleted because the guy closing it only added up the votes and did not consider the arguments.
1404:
probably should have first been brought to DRV before recreation. We're at DRv now, so, with a formal deletion discussion ongoing and some keep reasoning listed, it seems reasonable to allow CfD2 to finish, particularly since CfD1 was two years ago. --
623:
Given your stated concern with adherence to policy, perhaps you could explain why you placed an invalid speedy deletion nomination today on an article where my spouse, who had criticized you here, had objected to the first speedy deletion tag.
1208:- no procedural error in the speedy deletion. Given that there were four editors' comments with two in favor of deletion and two in favor of keeping, the notion that consensus was "clearly leaning towards retention" seems faintly ludicrous. 444:. This should be attempted first – courteously invite the admin to take a second look". I haven't noticed this discussion taking place. Can the nominator please explain why (or point out where the discussion was, as I may have missed it)? 218: 1321:
Well, the problem is that the classification of a real person as an anti-hero is fundamentally figurative. I know that it is used for real people, but we can't make an NPOV classification of it any more than we can make
539: 276: 175: 923:. Despite the fact that consensus at the CfD seemed clearly leaning towards retention of the category based on relevant Knowledge (XXG) policy, the category was speedy deleted as a recreation of a category deleted at 935:. For articles, there is a very simple system of recreating deleted content; Articles that had been deleted due to sourcing issues can be recreated as long as the sourcing issues have been addressed. The article 1150: 997:
The reason the category and corresponding list got deleted in the first place was a lack of sources to support the claim, and that issue has been addressed with ample reliable and verifiable sources.
1046:
that would reveal the blog/website name of the source, the blog/website name of the sources largely are hidden, making it even more difficult to verify the sourcing of List of fictional anti-heroes.
212: 1546:
per DGG. It would be one thing if this was a (relatively) recent discussion. But as Alansohn points out, consensus can change - and two years is a virtual eternity on Knowledge (XXG). --
1447: 1364: 1355: 1102: 805: 1451: 1439: 1431: 924: 909: 139: 134: 1443: 643:
since there is some question whether the article was indeed desired to be deleted. Once others have commented that an article shouldbe kept, the principle of G7 no longer should apply.
143: 932: 1105:
of Category:Antiheroes, this DRV cannot lead to restoring Category:Fictional antiheroes. I suggest closing this DRV, posting a new DRV requesting that you be allowed to recreate
167: 126: 1359:- Once CfD2 started and an editor posted keep reasoning, the page could not be G4 speedy deleted (i) without discussion (ii) in the face of no reasonable doubt as required by 928: 801: 726: 1513: 51: 37: 896: 1144: 1471:
After this much time, deletion without a rehearing is simply not reasonable. We will find out if consensus has changed by having the CfD, that's what it is for.
1385:
There wasn't "reasonable doubt" that this was a recreation of content previously deleted per a deletion discussion; that's what "reasonable doubt", as used in
46: 326:
title turned up nothing other than the 12 hits I already linked to. A charting album isn't inherently notable, especially if we can barely even verify it.
1681: 1589: 1360: 233: 200: 849: 510: 788: 42: 1109:
since (i) the CfD was two years ago, (ii) consensus can change at a new CfD. (iii) In addition, Knowledge (XXG) does have an article on
561:. You weren't listed as the closer of the AFD discussion. Why don't you just undelete it, rather than standing on unnecessary protocol? 405: 194: 1323: 506: 190: 21: 130: 1222:
Do you care to address the propriety of the recreation or are you basing your endorse off a CfD result from 2-1/2 years ago?
543:
admins full right to undelete it. (If I have to "release" the right to do so; which I'm still not sure if I have to or not.)
240: 1435: 1363:
since a formal discussion was in progress and included a keep reasoning that raised reasonable doubt. Overturn and relist
1034: 936: 122: 76: 872: 426:
Caldorwards4 indeed contributed the only significant content of the article, otherwise I wouldn't have tagged it for G7.
1645: 1640: 1511:. And of course, DRV isn't CFD deux. (But since this has become a common theme in recent DRVs, I ask the closer to take 629: 566: 551: 379: 344: 312: 262: 1709: 1612: 1563: 1165: 705: 665: 106: 17: 1649: 1132: 253:
speedy deleted by nominator, underlying claim was that album wasn't verifiable and had no allmusic guide entry. But
1094: 1026: 880: 863: 1178: 1106: 1098: 206: 1673: 1632: 825: 442:
where someone is unable to resolve the issue in discussion with the administrator (or other editor) in question
764: 1597: 1495: 625: 562: 524: 484: 466: 449: 375: 340: 308: 258: 1699: 1601: 1552: 1538: 1521: 1499: 1482: 1463: 1417: 1398: 1380: 1336: 1312: 1282: 1256: 1231: 1217: 1194: 1126: 1080: 1061: 1006: 992: 982: 967: 953: 816: 747: 694: 654: 633: 618: 602: 584: 570: 553: 528: 514: 496: 470: 453: 433: 421: 408:(assuming that Caldorwards4 provided the page's only substantial content throughout its page history). -- 383: 368: 348: 333: 316: 298: 266: 95: 1090: 1030: 1022: 929:
Knowledge (XXG):Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_May_13#Category:Anti-heroes original CfD from March 2006
916: 755: 686: 833: 580:
Seems straightforward G7 and process was followed. No objection to recreation if sources can be found.
772: 1122: 927:
nearly two years ago. This CfD in turn was based on a speedy deletion of a an even earlier CfD. The
1158: 612: 492: 427: 362: 327: 292: 254: 226: 354: 1534: 1252: 1227: 1213: 1076: 1039: 1002: 978: 949: 90: 81: 1172: 1110: 1101:. Your interest seems to be in Category:Fictional antiheroes. Because this DRV asks to look at 1459: 1394: 1332: 1278: 1043: 598: 1548: 1408: 1371: 1303: 1185: 1052: 738: 691: 549: 412: 1508: 1386: 1025:- to classify fictional people, are you? I suggest refocusing your efforts towards getting 941: 479: 400: 250: 1677: 900: 853: 792: 171: 538:
ummm.... just out of curiosity, did anyone actually read my deletion reason? The author
1696: 488: 1138: 288: 1636: 1530: 1478: 1248: 1223: 1209: 1072: 998: 989: 974: 964: 945: 650: 85: 1295: 1114: 440:
On the deletion review page, there is an instruction "Deletion Review is to be used
287:
hits are things like Discogs which are not reliable. This almost entirely fails the
1455: 1390: 1328: 1274: 920: 594: 581: 505:
all ages and subjugates users who foolhardily try to deal with them in good faith.
1666: 160: 1507:- re-creation, and no indication from even the discussion as far as it went that 1021:- Your're not seriously arguing to use a real world category about real people - 1593: 1491: 1405: 1368: 1300: 1182: 1049: 735: 544: 520: 462: 445: 409: 1177:) by itself and with adjectives to allow for Knowledge (XXG) subcategories of 1693: 1518: 461:
by default due to the nominator's failure to respond to a reasonable query.
483:
subject to a history check of the deleted article. Userfy on request for
1628: 1584: 1473: 645: 1327:
a "fictional anti-heroes" category without a "real" parent/sibling cat.
1117:
that is often applied to fictional characters by reliable sources (
1490:
per DGG, with no opinion on the merits of the speedy deletion.
1093:, Category:Antiheroes should have at least two subcategories 275:
as nominator. The Allmusic listing is blank, there are only
353:
Okay, I didn't catch that the title was wrong. Please quit
84:
if you'd like the article userfied as a starting point. –
80:– G7 endorsed. Feel free to write an article yourself. 1517:
into consideration if/when weighing such discussion.) -
1662: 1658: 1654: 888: 884: 876: 868: 841: 837: 829: 821: 780: 776: 768: 760: 722: 156: 152: 148: 1157: 225: 257:, and the entry verifies charting stats/notability. 1171: 239: 1438:itself explains. See also related CFDs regarding 988:deleted and recreated when I wasn't looking? -- 1324:Category:Individuals who are a pain in the ass 8: 1361:Knowledge (XXG):Criteria for speedy deletion 1611:The following is an archived debate of the 704:The following is an archived debate of the 105:The following is an archived debate of the 1577: 679: 69: 933:AfD of a corresponding list of Antiheroes 919:was speedy deleted while at CfD today by 322:each gave nothing, and a search for the 41: 50: 33: 357:me or I will have you reported. What 7: 123:Christmas with The Judds and Alabama 77:Christmas with The Judds and Alabama 1712:of the page listed in the heading. 1566:of the page listed in the heading. 931:was created in combination with an 668:of the page listed in the heading. 540:clearly asked for it to be deleted 28: 1708:The above is an archive of the 1562:The above is an archive of the 963:discussion or explanation." -- 664:The above is an archive of the 18:Knowledge (XXG):Deletion review 1095:Category:Real world antiheroes 1027:Category:Fictional anti-heroes 864:Category:Fictional anti-heroes 690:– Overturned for relisting. – 1: 1436:List of fictional anti-heroes 1179:Category:Fictional antiheroes 1107:Category:Fictional antiheroes 1099:Category:Fictional antiheroes 1035:List of fictional anti-heroes 1029:restored as a subcategory of 937:List of fictional anti-heroes 30: 1700:09:04, 16 October 2008 (UTC) 1602:09:09, 16 October 2008 (UTC) 1553:04:06, 24 October 2008 (UTC) 1539:21:53, 17 October 2008 (UTC) 1522:17:21, 17 October 2008 (UTC) 1500:08:29, 17 October 2008 (UTC) 1483:01:04, 17 October 2008 (UTC) 1464:00:45, 17 October 2008 (UTC) 1418:01:02, 17 October 2008 (UTC) 1399:00:51, 17 October 2008 (UTC) 1381:00:32, 17 October 2008 (UTC) 1337:00:55, 17 October 2008 (UTC) 1313:00:39, 17 October 2008 (UTC) 1283:00:02, 17 October 2008 (UTC) 1257:23:28, 16 October 2008 (UTC) 1232:22:33, 16 October 2008 (UTC) 1218:22:29, 16 October 2008 (UTC) 1195:22:12, 16 October 2008 (UTC) 1081:21:52, 16 October 2008 (UTC) 1062:21:36, 16 October 2008 (UTC) 1007:21:32, 16 October 2008 (UTC) 993:21:17, 16 October 2008 (UTC) 983:21:09, 16 October 2008 (UTC) 968:21:03, 16 October 2008 (UTC) 954:20:31, 16 October 2008 (UTC) 748:00:27, 17 October 2008 (UTC) 725:of material recreated after 695:17:26, 24 October 2008 (UTC) 655:02:14, 19 October 2008 (UTC) 634:22:22, 18 October 2008 (UTC) 619:18:52, 18 October 2008 (UTC) 603:21:29, 17 October 2008 (UTC) 585:19:24, 17 October 2008 (UTC) 571:20:28, 18 October 2008 (UTC) 554:14:05, 17 October 2008 (UTC) 529:13:49, 17 October 2008 (UTC) 515:12:52, 17 October 2008 (UTC) 497:10:54, 17 October 2008 (UTC) 471:12:47, 19 October 2008 (UTC) 454:08:27, 17 October 2008 (UTC) 434:12:41, 17 October 2008 (UTC) 422:00:50, 17 October 2008 (UTC) 384:20:26, 18 October 2008 (UTC) 369:12:41, 17 October 2008 (UTC) 349:01:20, 17 October 2008 (UTC) 334:00:32, 17 October 2008 (UTC) 317:00:14, 17 October 2008 (UTC) 299:23:40, 16 October 2008 (UTC) 267:23:28, 16 October 2008 (UTC) 96:15:20, 20 October 2008 (UTC) 507:The Enchantress Of Florence 1735: 1389:, would pertain to here. 1529:I agree with Otto above. 1113:and antiheroes does have 1715:Please do not modify it. 1618:Please do not modify it. 1569:Please do not modify it. 1296:Dictionary.reference.com 711:Please do not modify it. 671:Please do not modify it. 112:Please do not modify it. 43:Deletion review archives 1615:of the article above. 861:(noted as CfD1 above) 708:of the article above. 109:of the article above. 1509:consensus had changed 249:Short-circuited AFD, 1592:by deleting admin – 942:can consensus change 817:Category:Anti-heroes 283:on Google News. The 1367:for more input. -- 1091:Category:Antiheroes 1089:Rather than rename 1031:Category:Antiheroes 1023:Category:Antiheroes 917:Category:Antiheroes 812:This one now at DRV 756:Category:Antiheroes 731:This one now at DRV 687:Category:Antiheroes 361:the correct title? 279:for the album, and 1040:Template:Cite book 626:Minos P. Dautrieve 617:and his otters • 563:Minos P. Dautrieve 519:Uh... come again? 485:Minos P. Dautrieve 432:and his otters • 404:speedy delete per 376:Minos P. Dautrieve 367:and his otters • 341:Minos P. Dautrieve 332:and his otters • 309:Minos P. Dautrieve 297:and his otters • 259:Minos P. Dautrieve 1722: 1721: 1576: 1575: 1444:more protagonists 1044:Template:Cite web 750: 678: 677: 601: 60: 59: 1726: 1717: 1685: 1670: 1652: 1620: 1578: 1571: 1413: 1376: 1308: 1190: 1176: 1175: 1161: 1057: 904: 893: 892: 857: 846: 845: 796: 785: 784: 743: 733: 727:Anti-heroes CfD1 713: 680: 673: 615: 614:Ten Pound Hammer 597: 547: 459:Endorse deletion 430: 429:Ten Pound Hammer 417: 365: 364:Ten Pound Hammer 330: 329:Ten Pound Hammer 295: 294:Ten Pound Hammer 244: 243: 229: 179: 164: 146: 114: 70: 56: 36: 31: 1734: 1733: 1729: 1728: 1727: 1725: 1724: 1723: 1713: 1710:deletion review 1671: 1643: 1627: 1616: 1613:deletion review 1567: 1564:deletion review 1432:this recent CFD 1414: 1411: 1377: 1374: 1309: 1306: 1191: 1188: 1118: 1115:a clear meaning 1058: 1055: 894: 866: 862: 847: 819: 815: 786: 758: 754: 744: 741: 709: 706:deletion review 669: 666:deletion review 613: 590:Endorse closure 545: 428: 418: 415: 363: 328: 293: 186: 165: 137: 121: 110: 107:deletion review 68: 65:16 October 2008 61: 54: 34: 26: 25: 24: 12: 11: 5: 1732: 1730: 1720: 1719: 1704: 1703: 1688: 1623: 1622: 1607: 1606: 1605: 1604: 1574: 1573: 1558: 1557: 1556: 1555: 1541: 1524: 1502: 1485: 1466: 1424: 1423: 1422: 1421: 1420: 1410: 1373: 1344: 1343: 1342: 1341: 1340: 1339: 1316: 1315: 1305: 1286: 1285: 1266: 1265: 1264: 1263: 1262: 1261: 1260: 1259: 1237: 1236: 1235: 1234: 1202: 1201: 1200: 1199: 1198: 1197: 1187: 1084: 1083: 1065: 1064: 1054: 1015: 1014: 1013: 1012: 1011: 1010: 1009: 907: 860: 799: 752: 751: 740: 716: 715: 700: 699: 698: 697: 676: 675: 660: 659: 658: 657: 638: 637: 636: 605: 587: 575: 574: 573: 533: 532: 531: 499: 475: 474: 473: 438: 437: 436: 414: 396: 395: 394: 393: 392: 391: 390: 389: 388: 387: 386: 247: 246: 245: 182: 117: 116: 101: 100: 99: 98: 67: 62: 58: 57: 49: 40: 29: 27: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 1731: 1718: 1716: 1711: 1706: 1705: 1702: 1701: 1698: 1695: 1689: 1686: 1683: 1679: 1675: 1668: 1664: 1660: 1656: 1651: 1647: 1642: 1638: 1634: 1630: 1625: 1624: 1621: 1619: 1614: 1609: 1608: 1603: 1599: 1595: 1591: 1587: 1586: 1582: 1581: 1580: 1579: 1572: 1570: 1565: 1560: 1559: 1554: 1551: 1550: 1545: 1542: 1540: 1536: 1532: 1528: 1525: 1523: 1520: 1516: 1515: 1510: 1506: 1503: 1501: 1497: 1493: 1489: 1486: 1484: 1480: 1476: 1475: 1470: 1467: 1465: 1461: 1457: 1453: 1449: 1448:femme fatales 1445: 1441: 1437: 1433: 1428: 1425: 1419: 1416: 1415: 1407: 1402: 1401: 1400: 1396: 1392: 1388: 1384: 1383: 1382: 1379: 1378: 1370: 1366: 1362: 1358: 1357: 1353: 1350: 1346: 1345: 1338: 1334: 1330: 1325: 1320: 1319: 1318: 1317: 1314: 1311: 1310: 1302: 1297: 1293: 1290: 1289: 1288: 1287: 1284: 1280: 1276: 1271: 1268: 1267: 1258: 1254: 1250: 1245: 1244: 1243: 1242: 1241: 1240: 1239: 1238: 1233: 1229: 1225: 1221: 1220: 1219: 1215: 1211: 1207: 1204: 1203: 1196: 1193: 1192: 1184: 1180: 1174: 1170: 1167: 1164: 1160: 1156: 1152: 1149: 1146: 1143: 1140: 1137: 1134: 1131: 1128: 1124: 1121: 1120:Find sources: 1116: 1112: 1108: 1104: 1100: 1096: 1092: 1088: 1087: 1086: 1085: 1082: 1078: 1074: 1069: 1068: 1067: 1066: 1063: 1060: 1059: 1051: 1047: 1045: 1041: 1036: 1032: 1028: 1024: 1020: 1016: 1008: 1004: 1000: 996: 995: 994: 991: 986: 985: 984: 980: 976: 971: 970: 969: 966: 961: 958: 957: 956: 955: 951: 947: 943: 938: 934: 930: 926: 922: 918: 913: 911: 905: 902: 898: 890: 886: 882: 878: 874: 870: 865: 858: 855: 851: 843: 839: 835: 831: 827: 823: 818: 814: 813: 807: 803: 797: 794: 790: 782: 778: 774: 770: 766: 762: 757: 749: 746: 745: 737: 732: 728: 724: 723:speedy delete 720: 719: 718: 717: 714: 712: 707: 702: 701: 696: 693: 689: 688: 684: 683: 682: 681: 674: 672: 667: 662: 661: 656: 652: 648: 647: 642: 639: 635: 631: 627: 622: 621: 620: 616: 609: 606: 604: 600: 596: 591: 588: 586: 583: 579: 576: 572: 568: 564: 560: 557: 556: 555: 552: 550: 548: 541: 537: 534: 530: 526: 522: 518: 517: 516: 512: 508: 503: 500: 498: 494: 490: 486: 482: 481: 476: 472: 468: 464: 460: 457: 456: 455: 451: 447: 443: 439: 435: 431: 425: 424: 423: 420: 419: 411: 407: 403: 402: 397: 385: 381: 377: 372: 371: 370: 366: 360: 356: 352: 351: 350: 346: 342: 337: 336: 335: 331: 325: 320: 319: 318: 314: 310: 305: 302: 301: 300: 296: 290: 286: 282: 278: 274: 271: 270: 269: 268: 264: 260: 256: 252: 242: 238: 235: 232: 228: 224: 220: 217: 214: 211: 208: 205: 202: 199: 196: 192: 189: 188:Find sources: 185: 184: 183: 180: 177: 173: 169: 162: 158: 154: 150: 145: 141: 136: 132: 128: 124: 119: 118: 115: 113: 108: 103: 102: 97: 94: 93: 89: 88: 83: 79: 78: 74: 73: 72: 71: 66: 63: 53: 48: 44: 39: 32: 23: 19: 1714: 1707: 1690: 1626: 1617: 1610: 1583: 1568: 1561: 1547: 1543: 1526: 1512: 1504: 1487: 1472: 1468: 1440:protagonists 1426: 1409: 1372: 1351: 1348: 1347: 1304: 1291: 1269: 1205: 1186: 1168: 1162: 1154: 1147: 1141: 1135: 1129: 1119: 1053: 1018: 1017: 959: 921:User:Postdlf 914: 811: 809: 753: 739: 730: 710: 703: 685: 670: 663: 644: 640: 607: 589: 577: 558: 535: 501: 477: 458: 441: 413: 398: 358: 323: 303: 284: 280: 272: 248: 236: 230: 222: 215: 209: 203: 197: 187: 120: 111: 104: 91: 86: 75: 64: 47:2008 October 1549:Philosopher 1452:antagonists 1354:and relist 1270:List at CfD 1145:free images 692:Chick Bowen 213:free images 1514:this essay 291:test too. 52:October 17 38:October 15 1349:Overturn 1292:Off topic 1111:antiheros 1033:. As for 489:SmokeyJoe 480:WP:CSD#G7 355:attacking 1629:Rom baro 1590:Relisted 1585:Rom baro 1544:Overturn 1531:Eusebeus 1249:Otto4711 1224:Alansohn 1210:Otto4711 1073:Alansohn 999:Alansohn 990:Kbdank71 975:Alansohn 965:Kbdank71 946:Alansohn 925:this CfD 502:Overturn 478:Endorse 399:Endorse 304:Comment. 87:lifebaka 20:‎ | 1674:restore 1646:protect 1641:history 1527:Endorse 1505:Endorse 1456:Postdlf 1427:Endorse 1391:Postdlf 1352:Endorse 1329:Protonk 1275:Protonk 1206:Endorse 1151:WP refs 1139:scholar 1019:Endorse 960:Endorse 897:restore 877:history 850:restore 830:history 810:<-- 789:restore 769:history 729:<-- 608:Comment 595:Rossami 582:Spartaz 578:Endorse 536:Comment 406:request 281:nothing 277:12 hits 273:Endorse 255:it does 219:WP refs 207:scholar 168:restore 140:protect 135:history 1697:(tock) 1650:delete 1594:Stifle 1492:Stifle 1488:Relist 1469:Relist 1450:, and 1406:Suntag 1387:WP:CSD 1369:Suntag 1301:Suntag 1183:Suntag 1123:Google 1050:Suntag 736:Suntag 641:Relist 599:(talk) 546:Thingg 521:Stifle 463:Stifle 446:Stifle 410:Suntag 191:Google 144:delete 82:Ask me 1678:cache 1667:views 1659:watch 1655:links 1442:(and 1181:. -- 1166:JSTOR 1127:books 901:cache 885:watch 881:links 854:cache 838:watch 834:links 793:cache 777:watch 773:links 559:Reply 487:. -- 324:exact 234:JSTOR 195:books 172:cache 161:views 153:watch 149:links 55:: --> 16:< 1694:Shii 1663:logs 1637:talk 1633:edit 1598:talk 1535:talk 1519:jc37 1496:talk 1479:talk 1460:talk 1395:talk 1365:CfD2 1356:CfD2 1333:talk 1279:talk 1253:talk 1228:talk 1214:talk 1159:FENS 1133:news 1103:CfD2 1097:and 1077:talk 1042:and 1003:talk 979:talk 950:talk 915:The 910:CfD1 889:logs 873:talk 869:edit 842:logs 826:talk 822:edit 806:CfD2 802:CfD1 781:logs 765:talk 761:edit 651:talk 630:talk 567:talk 525:talk 511:talk 493:talk 467:talk 450:talk 380:talk 345:talk 313:talk 289:WP:V 285:only 263:talk 227:FENS 201:news 157:logs 131:talk 127:edit 35:< 1682:AfD 1474:DGG 1446:), 1173:TWL 1048:-- 804:) ( 734:-- 721:G4 646:DGG 241:TWL 176:AfD 22:Log 1680:| 1676:| 1665:| 1661:| 1657:| 1653:| 1648:| 1644:| 1639:| 1635:| 1600:) 1588:– 1537:) 1498:) 1481:) 1462:) 1397:) 1335:) 1294:- 1281:) 1255:) 1230:) 1216:) 1153:) 1079:) 1005:) 981:) 952:) 912:) 899:| 887:| 883:| 879:| 875:| 871:| 852:| 840:| 836:| 832:| 828:| 824:| 791:| 779:| 775:| 771:| 767:| 763:| 653:) 632:) 569:) 527:) 513:) 495:) 469:) 452:) 401:G7 382:) 359:is 347:) 315:) 265:) 251:G7 221:) 174:| 170:| 159:| 155:| 151:| 147:| 142:| 138:| 133:| 129:| 92:++ 45:: 1687:) 1684:) 1672:( 1669:) 1631:( 1596:( 1533:( 1494:( 1477:( 1458:( 1412:☼ 1393:( 1375:☼ 1331:( 1307:☼ 1277:( 1251:( 1226:( 1212:( 1189:☼ 1169:· 1163:· 1155:· 1148:· 1142:· 1136:· 1130:· 1125:( 1075:( 1056:☼ 1001:( 977:( 948:( 908:( 906:) 903:) 895:( 891:) 867:( 859:) 856:) 848:( 844:) 820:( 808:) 800:( 798:) 795:) 787:( 783:) 759:( 742:☼ 649:( 628:( 565:( 523:( 509:( 491:( 465:( 448:( 416:☼ 378:( 343:( 311:( 261:( 237:· 231:· 223:· 216:· 210:· 204:· 198:· 193:( 181:) 178:) 166:( 163:) 125:(

Index

Knowledge (XXG):Deletion review
Log
October 15
Deletion review archives
2008 October
October 17
16 October 2008
Christmas with The Judds and Alabama
Ask me
lifebaka
++
15:20, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
deletion review
Christmas with The Judds and Alabama
edit
talk
history
protect
delete
links
watch
logs
views
restore
cache
AfD
Google
books
news
scholar

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