Knowledge:Deletion review/Log/2008 May 8

3195:, and yes we know ED users want to validate their tawdry website by having a Knowledge article, and nothing grieves them more than the implication that their little website is of anything less than surpassing importance but tough. It's just another site full of juvenilia and acutely unfunny "humor", there are a million of them. Oh, and I just visited the shithole to find out of Urban Rose has more edits htere than here, but their popups crashed Firefox. So: not only is it a cesspit of boring sophomoric nonsense, it's an ad'-riddled one at that. On the plus side, Rose does have fewer edits there than here (remarkable given her few edits here), but I did rapidly find out that she is active in the discussions about Grawp, who appears to originate at ED (I guess everybody else already knew this and I am just slow catching on). So another reason for not having an article: they are co-ordinating vandalims of Knowledge as "punishment" for our daring to say how insignificant they are. 990:, possible relisting possible. (I noticed that the later CFD for a later discussion for a school in Baltimore had unanimous "delete" opinions before being closed due to this DRV, but with further discussion that may of course have changed). Like the last DRV I closed (Enc.Dram.), I disagree personally with the existence of such pages, since alumni lists in the school articles are easier to build and source, but my personal opinion does not trump consensus. We might note that WaltCip is wrong when he says "Consensus trumps policy", but DGG has the right idea when he says "consensus interprets policy" (as long as its within reason.) I have taken note of the 1646:". So, his stay as Baltimore student is non-notable, and there are obvious advantages on letting people click on "Baltimore High School" and then clicking on the list of people, like the name of school being listed only on articles where the school is actually relevant to the article, instead of indiscriminately put at the bottom of everyone that has put a foot on the college as a student. These categories are just unverifiable repetitions of lists of people that can be easily sourced, and which give undue weight to ever having gone to a certain college in cases where this is not a notable event at all and it could have been any other college -- 1754:

articles with this sort of problems. And, no, I'm going to go trought 50 articles to source them all for a category with almost no utility at all, and much less go trought all the other 1439 articles to fix them. if you want to be able to say that the categories are well-cited, then go fix it yourself, since you are the one that wants to preserve the category. I take special offence on the cases where the stay on a Baltimore college is totally irrelevant to the article and is not mentioned anywhere. If the mention of the college is irrelevant, then the category is also irrelevant, and the proper place for the mention of that person is on

1209:(check the well organized list on the article) which has the same list, only that it lists people grouped by meaningful groups, sources on a centralized place the claims of assistance, can state clearly on the same list when and why the person has been specially relevant and can even place photos. There is nothing notable on that category and does not aid navigation since nobody has a reason to navigate such a trivial list and the article with the list of people is way better and it's linked from the school article. This is a case of 308:. In line with Stifle's comment above, circumventing G10 would lead me to consider A7. And BLP still concerns me, as the man has not actually been convicted of the crime(s) for which he is accused, and there was no balanced presentation; only that he was a suspect apprehended, and while it was reported clearly, it would undoubtedly inspire further conviction in the court of public opinion before the legal process is permitted to run its course. (See 2087:". No assessment appears to have been made on a category-by-category basis. When dealing with a large collection of categories, the standard of care should be high enough so as to not throw out the good with the bad. I know that sounds hard on Kbdank71, and I don't mean to be incivil, but it's the reason I support their now-regretted decision to change the closing to "keep". Personally, I think they did a good job making a tough choice. 3776:- The new source found may tip the balance in favour of keeping. Yes, it attacks Knowledge, but so have many mainstream newspapers, and we don't not have an article on those saying 'OMG!! THEYRE CRITICIZING TEH WIKIPEDIAZZZ!!!!111' Overall, it seems that having the ED article deleted, and constantly a topic of discussion is creating more drama than it was intending to prevent. No promise that I'll !vote 'keep' in any AfD though! 2611: 4283:

reliable sources, then the page should still be allowed to be recreated, as if new sources turn up it the future, it's not really fair that those who wish to see the article recreated should have to go through this process, as it was really an entirely different article that was deleted way back when. If someone recreates it without new sources, speedy delete it, but there's no reason to protect it from being recreated.--

2205: 1991:

keeping a list that already exists. About challenging, do you realize that any editor can add any unverified article that he wishes to any of the categories and that you will never notice unless you check the category list regularly? And those are 74 different categories that you have to check regularly for unverified articles, compared to watchlisting 74 articles. This is just

3176:

primarily about ED, and all only mention them for a few sentences. It has pretty much the same number of sources than Knowledge review but not with the same quality or depth, so if we remake it, we technically should have the WR article as well, not that I really think we are obliged to have either. In the case of ED, t's free advertising for what's effectively an attack site.

2998:. In previous attempts, it has been said many times, that there are not many sources for possible ED article. Altough judging from other articles about other sites, previous news coverage should be sufficient, but there is this new, reliable msn source, which gives ED a little bit more notability. Of course, the article will have to be protected from vandals, just like 3261:

how naughty it is. An aside- I think if some people had a very nasty article about them on ED, not just an attractive pic of them, and some of their own words like Urban Rose has, they would understand the views of some who are upset about their articles there a little more. I'm not so upset about mine nowadays but someone (not a regular at ED) wrote one where the

4332:

those who control ED made their endless attempts to control what information appeared in the Knowledge page on ED. Various sockpuppets like "encydra", "encydra2" were created here as part of this effort. Any reason to believe that yet another recreation of this page will look even remotely like an encyclopædia article instead of just another online battlefield? --

2160:. For a contentious issue as this has been, I think the participants of this discussion deserve a lot of praise because, while their opinions have been strong, they have kept the tone civil and constructive. The consensus here appears to be that the source found should allow this article to receive further discussion. I will move the draft at 1525:

unsourced. It's not the responsability of the closing admin to go over 2000 articles to source every single on so the category doesn't get deleted and it's unreasonable to expect closing admins to make this sort of work. Editors are supposed to first source the articles correctly and *then* create the category and put the articles on it. --

1404:

be verifiable, and any category added to an article should be supported by a statement in the article and a source for that statement. As to the claim that of 50 articles only 1 was sourced, I can easily identify 50 that are sourced. Despite Kbdank71's regret, he did the right thing in reversing his own decision to delete.

3260:

I don't think anywhere on ED said Grawp originated at ED. There are some imitators of him operating now. Yes ED is effectively an attack site but that's not the main substance of Guy's argument or mine, which is its lack of sources discussing it in depth- one at the most, and not in a paper, saying

2665:

isn't a reason for deletion, and non-notable nonsense, well I guess uncyclopedia isn't nonsense and it's a very useful source of information. Oh and sub-domains are also counted in alexa.com ranks, so even with those 50% of those other uncyclopedias domains you speak of, ED is still considerably more

2457:

This nomination was started by an SPA but it seems to have a valid point worth considering. For me at least the MSN article seems to push us clearly into the notable end of things. I suspect that some people will argue that this article focuses on Anonymous more than ED which may be a valid criticism

1753:

So, if this is what you call well-cited, then I want to see some serious proof that the categories are actually sourced. Notice that the samples I choosed have some article with huge WP:V issues for the inclusion on the category, and that there is no guarantee that the categories are not filled with

1471:

It's the articles that were listed at the categories that failed WP:V for inclusion on the category. The closing admin had reasons to think that most articles on the category were unverified, which means that the category was making unverified claims of assistance to a certain high school on hundreds

1427:

point much attention, but I don't think it's compelling. In most cases the alumni categorizations could be easily verified with a quick Google search. One might argue that citing such trivial (that is, trivial to verify) information as a subject's high school is overkill. In any case, though, it's at

4660:

I understand where you are coming from, but I'm not completely convinced. An encyclopedia that is missing certain topics would still be an encyclopedia. Deciding a topic will be more trouble than it is worth doesn't make us not an encyclopedia. Ultimately we need to think about what will benefit our

4572:

If and when we begin to simply decide ourselves what kind of knowledge we want to provide to mankind, then Knowledge has stopped being an encyclopedia. "Marginally notable" is at least as subjective an opinion as "sufficiently notable", and that means that if we are going to take Knowledge seriously

3650:

ED should of course be treated like any other article on any other website - if it makes the cut with the sources then there is no reason not to include it. If it doesn't then we shouldn't have it. This one seems to have made the cut. No bias, no hatred, no hysteria just simple a simple policy based

2164:

to the new title as a first round. Regarding listing this on AFD, I don't see a clear consensus here that this needs to be done immediately, but nor is there a consensus that AFD should not be used. I am leaving that matter up to individual editors. (Personally, I continue to have reservations about

1403:

the categories (they are not currently deleted). Given the way articles are categorized, it is literally impossible for a category to be verifiable - there's no way to put source references in the category listing. However it is absolutely possible for the categorization of an individual article to

1244:

categories on grounds that the deleting admin erred: Failing WP:V applies to the articles themselves not the category. DO go back and remove all articles from categories where the references do not support the alumnus status. THEN delete all categories that remain empty after the usual few days.

351:

He hasn't still been convicted, the article would be changing with every news article about the trial, with no reliable sources specially if the trial summary is secret. Once the trial ends, an AfD can see if he is notable enough to have his own article or should just be included on a list of famous

4496:

and relist for good measure. I thought Shii came very close in March, and this new source puts ED over the top. Notability is established, and to exclude the article for other reasons doesn't seem to fit our "neutral point of view" ideal. ED isn't even the worst website on the Internet. We have

2029:

lists of alumni would be equally well spent doing categorization work in general. Click the Random Page link, study the categories you see, add sources or add/remove categories as appropriate -- it would be just as productive. Maintaining a list of alumni might be easier than maintaining a category

1995:

for the sake of it, when there are "list of" articles that already handle the task on a way better manner, can be verified much more easily, can put persons on proper context (grouping by achievemnts on life rather than alphabetical order), etc. And the articles don't get detrimented at all because

1594:

Now we are talking bussiness :) Just make a list with the small categories so we can verify them, and save them from deletion, and then we nuke the big ones that have dozens of unverified articles (unless someone is willing to verify them article by article before the DRV ends). If you know of some

4705:

I would not be in favor of that (I'm not in favor of it in this case either) but doing so wouldn't make the project non-encyclopedic. This is something annoys me a bit- many people have their own notions of what constitutes something being encyclopedic and then argue either for or against deletion

4331:

The original ED article was plagued with problems as people from that site were editing disruptively, at one point going as far as to repeatedly remove such basic information as the name of the site's legal owner. In short, the intent was to create an advertisement, not an encyclopædia article, as

4125:

I don't think that considering notability level past the point of inclusion makes sense. We have non-notable for subjects which can't sustain an article, and notable for things which can. It makes some sense to introduce a "semi-notable" category for things in the middle, but it's not clear how to

3175:

I still don't think this source is very good. It is only one source about the subject, it is quite short, and is it not a web source rather than a paper? It's definitely not the most well known of papers. We often delete articles based on their having only one source. The other sources are not

3057:

Last time this came up at deletion review I did not think notability was quite established, with the new article am convinced that it has been and do not see any arguments that it has not been. Anyone can list it at AFD once it has been recreated of course but am convinced it will be kept now. The

2054:

See, this article is unnecessary, has a list that covers the topic better, has articles on it where the relevance is nil or where the claim is completely unsourced, its function is already covered by simply linking to the college name on the articles where the fact of having gone to the college is

1219:

should have been a "delete per being empty categories after taking out unverified articles" like the original decision stated. Delete all the categories and restore them only one by one once you have 4 or 5 articles that verify assistance to that high school. Once they are created they can then be

1138:

is a red-herring - there is no problem verifying which high school many people attended (eg George Bush) and if there is a problem with verification the article should be tagged and then removed from the category (as with any article in any category). Non-defining is a matter of opinion - Otto4711

998:

the categories we have on Knowledge, so I don't think the WP:V policy is applied in that manner to categories. (Rather a citation in the article which is put into the relevant category is desirable/required in the long run, if this remains a problem for most of the categories, they will eventually

3245:

Guy, I understand where you are coming from, but NPOV more or less says we shouldn't let our personal views figure into deletions. The fact that ED is composed almost exclusively of a bunch of complete shitheads who probably get laid even less often than I do and will go shoot themselves in a few

2647:

in a backroom deal in July 2006 pretty much ensured that fifty of the fifty-two Uncyclopedia languages will remain hosted on domains other than "uncyclopedia.org" - either "*.wikia.com" or independently - with no new *.uncyclopedia.org subdomains created. This means that Uncyclopedia has multiple

2033:

Of course, you would be right in asserting that fewer categories means better category oversight -- just as fewer articles means higher article quality. But, again, this issue is completely general. We can't delete categories arbitrarily simply on this basis -- policy, editorial norms, and common

1990:

Are you going to check regularly the categories to see that nobody adds unverified articles? This is not like an article, which can get watchlisted and then you can check the newest additions one by one and click on the sources. Maintaining this category verifiable is a *huge* trouble compared to

1850:

are all unreferenced, then proper category maintenance requires them to all be removed. And if that happens, then the category is empty and thus deletable. Bottom line, if a category doesn't have a single properly-referenced entry in it, then it's an invalid category. And then we come back to the

1493:

Kbank says that in 49 out of 50 articles checked the high school was not properly sourced. Did K try to find sources? THis is usually quite easy (for politicians, academics, film people, sporetspeople, media people ...) but very time-consuming to add an inline ref for a non-controversial detail

1204:

totally irrelevant on discussion categories. This closing was faulty and should have been "delete the cats and add the sources articles to the school article". Actually, nobody has stated what purpose the category serves on the first place or what is the purpose of making an alphabetically sorted

2013:

Is there something unique about alumni categories that calls for designated category maintainers, as opposed to regular categorization work by regular page editors? There's just no pertinent distinction between these categories and any others. One could certainly argue that category oversight in

3699:

Policy and guidelines are primarily described but what the community does. I can understand the logic behind Everyking's point and he doesn't necessarily need a policy behind (although I agree with you that this is allowing a POV to infect our notability criteria and thus strongly disagree with

1965:

1,489 sounds like quite a figure until we realize that deletion implicates 74 categories and detrements 1,489 articles. Improvement doesn't need to be a one-man task -- I'd be happy to pitch in, though quite frankly I think the current state of the articles is perfectly satisfactory. (As I said

2014:

general is unsatisfactory, but that is a general issue that has nothing to do with these categories in particular. It may be true that the uncontroversial nature of these categories cause page editors to relax their verification standards, but this is only natural and proper -- we needn't give

4282:

Even if this article doesn't survive the upcoming afd, I think we should unprotect its page from recreation. The only time that I believe pages should be protected from recreation is if a disruptive user is repetitively recreating a specific page. If an article is deleted because of a lack of

1524:

of proof of properly sourcing an article before including it on a category is on the editor that adds the article to the category. In this case, the closing admin found 49 that had not done the sourcing work. So, he had reasons to believe that the articles on the category were in its majority

2856:. The problems with an ED article now are troll attacks - the former can really only be dealt with by protecting, as any Grawp-basher knows - trolls from the 4chan family of websites are the most persistent. Do note, that even if the article is kept, the site can not be linked to directly - 1547:

Agreed. Except in this case we're dealing with an attempt to treat 73 categories as a unit. Some of those categories are so small as to seem useless (40 of them contain less than 10 articles, and 15 contain less than 5 articles), but some are quite large and the articles are well-cited

3083:. Keeping them out because they're odious is contrary to our principles of no censorship, fails to provide neutral coverage of that segment of the web, and passes up the chance to neutrally describe their odiousness. We shouldn't let their misbehavior drag us down towards their level. — 3684:

I'm sorry, can you identify a policy to support that opinion? As I see it, not covering a subject that you hate or that has negatively affected you is POV, and not allowed by Knowledge. I agree with your intention, but I don't think this is a valid argument for deletion by any means.

2978:. That doesn't mean that the images there deserve to be censored. And also, you completely ignore the fact that this nomination differs from the other three in that new sources have recently been found. You simply fail to give a valid argument against the recreation of this article.-- 4480:. There is a stub with 23 sources. Aren't we holding this to a higher standard than...well...every other article on Knowledge? Those who wanted the article were told to create a draft with sources to have a discussion...when they did that on May 3, it was closed as a disruption. -- 2539:

new informations - the new msn article. While I think ED was worth the article before it, now it's even more. I think now it's not so much about having or not having the sources, it's more about general principles. I am against this "Oh my, we don't want all these bad trolls and

312:.) Regarding notability after a presumed conviction, I would consider an AFD to discuss the notability of a criminal convicted of a (disturbingly) non-notable crime, and/or a (disturbingly) non-notable number of times and/or a (disturbingly) non-notable level of severity. The 3444:

The admin doesn't have to relist it... but he can relist, or leave it up to editor discrition. If the admin relists, in my opinion it helps if the admin actually thinks the article should be deleted... a procedural no-vote AFD nomination can be confusing and counterproductive.

3299:, I thought it was sufficiently well-sourced and sufficiently established notability that, if it were any website without ED's history of conflict with Knowledge, there would be no dispute about its inclusion. This feature article from ninemsn (which is a collaboration between 1245:

After all of this is done, if there are any sparsely-populated categories - particularly those with only 1 or 2 alumni - nominate them for deletion individually. I fully expect 80-99% of these categories will disappear by virtue of being empty or having only 1 entry in them.

1498:

point, made right at the end of the discussion, applies to any artcile in any category. It was not explained why it is unusually relevent to High Schools.) Another point is that the school alumni catgory is usually included in a 'people from' catgory and deletion loses this.

1174:

that so-and-so graduated high school but it does not define who that person is as a person. Pick any person in any of these categories and list off the things that define them. Does "graduated high school" make the top ten? The top fifty? For the vast majority of them, no.

2722:

finally a source that unambiguously covers ED directly and not its actions. And it's on the technology section too. I would say "overturn" but an article with such a contentious article should go throught the long path because skiping any step would cause heavy amounts of

2606:- It's going to be an uphill battle to keep the ED article from becoming a mini-ED itself. Nevertheless, there seem to be good sources, and a large number of people are interested. As for notability, it's currently ranked 2,099 on Alexa, which is significantly higher than 2034:

sense require that we identify unique problem areas. Ambiguity, triviality, etc. are perfectly valid reasons to get rid of certain categories, but whether or not verifiability could constitute a proper justification, it doesn't have any unique application in this case. —

3547:

This is one article in addition to the pre-existing coverage as you can see if you look at the draft of the article or if you read the nominator's comment or if you read many of the comments above. And even if you were correct that hardly would justify a "speedy close".

4252:

Not actually true... there was one version that lasted a decent length of time and even survived at least one AFD before succumbing to the successful one. (Supporters of the article don't have a monopoly on the "if at first you don't succeed, try try again" strategy.)

369:

The final version of the article, even with refs, was definitely A7-able in my mind. He's suspected of rape. What about the case stands out that it merits an article? That being said, if events develop that an article can be written, by all means let one be created.

4373:

It's not surprising that when it was a page not based on suitable sources, the contributors were not following other guidelines. Now that there is a well defined suitable source, it should be expected that the content is largely defined by what's in that source.

3136:

Encyclopedia Dramatica is clearly relevant enough for an article to be created, not having one seems irresponsible. The content of the site shouldn't affect whether or not there is an article on it, and certainly hasn't stopped articles being created on similar

3225:

I don't understand your point - you are trying to say, that WP shouldn't have ED article, because it's attack site and it's full of vulgarities? Well, this can be easily described in the article. If you are implying that all users, that want ED recreated

4388:

The problems with this article, in its original form, went well beyond the lack of sources. I don't see how one mention in a news article is going to magically change everything, if the content of this wiki has such little notability beyond the brief

4350:

Permanently protect it, if necessary. But it makes the inclusion criteria, and the possibility of those problems shouldn't preclude inclusion. The same possibility exists for virtually any article, if people care enough to constantly vandalize it.

3394:

and relist at AfD is anyone feels necessary (which they will, but I don't think it's the job of DRV to tell them to). Sourcing looks nearly excessive from where I stand, and at the very least the new source pushes it close enough to the criteria at

4413:

The one defining source can be like the string of the kite, or the question that defines a debate. Without a proper secondary source, it’s not surprising that there was a rambling flow of original research going wherever the breeze was blowing.

1494:

such as school, college. There is a difference between unverified and unverifiable. Also there are over 2000 articles in these 73 categories, many of which have proper sources. I would be happy to check over the 50 if I knew which they were. (The

875:- Lack of verifiability is not a valid reason for a speedy delete. If UsaSatsui is correct on the procedure on this one (and I don't know), I'll send it right to AfD if someone doesn't beat me to it (or reliable sources don't suddenly appear). - 1384:- Given the circumstances of this deletion I would recommend that for clarity, people would refrain from stating "endorse" or "overturn" on their own as it is unclear what exactly you wish to overturn or endorse without further clarification. 3399:

that the community needs to decide on it. It also looks like this is nearly snowballing to allow it, since no one has managed to bring up a reason not to yet except things like "dear god no" and "disruptive", the latter of which is wrong.

2693:

Stupid nonsense, but that meets my standard for this sort of thing on the notability scale. It's far more than most websites we have articles on achieve. The article if it's remade should be permanently semi-protected to keep trolls at bay.

4315:

I had always been of the mind that given the pain ED has caused, any attempt to recreate the article better be impeccably sourced. The draft provided by Running, combined with the source UrbanRose provided, appears to meet that threshold.

1089:- I wasn't going to chime in as closer on this one, but I take exception to the "consensus trumps policy" statement above. No, it doesn't. You can have unanimous support to keep an attack category, but at the end of the day it's gone. -- 4613:

do that without abandoning the 'encyclopedia' aspect of the project, and the 'free' aspect too, for that matter (not to mention the 'anyone can edit' portion). Consider that I have no strong preference either way, but at this point it is

3667:. The case is borderline, as there is now a slight claim to marginal notability; in a borderline case, a factor such as the fact that the site features vicious and repugnant attacks against Knowledge and Wikipedians should be considered. 3100:

as it has become more notable. If we can have a bazillion articles about paedophilia, really weird sex acts, zoophilia, graphic photos of various STDs, etc, etc, I'm sure we can bear the grossness of having an article about ED. --

1337:

to get a representative sample of the articles on the categories. Anyways, even with a not-very-random sampling, if you get 98% failure when examing 3% of the total population, you can probably assume that the total population has

2388:

Before you instantly consider closing this as a disruptive request given that the last DRV was speedily closed, something happened overnight concerning Encyclopedia Dramatica's notability. Something big happened. Specifically, an

852:

If it really had no verifiability at all (I can't see the deleted version), then restoring it can only end with a speedy deletion. AfD would be a waste of time unless the article is recreated with sources asserting notability per

4522:— It's real-life, it has received non-trivial coverage. What more do you want? Granted, ED poses certain unique problems, but if we're going to make an exception here, why not simply shut down Knowledge altogether? Also endorse 749:: Just to be clear, the reason in the deletion log was not my reason for deleting it. My reason for deleting it was simply due to the expired PROD, and the reason listed in the log is the reason that was on the PROD tag. - 4078:

Though whether an article's existence leads to disruption of the project is not a valid consideration for it's deletion. If it was, then articles that have to be permanently semi-protected just to deal with vandalism like

1165:

Way to put words in my mouth. I didn't say vegetarianism is "crucial;" I said it was defining. And for all of your bluster about red herrings you have yet to rebut my point in the CFD that these categories are nothing but

1595:

category where you know for sure that all articles are sourced for attendance to the high school, please list it too and mark it as verified so we can make just a cursory check to make sure the sourcing is correct. --

4819:. As much as I think ED is a POS site that doesn't deserve an article here, let alone a mention at msn, JoshuaZ convinced me with the NPOV argument and his other comments. So I'll compromise with relist at afd. -- 693: 1298:

No, it's not. The original nomination targeted categories containing 1,489 articles. A result derived from examining 3% of them isn't obviously correct for the other 97%. This discussion is perfectly appropriate.

4782:

Furthermore, we don't care about Alexa rankings. Something could be ranked 10 millionth. What matters is if we have enough verifiable content to write an ok stub on the topic and we seem to have more than enough.

1938:

It's not a single page that can easily be verified. As RossPatterson points above, the categories had a total of 1,489 articles. Suggesting that the nominator should make an attempt to bring them to compliance to

1812:

You can't expect the closing admin to do this work for you. On its current state, the articles' inclusion on the categories was not verified, and a CfD is not about any particular article but about a category

4185:

ED seems to have a policy against outing people who haven't already made they're personal information public so I don't see the concern with having this article. Notability should be determined in the AFD.

4661:

readers more. Now, as far as I'm concerned making such decisions provides seriously perverse incentives to people to harass and disrupt when they don't want articles and also possibly undermines

4237:

I am also for recreation, but I feel that direct recreation would cause a lot more drama than relisting. And the article about ED never really existed - it was always deleted in matter of days.--

1947:. I think that common sense requires to interpret that sentence from policy in proper context (aka, what the heck can possibly qualify as "all attempts" on this case apart from trying to verify 1642:, which is a total repetition of what the category lists, we can see that it is properly sourced and listed under "Science" (more proper context than the category), and that its source says " 4393:

prank notoriety. Given the improbability of this becoming anything more than a mess of advertising, POV pushing and disruption that adds little of any encyclopædic value, it may be best to

650: 645: 4687:

having an article about ED, just not under the intellectually dishonest pretence that Knowledge can still be an encyclopedic project while we make such purely self-referential decisions.

3807:. There's more than enough to warrant keeping the subject. Personal biases seem to be fairly major in keeping this deleted, considering the amount of coverage and mentions available. 654: 3331:

should suffice. If ED is a shock site, then it belongs in the same group (and is just as worthy of coverage) as goatse. At any rate, I don't think attacking WP is sufficient reason to

4577:, we have —for better or worse— simply no other choice than to have an article about a topic that has been covered, and mentioned at least in passing on several notable news sources: 2763:

The deletion was for notability and sourcing concerns and this seems to have been met. I see no reason we have to go through an AfD; DRV is the proper venue for this sort of thing.

1140: 2379: 679: 637: 2397:

ED. It is obviously a reliable source. It is clearly non-trivial coverage given that the article's primary subject is Enyclopedia Dramatica. Given the draft that already exists at

3352:

End the drama. Just relist this for crying out loud! It is more vigourously attacked than most websites, and now that we have a good source, I don't see why this should continue.

1047: 1035: 2520:

on my userpage, which was already linked here. ED has three sources that talk about it and 16 sources that mention it somehow (and there are maybe more). I think it's enough. --

4056:

In fairness, the existence of an article on the KKK isn't as likely lead to long-term active disruption of the project. And the notabiilty level of the KKK is very different.

2584:

annother comment - in one of these closed deletion reviews, I read something like "show us some good draft". Somebody with better english than me can try edit the draft here -

2212: 1131: 3533:

article now? That is hardly non-trivial. ED is not the subject of ongoing, repeated coverage in multiple major media outlets. One article does not establish importance.

1276:

uh, isn't this just a lot of unnecessary bureaucracy? The closing admin states that out of 50 articles that he tested only one was properly sourced to be on the category. --

3335:

have an article/redirect. But then again, I have never been personally attacked by their sophomoric army of twits; my opinion might be different if it were otherwise. --

3327:- perhaps someone can figure out what exactly ED's claim to fame is. If it is to lampoon/attack WP (which is what the msn article is primarily about), then a redirect to 309: 2648:

Alexa ranks (uncyclopedia.org, uncyclopedia.info, pedia.ws and various others) but no means of obtaining valid info for Désencyclopédie, Inciclopedia and the like. --

2860:

explicitly disallows any links to the site, and the remedy (and enforcement) was upheld two months ago (annoyingly, using my ED page as a reason for denying links).

2930:- Apparently you seem to be confused. New sources have turned up that establish ED's notability. There is no policy which forbid that there be an article on ED and 226:

isn't really about notability. Page isn't in the cache, but if it was sourced, as you say on your and the admin's talk pages, I don't believe there's anything in

1851:

fact that even if the entries are referenced, it's still essentially trivia which merits a list, not a category. And no, consensus doesn't trump policy, either.

3562:

Not to mention that to speedy-close this when an overwhelming response has so far been in the direction of relisting would be a blatant disregard of consensus.

2614:). I realise the site is a vicious parody of Knowledge, but this shouldn't prevent us from covering it. In fact, it should make us more inclined to cover it. -- 2458:(and it is fairly short). (I wish that these trolls would have the minimal social understanding to have a normal user like Shii or Running start this DRV...) 1222:

and then the info be added to the school article instead, but that was not the argument used on this CfD closure and the discussion would be out of place on DRV

4020:

The draft listed by MHGW shows that a fairly decent article can indeed be written about ED. I believe the page should be undeleted and this draft moved to it.

4158:

Is it clear that ED is "clearly notable"? If we had this many sources for a BLP who wanted deletion many people would probably call this borderline notable.

4646:, complete with external links to that site. Thus, there's no grounds to claim that there's any exclusion of hate sites that overrides normal WP practice. 2535:

I now read this page and I see that in last month some ED requests were speedily closed with messages like "no new informations" - well, now there actually

2782:. The various objects to an ED article reek of POV corruption. Knowledge's mission necessitates an article on this notable (yet still disgusting) wiki. -- 3296: 2494: 2336: 2331: 641: 2493:

Or you know, we could actually have a decent DRV discussion based on the sourcing and ignore the trolling. Which we've actually managed to before. See

313: 3874: 3638: 2585: 2340: 4220:- No need to relist, original reason for deletion no longer met with introduction of non-trivial source, so an article would now fall within policy. 2857: 2445: 1557: 146: 141: 51: 37: 3265:

was my full real-world name, which personally I have never posted online. Even ED were sound enough to change it, as it's against their policies.

2365: 2323: 1916:

to have failed . . . ages are deleted by an administrator if there is consensus to do so. If there is no rough consensus, the page is kept . . ."

150: 4706:

based on that. The term encyclopedic is at best vague. Let's not get into arguments over which personalized definition makes the most sense, ok?

3985:

Nevermind, my version of the draft has been redirected so it seems that there is one particular draft that consensus is currently in favor of.--

3947:

which I think is more in line with the sources than Shii's. But if someone wants to use a different version of the draft, I'm okay with that.--

3841:

I strongly suggest we move that back until the DRV is closed. Process minimizes drama and conflict. (Also that should as I understand it be at

1624: 1561: 1553: 277:

neutral and sourced (only two sources had made it in however - it was a stub). Is there any way to get an admin to pull it up so we can see? --

46: 4203:

I have to admit it is notable, even though they have banned me twice for "being a faggot" and seem to love raping each other in the ass. :-P

3355: 1791:

fails to use the category correctly, then either a source can be added or the category removed. Deleting all the categories regardless is a

1755: 1639: 1206: 633: 592: 175: 133: 2955:, third or fourth nomination inside a week. Disruptive. It has been very clearly established that this article is not wanted on Knowledge. 2708: 189: 4546:

So if we make an "exception" here and exclude an article on a marginally notable website that attacks Wikipedians, we might as well just

4527: 3965:

That name, while more accurate, has the "æ" character on the name, a character that most keyboards don't have. Since enwiki uses mainly

3304: 2398: 2161: 2112: 386: 4755:, compare their ranks on alexa.com), and every website in the MediaWiki websites category. It clearly passes any Alexa litmus test. -- 2744:

While I think this is a bit early to have another deletion debate about this article, I outlined some sound reasons for keeping it at

484: 479: 1674:

And the above was on "A" which is at the start of the list and probably gets verified more often. Let's check the only entry at "U" "

4585: 3789: 2974:

I (and I'm sure that many other Wikipedians) don't particularly "want" to have to look at pictures of male genitalia on the article

2221: 1998:

on those articles where the assistance to a Baltimore college is actually relevant', there is already a link to the college page. --

1644:

Bala, as he is known, is relieved to be out of Baltimore City College High School, where he resented the peer pressure to not excel.

1627:, and I started looking one by one from the first one on the list. Under "A" there 5 articles, 4 are properly sourced and such, but 527: 488: 42: 4733:

an Alexa rank of 2,250 and not much increase over the last time this was up, surely indicates the non-notability of this website.

2676:- I have no opinion on the reasoning for the deletion review. That said, the new source seems to be enough to warrent a new AfD. - 1200:

trump the consensus at a CfD. It's supposed to be a fucking core policy. The interpretation at the CfD is too loose and makes WP:V

4622:. I for one would like Knowledge to be about 'all human knowledge', and yes, even in the face of the fact of what ED is and does. 2030:

of alumni, but in either case we might as well be working on categorization in general instead of arbitrarily narrowing our focus.

339:

I think G10 was fine as a reason, but A7 will do it also. I don't see evidence at this time that this merits AFD consideration.

3163: 2767: 2251: 2429:

in Knowledge's policies and guidelines that I know of that can be used to deny Encyclopedia Dramatica an article at this point.

1710:

the only source on the article says that he was "was Maryland educated" (were there colleges on Maryland outside of Baltimore?)

1167: 513: 471: 702:

Contains important information to fans, can have disclaimer regarding issues surrounding tracklisting requiring more sources.

259:, assuming the G10 was valid (I have no way to be sure). Why not rewrite a neutral version? That should solve the issue. -- 4363: 3412: 2931: 2044: 1980: 1928: 1878: 1838:-violating trivia, which isn't any less true just because it isn't part of DRV's role to evaluate, a category most certainly 1438: 246: 1050:

over allowing himself to be pressured in this way. The original interpretation of the CFD was correct, the categories fail

4599: 3757: 3634: 3612: 1257: 1205:

list of every person that ever set a foot on a Baltimore college (see my examples below), specially when you already have

21: 4751:

This argument is ridiculous. That rank is superior than 95% of the websites in the "Comedy websites" category (including

4510: 4099:

By any reasonable standard George W. Bush is much more notable than ED. So I'm not sure that argument would hold water.

3159: 2015: 316:

I got was 64 (one of them was this article), and most of these are press that repeat what other sources report, such as

212:

with an explanation on talk (I added both). I think this is close enough to notable (meaning it may be) to warrant AfD.

2897:

On the last extended DRV discussion I thought there was a good claim for notability. This new article solidifies it.--

3498: 3472:

Better evidence of sourcing than a lot of articles keep around nowadays... not sure it meets a careful application of

2545: 2327: 2237: 2055:

relevant or sourced, all time spent trying to maintain is time wasted since it serves no purpose. Oh, yeah, I forgot,

536:

Didn't have a watch on the page and missed the PROD warning, can re-edit page and clean up links once it is restored.

1109:

it. The attack policy for example is applied strictly because such application has very strong consensus every time.

1054:

and are also non-defining of the people included, CFD is not a vote and the original deletion should be reinstated.

4191: 1731: 3307:, one of Australia's largest companies, and according to Alexa is the highest trafficked news website in Australia 2441: 2210:

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is

4834: 4468: 4445: 4208: 3940: 3427: 3361: 3308: 3246:

years when they realize they haven't contributed anything to humanity at all shouldn't factor into our decision.

2185: 2131: 1907: 1261: 1019: 963: 921: 616: 571: 450: 405: 112: 17: 2568:

enough for a relisting, though I'm not sure how the AfD will turn out--but finding that out is what AFD is for.

4742: 3753: 3630: 3606: 3213:

Do you have anything to say about the arguments presented here or do you just want to make ad hominem attacks?

3088: 2702: 326: 137: 4802:- As much as this website is disliked by many here, it does now qualify for inclusion under our standards. -- 2437: 924:. It was deleted via my PROD so any reasonable request should restore it. Our discussion should be in AfD. - 3895: 3842: 3824: 2960: 2884: 2116: 2092: 1636: 1573: 1409: 1389: 1372: 1334: 1304: 390: 296: 3510:

the article on ED. It's a huge compendium of Internet culture and Internet history. We have good sources.--

3119:

notability has been established with the significant MSN source. Of course, relist at AfD if you disagree.

1892:

and he may give advice on what to do to restore them. People who want the categories back should fix it. --

4464: 4441: 3494: 3328: 2995: 2635:

users; to label it "a vicious parody of Knowledge" may be to give a wee bit too much credit. As for using

2319: 2283: 2152: 1912:"If the page can be improved, this should be solved through regular editing, rather than deletion. . . . 1713: 707: 230:

to cover the speedy deletion of this. I'm going to assume it was written in a neutral tone and suggest a

129: 76: 3859:

Have to agree here. I support an article, but if any DRV's should be run by the book, this one should.--

1342:

80-90% failure (giving a very generous margin of error), unless you have chosen a terribly bad sample. --

4693: 4628: 4536: 4187: 3974: 3864: 3783: 3585: 3538: 3435: 3076: 2902: 2826: 2732: 2681: 2662: 2064: 2003: 1956: 1897: 1818: 1799: 1763: 1651: 1600: 1530: 1477: 1347: 1330: 1326: 1281: 1230: 1152: 929: 902: 880: 863: 796: 786: 357: 4775: 4643: 4486: 4289: 4204: 4089: 3991: 3953: 3358: 3271: 3182: 3042: 2984: 2940: 2812: 2433: 2267: 2241: 1966:

earlier, easily accessible information like school attendance is trivial to verify and generally not

4769:

Wouldn't that imply the exact opposite? Out of over 100 million websites, it's in the top 99.997% --

994:

concerns, but note that the fact that categories lack citations and references is something true of

4823: 4811: 4792: 4777: 4764: 4760: 4746: 4738: 4715: 4698: 4674: 4655: 4633: 4578: 4559: 4555: 4541: 4514: 4488: 4472: 4449: 4423: 4419: 4406: 4390: 4383: 4379: 4368: 4341: 4323: 4320: 4294: 4262: 4247: 4229: 4212: 4195: 4167: 4146: 4108: 4094: 4065: 4051: 4030: 4021: 3996: 3978: 3958: 3909: 3886: 3868: 3854: 3836: 3815: 3761: 3744: 3740: 3727: 3709: 3694: 3676: 3672: 3659: 3642: 3621: 3589: 3571: 3557: 3542: 3519: 3502: 3485: 3454: 3439: 3417: 3386: 3369: 3344: 3319: 3276: 3255: 3240: 3220: 3208: 3187: 3146: 3128: 3111: 3092: 3084: 3067: 3058:

article should be premamently semi protected at least as a rather special case where it is needed.

3047: 3026: 3012: 2989: 2964: 2945: 2920: 2906: 2889: 2866: 2838: 2817: 2791: 2787: 2774: 2755: 2736: 2724: 2714: 2696: 2685: 2657: 2640: 2623: 2598: 2579: 2558: 2530: 2506: 2488: 2467: 2226: 2174: 2169: 2120: 2096: 2068: 2049: 2007: 1985: 1960: 1933: 1901: 1883: 1860: 1822: 1803: 1792: 1767: 1655: 1632: 1604: 1577: 1534: 1508: 1481: 1462: 1443: 1413: 1393: 1376: 1351: 1308: 1285: 1267: 1234: 1184: 1170:

and that people are neither notable for nor defined by graduating high school. It may very well be

1156: 1144: 1120: 1093: 1081: 1063: 1008: 1003: 952: 933: 906: 884: 867: 821: 817: 800: 758: 741: 711: 605: 601: 560: 545: 537: 475: 439: 394: 377: 374: 361: 343: 331: 322: 300: 281: 268: 264: 251: 216: 101: 4683:

Would you also agree to removing the occasional problematic BLP? And for all, again: I don't mind

3721:, the evidence fulfills the requirements for the article to exist. Nothing more, nothing less. –– 4807: 4502: 4359: 4225: 3944: 3813: 3481: 3450: 3408: 3340: 3151: 3138: 3063: 2880: 2802: 2405:

in March 2008 was already at the stage where consensus was that if an article that was primarily

2273: 2204: 2088: 2019: 1888:

That's not the closing admin's work. On CfD he only has to assess if the cat ought to be deleted

1741: 1569: 1405: 1300: 1180: 1059: 1043: 737: 541: 435: 278: 242: 213: 2588:- it's just copied version from march or something, written by Shii, without the new sources. -- 3898:

for speedy deletion under R2 (redir from main to user space). No comment on this DRV though. --

4788: 4711: 4670: 4651: 4258: 4163: 4142: 4104: 4061: 4047: 3850: 3705: 3655: 3567: 3553: 3515: 3382: 3315: 3251: 2834: 2541: 2502: 2484: 2463: 1992: 1865: 1856: 1783:

I was one of those who "pressured" (really?) Kbdank into his rethink. These categories aren't

1701: 1677: 1628: 1253: 1210: 1077: 948: 829:

at AfD. Oooopsie, lack of notability is not listed on the list of speedy deletion criteria at

754: 703: 556: 4689: 4624: 4532: 4506: 3970: 3860: 3778: 3690: 3581: 3534: 3431: 3155: 3142: 2898: 2728: 2677: 2619: 2060: 1999: 1952: 1893: 1814: 1796: 1759: 1728:

no sources for studying college on Baltimore (altought, from context, he probably did study)

1647: 1596: 1526: 1521: 1504: 1473: 1343: 1277: 1226: 1215:

Nobody has made a case of when a visitor to the encyclopedia would find this category useful

1148: 925: 898: 876: 859: 808:. It's an contested prod, so it gets restored. Discussions about notability can be had at 792: 782: 353: 317: 97: 89: 1795:

reaction. NB clearly no consensus to delete based on such categories being "non-defining".

4770: 4665:. But claiming that doing so would make us somehow not an encyclopedia is hard to accept. 4481: 4402: 4337: 4284: 4182: 4084: 3986: 3948: 3266: 3177: 3037: 2979: 2935: 2807: 2764: 2653: 854: 206: 2516:- there is no real reason for not having the article. I have the history of this article 2372: 686: 520: 182: 4756: 4662: 4551: 4523: 4501:. Trying to keep this article deleted for eternity isn't going to solve any problems. 4415: 4375: 4317: 4080: 3882: 3832: 3736: 3668: 3364: 3217: 3080: 2783: 2752: 2166: 1835: 1719: 1000: 837: 813: 597: 467: 426: 371: 260: 4038:. If articles should be deleted based on how "vile" their subject is, I expect to see 2748:

and I think this new source should prove quite helpful to maintaining a good article.

352:

convicted pederasts or, who knows, a list of people accused wrongly of pederasty :P --

4820: 4803: 4734: 4352: 4221: 3808: 3477: 3446: 3401: 3336: 3203: 3197: 3124: 3059: 2575: 2476: 2422: 2414: 2035: 1971: 1919: 1869: 1697: 1458: 1429: 1176: 1143:. In contrast the biographers of the United States Congress give the high school for 1116: 1090: 1055: 830: 809: 733: 431: 235: 227: 223: 199: 4463:

now a very notable website with plenty of reliable sources to make a good article.--

2390: 4784: 4752: 4707: 4666: 4647: 4581: 4254: 4244: 4159: 4131: 4100: 4057: 4043: 4039: 3899: 3846: 3701: 3652: 3563: 3549: 3511: 3378: 3311: 3289: 3247: 3237: 3023: 3009: 2862: 2830: 2745: 2607: 2595: 2555: 2527: 2498: 2480: 2459: 2301: 2289: 2257: 1852: 1246: 1073: 944: 777:

be important to fans (though we have nothing to substantiate this), but we have no

750: 725: 552: 340: 2357: 671: 505: 167: 4592: 2236:

However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to

1367:, per Enric Naval. Neither verifiable nor remotely notable or useful categories. 551:

You could have just asked for it to be restored, being a PROD deletion. Done. -

4498: 3686: 3473: 3396: 3103: 2956: 2915: 2632: 2615: 2418: 1967: 1940: 1843: 1725: 1500: 1495: 1424: 1385: 1368: 1135: 1051: 991: 778: 729: 292: 93: 85: 1704:

and there is no mention or source of being a high college student on Baltimore.

4398: 4333: 2649: 1944: 1707: 2165:

the website, and will probably vote to delete it if it is brought to AFD.) –

2057:

nobody has explained what purpose does this category serve on the first place

2025:

Given this, it follows that any energy we might spend maintaining categories

1834:. Quite aside from the fact that high school alumni categories are basically 3878: 3828: 3300: 3214: 2844:

Relist at AFD, but keep the article permanently full-protected if it is kept

2749: 2479:- this is a perennial issue, and one that will not be solved by DRV alone.-- 2402: 1687: 1681: 2639:

to rank ED against Uncyclopedia? Good luck getting anything meaningful, as

833:. You first need to go to AfD, get a delete result, and then you can apply 2799:- per the additon of new sources. I was just about to start a DRV myself. 732:

of the album. No prejudice to recreation should such sources materialize.

310:

Knowledge:Requests_for_arbitration/Badlydrawnjeff#Summary_deletion_of_BLPs

4588: 3723: 3120: 2570: 1453: 1111: 943:: Absolutely no reason for Deletion Review on a PROD deleted article. - 3601: 2631:- The site is a pile of non-notable nonsense about equally non-notable 4526:'s suggestion to indefinitely sprotect the article, and the draft at 3430:. Not sure if the closing admin is supposed to relist it himself. -- 1423:. Admittedly those who favored retention in the CfD didn't give the 1139:

believes that high school is not defining but dietary preference is

3943:. Also, I will mention again that I have a version of the draft at 4602: 4595: 3966: 3228:

I shouldn't say recreated, because ED article never really existed

2999: 2975: 2644: 2636: 1631:

says nothing about Baltimore, but it says that he graduated from

2409:

Encyclopedia Dramatica was to be published, notability would be

3735:. The new source demonstrates that the subject is notable. -- 2846:- even as Knowledge's anti-ED poster child, I think the source 2421:

on top of the existing sources we have on the site. Other than

773:

reliable sources (and none were provided). The purported album

4239: 3939:- The namespace that the article should be recreated under is 3823:

An article on this subject has been moved into article space:

3232: 3004: 2914:. Enough already. How many times have we been through this? 2590: 2550: 2522: 2199: 1623:

About sampling.... I checked the first category that you list

3377:

per the new source. And let the chips fall where they may. -

1046:

by two editors reversed himself. Closing admin has expressed

999:

become quite empty as the articles are removed from them.) –

3230:) are trolls or something, you are insulting me a little. -- 2230:(agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, 1428:

most an issue with the articles and not the categories. —

3629:

Let's end the drama and show that we're not that biased.

3428:

Knowledge:Deletion_review#Commenting_in_a_deletion_review

2825:. The arguments against always look like a whole lot of 2518:(with maybe too much personal opinions about the matter) 2083:

The admin didn't "assess if the cat ought to be deleted

3293: 2875: 2353: 2349: 2345: 721: 667: 663: 659: 501: 497: 493: 163: 159: 155: 3493:

due to the new source that has just become available

3310:) clearly pushes the notability level even higher. -- 1220:

brought again to CfD for being irrelevant categories

1213:

that is defended with no arguments backed on policy.

291:. G10 wasn't really relevant but A7 would have been. 1132:

Category:People by high school in the United States

596:– Restored as contested prod. Non-admin closure. 3894:just to keep things on the up and up, I've listed 3604:is a reliable source, and there have been others. 2544:on our wikipedia!", - WP should not be like that. 2393:in a major Australian media outlet was published 4440:It's not a mention, it's substantial coverage.-- 4313:Allow recreation, but permanently semi-protected 2727:and flood ANI with cries of undue procedures. -- 1329:. Unfortunately, the admin didn't say if it was 4609:decide not to have an article about it, but we 1906:To draw a few quotes from our easily-forgotten 2720:Relist and make sure to point to a good draft 2250:Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected 2220:among Knowledge contributors. Knowledge has 8: 1635:at age 13, and he seems to be from New York 724:that deletion was after an expired prod. No 2184:The following is an archived debate of the 1018:The following is an archived debate of the 615:The following is an archived debate of the 449:The following is an archived debate of the 111:The following is an archived debate of the 3426:actually, "relist" is one of the votes at 2495:Knowledge:Deletion review/Log/2008 March 6 2224:regarding the encyclopedia's content, and 2145: 977: 585: 419: 69: 3875:User:Running/Encyclopedia Dramatica/Draft 2586:User:Running/Encyclopedia Dramatica/Draft 1168:Category:People who graduated high school 2858:Knowledge:Requests for arbitration/MONGO 2244:on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. 1744:, Wood graduated from West Point in 1874 1558:Category:Erasmus Hall High School alumni 1194:Overturn "consensus" decision and delete 41: 2643:selling the "uncyclopedia.org" name to 1566:kill them all and let God sort them out 50: 1738:, the only reference to education is " 1625:Category:Baltimore City College alumni 1562:Category:Stuyvesant High School alumni 1554:Category:Baltimore City College alumni 769:- A reasonably extensive search found 33: 3967:latin letters on the english alphabet 1968:challenged or likely to be challenged 1756:List_of_Baltimore_City_College_people 1690:. Hey, this looks fun, let's try "W": 1640:List_of_Baltimore_City_College_people 1207:List_of_Baltimore_City_College_people 1034:Admin initially correctly closed the 897:Thanks for pointing out this to us -- 634:Pink (Mindless Self Indulgence album) 593:Pink (Mindless Self Indulgence album) 430:– Contested prod has been restored – 7: 4307:Arbitrary section break for sanity 2 2801:Also see my version of the draft at 1684:but never graduated from high school 4837:of the page listed in the heading. 4528:User:Running/Encyclopedia Dramatica 3476:but that's for an AFD to decide. -- 2399:User:Running/Encyclopedia Dramatica 2162:User:Running/Encyclopedia Dramatica 2134:of the page listed in the heading. 966:of the page listed in the heading. 574:of the page listed in the heading. 408:of the page listed in the heading. 3768:Arbitrary section break for sanity 2016:Category:Bolton High School alumni 1147:but omit his dietary preferences. 367:Endorse deletion without prejudice 28: 3295:) was brought to Deletion Review 2872:I knew this day would come Relist 1758:where it is actually relevant. -- 4642:Note that we have an article on 2203: 4833:The above is an archive of the 4130:notable than clearly notable. - 4083:should be be deleted as well.-- 2130:The above is an archive of the 962:The above is an archive of the 570:The above is an archive of the 404:The above is an archive of the 1949:a thousand and a half articles 1787:such as to violate policy. If 845:Recreation of deleted material 1: 2240:on the part of others and to 1951:. Again, this is madness). -- 920:- It looks like UsaSatsui is 92:) 14:12, 13 May 2008 (UTC) – 30: 2419:general notability guideline 1846:, albeit indirectly: if the 1072:- Consensus trumps policy.-- 2850:pushes it into notability. 2546:Knowledge:Assume good faith 1333:or if he made some sort of 1145:BUSH, George Herbert Walker 4860: 3969:, I'd rather not use it -- 3036:- And your reason being?-- 1732:Charles_Erskine_Scott_Wood 1451:Categories cannot fail V. 781:information to provide. - 4550:. Sorry, I don't follow. 2874:per my prophetic remarks 2455:overturn/allow recreation 2018:the same attention we do 1722:is a stub with no sources 1676:Uris attended schools in 789:) 15:35, 8 May 2008 (UTC) 18:Knowledge:Deletion review 4840:Please do not modify it. 4824:13:54, 13 May 2008 (UTC) 4812:03:27, 13 May 2008 (UTC) 4793:04:08, 13 May 2008 (UTC) 4778:03:48, 13 May 2008 (UTC) 4765:02:04, 13 May 2008 (UTC) 4747:23:44, 12 May 2008 (UTC) 4716:04:08, 13 May 2008 (UTC) 4699:01:06, 13 May 2008 (UTC) 4675:18:40, 12 May 2008 (UTC) 4656:15:32, 12 May 2008 (UTC) 4634:07:00, 12 May 2008 (UTC) 4560:04:22, 12 May 2008 (UTC) 4542:21:57, 11 May 2008 (UTC) 4515:18:35, 11 May 2008 (UTC) 4489:17:14, 11 May 2008 (UTC) 4473:12:33, 11 May 2008 (UTC) 4450:16:50, 11 May 2008 (UTC) 4424:04:35, 12 May 2008 (UTC) 4407:15:02, 11 May 2008 (UTC) 4384:05:57, 11 May 2008 (UTC) 4369:03:39, 11 May 2008 (UTC) 4342:03:19, 11 May 2008 (UTC) 4324:18:52, 10 May 2008 (UTC) 4295:02:26, 11 May 2008 (UTC) 4263:15:15, 10 May 2008 (UTC) 4248:11:54, 10 May 2008 (UTC) 4230:05:41, 10 May 2008 (UTC) 4213:04:25, 10 May 2008 (UTC) 4196:00:49, 10 May 2008 (UTC) 4168:16:39, 10 May 2008 (UTC) 4147:05:20, 10 May 2008 (UTC) 4109:16:39, 10 May 2008 (UTC) 4095:00:33, 10 May 2008 (UTC) 3997:00:09, 10 May 2008 (UTC) 3979:07:15, 11 May 2008 (UTC) 3959:00:07, 10 May 2008 (UTC) 3794:18:38, May 9, 2008 (UTC) 3590:00:10, 11 May 2008 (UTC) 3572:03:43, 10 May 2008 (UTC) 2912:Close, stop the nonsense 2658:15:02, 11 May 2008 (UTC) 2191:Please do not modify it. 2175:07:05, 14 May 2008 (UTC) 2137:Please do not modify it. 2121:18:10, 12 May 2008 (UTC) 2097:18:14, 11 May 2008 (UTC) 2069:06:03, 12 May 2008 (UTC) 2050:05:25, 12 May 2008 (UTC) 2008:18:59, 11 May 2008 (UTC) 1986:18:37, 11 May 2008 (UTC) 1961:18:06, 11 May 2008 (UTC) 1934:17:35, 11 May 2008 (UTC) 1902:14:35, 11 May 2008 (UTC) 1884:07:43, 11 May 2008 (UTC) 1861:04:51, 11 May 2008 (UTC) 1823:14:01, 11 May 2008 (UTC) 1804:19:07, 10 May 2008 (UTC) 1768:18:49, 11 May 2008 (UTC) 1734:No mention of Baltimore 1700:studied at conservatory 1656:18:25, 11 May 2008 (UTC) 1605:18:12, 11 May 2008 (UTC) 1578:18:02, 11 May 2008 (UTC) 1535:14:01, 11 May 2008 (UTC) 1509:14:11, 10 May 2008 (UTC) 1482:14:01, 11 May 2008 (UTC) 1463:14:03, 10 May 2008 (UTC) 1444:03:54, 10 May 2008 (UTC) 1352:18:06, 11 May 2008 (UTC) 1309:17:36, 11 May 2008 (UTC) 1121:13:59, 10 May 2008 (UTC) 1025:Please do not modify it. 1009:07:34, 14 May 2008 (UTC) 984:School alumni categories 969:Please do not modify it. 622:Please do not modify it. 577:Please do not modify it. 456:Please do not modify it. 411:Please do not modify it. 395:20:46, 12 May 2008 (UTC) 378:13:57, 11 May 2008 (UTC) 362:13:49, 11 May 2008 (UTC) 118:Please do not modify it. 102:14:12, 13 May 2008 (UTC) 43:Deletion review archives 4066:23:43, 9 May 2008 (UTC) 4052:23:30, 9 May 2008 (UTC) 4031:20:16, 9 May 2008 (UTC) 3910:21:53, 9 May 2008 (UTC) 3896:Encyclopaedia dramatica 3887:20:47, 9 May 2008 (UTC) 3869:20:38, 9 May 2008 (UTC) 3855:20:34, 9 May 2008 (UTC) 3843:Encyclopaedia Dramatica 3837:19:42, 9 May 2008 (UTC) 3825:Encyclopaedia dramatica 3816:19:04, 9 May 2008 (UTC) 3762:13:29, 9 May 2008 (UTC) 3745:11:04, 9 May 2008 (UTC) 3728:07:37, 9 May 2008 (UTC) 3710:15:11, 9 May 2008 (UTC) 3695:04:52, 9 May 2008 (UTC) 3677:04:20, 9 May 2008 (UTC) 3660:03:10, 9 May 2008 (UTC) 3643:02:42, 9 May 2008 (UTC) 3622:01:44, 9 May 2008 (UTC) 3558:01:46, 9 May 2008 (UTC) 3543:01:35, 9 May 2008 (UTC) 3520:01:33, 9 May 2008 (UTC) 3503:00:54, 9 May 2008 (UTC) 3486:00:42, 9 May 2008 (UTC) 3455:15:18, 9 May 2008 (UTC) 3440:05:42, 9 May 2008 (UTC) 3418:00:35, 9 May 2008 (UTC) 3387:00:32, 9 May 2008 (UTC) 3370:00:22, 9 May 2008 (UTC) 3345:00:18, 9 May 2008 (UTC) 3320:23:36, 8 May 2008 (UTC) 3277:22:58, 8 May 2008 (UTC) 3256:23:02, 8 May 2008 (UTC) 3241:22:47, 8 May 2008 (UTC) 3221:22:01, 8 May 2008 (UTC) 3209:21:45, 8 May 2008 (UTC) 3188:21:41, 8 May 2008 (UTC) 3147:21:01, 8 May 2008 (UTC) 3129:20:53, 8 May 2008 (UTC) 3112:20:27, 8 May 2008 (UTC) 3093:20:24, 8 May 2008 (UTC) 3068:20:23, 8 May 2008 (UTC) 3048:20:26, 8 May 2008 (UTC) 3027:20:22, 8 May 2008 (UTC) 3013:20:28, 8 May 2008 (UTC) 2990:20:26, 8 May 2008 (UTC) 2965:20:14, 8 May 2008 (UTC) 2946:20:12, 8 May 2008 (UTC) 2921:20:07, 8 May 2008 (UTC) 2907:19:57, 8 May 2008 (UTC) 2890:19:44, 8 May 2008 (UTC) 2867:19:43, 8 May 2008 (UTC) 2839:19:41, 8 May 2008 (UTC) 2818:19:33, 8 May 2008 (UTC) 2792:19:31, 8 May 2008 (UTC) 2775:19:25, 8 May 2008 (UTC) 2756:17:09, 8 May 2008 (UTC) 2737:16:39, 8 May 2008 (UTC) 2715:16:34, 8 May 2008 (UTC) 2686:16:33, 8 May 2008 (UTC) 2624:16:29, 8 May 2008 (UTC) 2599:16:14, 8 May 2008 (UTC) 2580:15:16, 8 May 2008 (UTC) 2559:14:52, 8 May 2008 (UTC) 2531:14:23, 8 May 2008 (UTC) 2507:14:09, 8 May 2008 (UTC) 2489:13:44, 8 May 2008 (UTC) 2468:13:14, 8 May 2008 (UTC) 2282:; accounts blocked for 2252:single-purpose accounts 2222:policies and guidelines 2107:Suggested compromise: 1785:inherently unverifiable 1568:" on Knowledge, do we? 1414:23:41, 8 May 2008 (UTC) 1394:20:13, 8 May 2008 (UTC) 1377:20:13, 8 May 2008 (UTC) 1286:18:16, 8 May 2008 (UTC) 1268:17:22, 8 May 2008 (UTC) 1235:17:01, 8 May 2008 (UTC) 1185:15:59, 8 May 2008 (UTC) 1157:15:36, 8 May 2008 (UTC) 1094:14:39, 8 May 2008 (UTC) 1082:14:09, 8 May 2008 (UTC) 1064:13:57, 8 May 2008 (UTC) 953:21:13, 8 May 2008 (UTC) 934:17:22, 8 May 2008 (UTC) 907:17:47, 8 May 2008 (UTC) 885:17:17, 8 May 2008 (UTC) 868:17:07, 8 May 2008 (UTC) 822:16:41, 8 May 2008 (UTC) 801:17:22, 8 May 2008 (UTC) 759:15:45, 8 May 2008 (UTC) 742:14:49, 8 May 2008 (UTC) 712:14:36, 8 May 2008 (UTC) 606:00:09, 9 May 2008 (UTC) 561:21:07, 8 May 2008 (UTC) 546:20:22, 8 May 2008 (UTC) 440:21:34, 8 May 2008 (UTC) 344:19:21, 9 May 2008 (UTC) 332:14:30, 9 May 2008 (UTC) 301:14:00, 9 May 2008 (UTC) 282:00:50, 9 May 2008 (UTC) 269:00:47, 9 May 2008 (UTC) 252:00:42, 9 May 2008 (UTC) 232:restore and list at AfD 217:21:30, 8 May 2008 (UTC) 4042:deleted before this. - 3941:Encyclopædia Dramatica 3873:It's back in place at 3329:Criticism_of_Wikipedia 2996:Knowledge:WEDONTNEEDIT 2878:, barely hours ago. -- 2641:some unsuspecting fool 2320:Encyclopedia Dramatica 2188:of the article above. 2153:Encyclopedia Dramatica 1789:any particular article 1714:John_Archibald_Wheeler 1022:of the article above. 619:of the article above. 453:of the article above. 115:of the article above. 4548:shut down the project 3164:few or no other edits 2413:established per both 1993:WP:OVERCATategorizing 1327:Sampling_(statistics) 1211:WP:OVERCATegorization 728:found to support the 4644:Stormfront (website) 3799:Overturn and restore 3288:. When the draft at 3166:outside this topic. 2932:consensus can change 2612:Really, check it out 2085:on its current state 1890:on its current state 1736:on the whole article 1105:policy, but it does 988:leave them undeleted 130:Wayne Nelson Corliss 77:Wayne Nelson Corliss 4126:classify things as 3754:Bramlet Abercrombie 3631:ImperfectlyInformed 3607:dihydrogen monoxide 2234:by counting votes. 2213:not a majority vote 1716:is properly sourced 1633:New York University 1365:Overturn and delete 1101:consensus does not 3945:User:Urban Rose/ED 2803:User:Urban Rose/ED 2438:AnonymousUser12345 2411:clearly and firmly 2020:Category:Murderers 1742:Erie, Pennsylvania 1130:the categories in 198:Page was speedied 4847: 4846: 4397:at this point. -- 4367: 4145: 4050: 4028: 3795: 3657: 3627:Allow recreation. 3620: 3599:Allow recreation. 3576:Very well then. 3495:George The Dragon 3416: 3207: 3167: 2994:Seems to me like 2761:Allow recreation. 2542:anonymous hackers 2450: 2436:comment added by 2315: 2314: 2311: 2238:assume good faith 2172: 2144: 2143: 1702:Peabody Institute 1678:Norfolk, Virginia 1629:Balamurali_Ambati 1266: 1265: 1223: 1006: 976: 975: 720:- deleting admin 584: 583: 418: 417: 250: 60: 59: 4851: 4842: 4800:Allow recreation 4520:Allow recreation 4494:Allow recreation 4461:Allow recreation 4395:endorse deletion 4357: 4292: 4287: 4218:Allow recreation 4201:Allow Recreation 4188:Pocopocopocopoco 4141: 4092: 4087: 4046: 4036:Allow recreation 4026: 4024: 4023:Ten Pound Hammer 3994: 3989: 3956: 3951: 3907: 3904: 3781: 3777: 3750:Allow recreation 3719:Allow recreation 3665:Endorse deletion 3656: 3648:Allow recreation 3610: 3578:Endorse deletion 3466:Allow recreation 3406: 3392:Allow recreation 3286:Allow recreation 3201: 3193:Endorse deletion 3149: 3134:Allow recreation 3117:Allow recreation 3110: 3108: 3055:Allow recreation 3045: 3040: 2987: 2982: 2943: 2938: 2918: 2895:Allow Recreation 2888: 2815: 2810: 2772: 2713: 2711: 2705: 2699: 2449: 2430: 2375: 2361: 2343: 2309: 2297: 2281: 2265: 2246: 2216:, but instead a 2207: 2200: 2193: 2170: 2146: 2139: 2040: 1976: 1924: 1874: 1832:Endorse deletion 1638:. If we look at 1434: 1251: 1250: 1221: 1027: 1004: 978: 971: 941:Article restored 842: 836: 726:reliable sources 689: 675: 657: 624: 586: 579: 523: 509: 491: 458: 420: 413: 349:Endorse deletion 337:Endorse deletion 330: 289:Endorse deletion 273:The article was 240: 211: 205: 185: 171: 153: 120: 82:endorse deletion 70: 56: 36: 31: 4859: 4858: 4854: 4853: 4852: 4850: 4849: 4848: 4838: 4835:deletion review 4697: 4632: 4540: 4497:articles about 4465:I LIVE IN A HAT 4442:I LIVE IN A HAT 4290: 4285: 4240:Have a nice day 4205:Electricbassguy 4183:user:Merkinsmum 4090: 4085: 4022: 3992: 3987: 3954: 3949: 3905: 3900: 3779: 3616: 3233:Have a nice day 3104: 3102: 3043: 3038: 3005:Have a nice day 2985: 2980: 2941: 2936: 2916: 2879: 2813: 2808: 2768: 2709: 2703: 2697: 2695: 2591:Have a nice day 2551:Have a nice day 2523:Have a nice day 2431: 2384: 2378: 2371: 2370: 2364: 2334: 2318: 2299: 2287: 2271: 2255: 2242:sign your posts 2189: 2186:deletion review 2135: 2132:deletion review 2047: 2036: 1983: 1972: 1931: 1920: 1908:deletion policy 1881: 1870: 1472:of articles. -- 1441: 1430: 1331:random sampling 1044:being pressured 1023: 1020:deletion review 967: 964:deletion review 840: 834: 698: 692: 685: 684: 678: 648: 632: 620: 617:deletion review 575: 572:deletion review 532: 526: 519: 518: 512: 482: 466: 454: 451:deletion review 409: 406:deletion review 329: 323:CobaltBlueTony™ 321: 209: 203: 194: 188: 181: 180: 174: 144: 128: 116: 113:deletion review 68: 61: 54: 34: 26: 25: 24: 12: 11: 5: 4857: 4855: 4845: 4844: 4829: 4828: 4827: 4826: 4814: 4797: 4796: 4795: 4780: 4767: 4739:Carlossuarez46 4727: 4726: 4725: 4724: 4723: 4722: 4721: 4720: 4719: 4718: 4702: 4701: 4688: 4678: 4677: 4658: 4637: 4636: 4623: 4565: 4564: 4563: 4562: 4531: 4524:User:Blueboy96 4517: 4491: 4475: 4457: 4456: 4455: 4454: 4453: 4452: 4433: 4432: 4431: 4430: 4429: 4428: 4427: 4426: 4386: 4371: 4345: 4344: 4326: 4309: 4308: 4304: 4303: 4302: 4301: 4300: 4299: 4298: 4297: 4270: 4269: 4268: 4267: 4266: 4265: 4215: 4198: 4176: 4175: 4174: 4173: 4172: 4171: 4170: 4139: 4138: 4137: 4136: 4135: 4134: 4118: 4117: 4116: 4115: 4114: 4113: 4112: 4111: 4081:George W. Bush 4071: 4070: 4069: 4068: 4033: 4027:and his otters 4014: 4013: 4012: 4011: 4010: 4009: 4008: 4007: 4006: 4005: 4004: 4003: 4002: 4001: 4000: 3999: 3983: 3982: 3981: 3921: 3920: 3919: 3918: 3917: 3916: 3915: 3914: 3913: 3912: 3818: 3796: 3770: 3769: 3765: 3764: 3747: 3730: 3716: 3715: 3714: 3713: 3712: 3662: 3645: 3624: 3614: 3596: 3595: 3594: 3593: 3592: 3560: 3522: 3505: 3488: 3462: 3461: 3460: 3459: 3458: 3457: 3421: 3420: 3389: 3372: 3347: 3322: 3283: 3282: 3281: 3280: 3279: 3243: 3223: 3190: 3169: 3168: 3131: 3114: 3095: 3085:David Eppstein 3077:WP:NOTCENSORED 3070: 3051: 3050: 3030: 3029: 3016: 3015: 2992: 2968: 2967: 2949: 2948: 2924: 2923: 2909: 2892: 2869: 2841: 2827:WP:IDONTLIKEIT 2820: 2794: 2777: 2758: 2739: 2717: 2698:Lawrence Cohen 2688: 2671: 2670: 2669: 2668: 2667: 2663:WP:IDONTLIKEIT 2601: 2582: 2563: 2562: 2561: 2511: 2510: 2509: 2470: 2386: 2385: 2382: 2376: 2368: 2362: 2313: 2312: 2208: 2196: 2195: 2180: 2179: 2178: 2177: 2142: 2141: 2126: 2125: 2124: 2123: 2105: 2104: 2103: 2102: 2101: 2100: 2099: 2081: 2080: 2079: 2078: 2077: 2076: 2075: 2074: 2073: 2072: 2071: 2043: 2031: 2023: 1979: 1927: 1877: 1828: 1827: 1826: 1825: 1807: 1806: 1777: 1776: 1775: 1774: 1773: 1772: 1771: 1770: 1750: 1749: 1748: 1747: 1729: 1723: 1720:Alan_M._Wilner 1717: 1711: 1705: 1692: 1691: 1665: 1664: 1663: 1662: 1661: 1660: 1659: 1658: 1614: 1613: 1612: 1611: 1610: 1609: 1608: 1607: 1585: 1584: 1583: 1582: 1581: 1580: 1564:). We don't " 1540: 1539: 1538: 1537: 1512: 1511: 1487: 1486: 1485: 1484: 1466: 1465: 1446: 1437: 1417: 1416: 1397: 1396: 1379: 1361: 1360: 1359: 1358: 1357: 1356: 1355: 1354: 1335:case selection 1316: 1315: 1314: 1313: 1312: 1311: 1291: 1290: 1289: 1288: 1271: 1270: 1238: 1237: 1190: 1189: 1188: 1187: 1160: 1159: 1149:-- roundhouse0 1124: 1123: 1096: 1084: 1030: 1029: 1014: 1013: 1012: 1011: 974: 973: 958: 957: 956: 955: 937: 936: 914: 913: 912: 911: 910: 909: 890: 889: 888: 887: 824: 803: 763: 762: 761: 700: 699: 696: 690: 682: 676: 627: 626: 611: 610: 609: 608: 582: 581: 566: 565: 564: 563: 534: 533: 530: 524: 516: 510: 468:Critical Watch 461: 460: 445: 444: 443: 442: 427:Critical Watch 416: 415: 400: 399: 398: 397: 380: 364: 346: 334: 325: 303: 286: 285: 284: 254: 196: 195: 192: 186: 178: 172: 123: 122: 107: 106: 105: 104: 67: 62: 58: 57: 49: 40: 29: 27: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 4856: 4843: 4841: 4836: 4831: 4830: 4825: 4822: 4818: 4815: 4813: 4809: 4805: 4801: 4798: 4794: 4790: 4786: 4781: 4779: 4776: 4774: 4773: 4768: 4766: 4762: 4758: 4754: 4750: 4749: 4748: 4744: 4740: 4736: 4732: 4729: 4728: 4717: 4713: 4709: 4704: 4703: 4700: 4695: 4691: 4686: 4682: 4681: 4680: 4679: 4676: 4672: 4668: 4664: 4659: 4657: 4653: 4649: 4645: 4641: 4640: 4639: 4638: 4635: 4630: 4626: 4621: 4617: 4612: 4608: 4604: 4600: 4597: 4593: 4590: 4586: 4583: 4579: 4576: 4571: 4570: 4569: 4568: 4567: 4566: 4561: 4557: 4553: 4549: 4545: 4544: 4543: 4538: 4534: 4529: 4525: 4521: 4518: 4516: 4512: 4508: 4504: 4500: 4495: 4492: 4490: 4487: 4485: 4484: 4479: 4478:Relist at AfD 4476: 4474: 4470: 4466: 4462: 4459: 4458: 4451: 4447: 4443: 4439: 4438: 4437: 4436: 4435: 4434: 4425: 4421: 4417: 4412: 4411: 4410: 4409: 4408: 4404: 4400: 4396: 4392: 4391:Jason Fortuny 4387: 4385: 4381: 4377: 4372: 4370: 4365: 4361: 4356: 4355: 4349: 4348: 4347: 4346: 4343: 4339: 4335: 4330: 4327: 4325: 4322: 4319: 4314: 4311: 4310: 4306: 4305: 4296: 4293: 4288: 4281: 4278: 4277: 4276: 4275: 4274: 4273: 4272: 4271: 4264: 4260: 4256: 4251: 4250: 4249: 4246: 4242: 4241: 4236: 4233: 4232: 4231: 4227: 4223: 4219: 4216: 4214: 4210: 4206: 4202: 4199: 4197: 4193: 4189: 4184: 4180: 4177: 4169: 4165: 4161: 4157: 4156: 4155: 4154: 4153: 4152: 4151: 4150: 4149: 4148: 4144: 4133: 4129: 4124: 4123: 4122: 4121: 4120: 4119: 4110: 4106: 4102: 4098: 4097: 4096: 4093: 4088: 4082: 4077: 4076: 4075: 4074: 4073: 4072: 4067: 4063: 4059: 4055: 4054: 4053: 4049: 4045: 4041: 4037: 4034: 4032: 4025: 4019: 4016: 4015: 3998: 3995: 3990: 3984: 3980: 3976: 3972: 3968: 3964: 3963: 3962: 3961: 3960: 3957: 3952: 3946: 3942: 3938: 3935: 3934: 3933: 3932: 3931: 3930: 3929: 3928: 3927: 3926: 3925: 3924: 3923: 3922: 3911: 3908: 3903: 3897: 3893: 3890: 3889: 3888: 3884: 3880: 3876: 3872: 3871: 3870: 3866: 3862: 3858: 3857: 3856: 3852: 3848: 3844: 3840: 3839: 3838: 3834: 3830: 3826: 3822: 3819: 3817: 3814: 3812: 3811: 3806: 3805: 3800: 3797: 3793: 3792: 3787: 3786: 3782: 3775: 3774:Relist at AfD 3772: 3771: 3767: 3766: 3763: 3759: 3755: 3751: 3748: 3746: 3742: 3738: 3734: 3731: 3729: 3726: 3725: 3720: 3717: 3711: 3707: 3703: 3698: 3697: 3696: 3692: 3688: 3683: 3680: 3679: 3678: 3674: 3670: 3666: 3663: 3661: 3658: 3654: 3649: 3646: 3644: 3640: 3636: 3632: 3628: 3625: 3623: 3618: 3609: 3608: 3603: 3600: 3597: 3591: 3587: 3583: 3579: 3575: 3574: 3573: 3569: 3565: 3561: 3559: 3555: 3551: 3546: 3545: 3544: 3540: 3536: 3532: 3528: 3527: 3523: 3521: 3517: 3513: 3509: 3506: 3504: 3500: 3496: 3492: 3489: 3487: 3483: 3479: 3475: 3471: 3467: 3464: 3463: 3456: 3452: 3448: 3443: 3442: 3441: 3437: 3433: 3429: 3425: 3424: 3423: 3422: 3419: 3414: 3410: 3405: 3404: 3398: 3393: 3390: 3388: 3384: 3380: 3376: 3373: 3371: 3368: 3367: 3366: 3363: 3360: 3357: 3351: 3348: 3346: 3342: 3338: 3334: 3330: 3326: 3323: 3321: 3317: 3313: 3309: 3306: 3302: 3298: 3294: 3292:(see version 3291: 3287: 3284: 3278: 3275: 3274: 3270: 3269: 3264: 3259: 3258: 3257: 3253: 3249: 3244: 3242: 3239: 3235: 3234: 3229: 3224: 3222: 3219: 3216: 3212: 3211: 3210: 3205: 3200: 3199: 3194: 3191: 3189: 3186: 3185: 3181: 3180: 3174: 3171: 3170: 3165: 3161: 3157: 3153: 3148: 3144: 3140: 3135: 3132: 3130: 3126: 3122: 3118: 3115: 3113: 3109: 3107: 3099: 3096: 3094: 3090: 3086: 3082: 3078: 3074: 3071: 3069: 3065: 3061: 3056: 3053: 3052: 3049: 3046: 3041: 3035: 3032: 3031: 3028: 3025: 3021: 3018: 3017: 3014: 3011: 3007: 3006: 3001: 2997: 2993: 2991: 2988: 2983: 2977: 2973: 2970: 2969: 2966: 2962: 2958: 2954: 2951: 2950: 2947: 2944: 2939: 2933: 2929: 2926: 2925: 2922: 2919: 2913: 2910: 2908: 2904: 2900: 2896: 2893: 2891: 2886: 2882: 2881:Relata refero 2877: 2873: 2870: 2868: 2865: 2864: 2859: 2855: 2854: 2849: 2845: 2842: 2840: 2836: 2832: 2828: 2824: 2821: 2819: 2816: 2811: 2805: 2804: 2798: 2795: 2793: 2789: 2785: 2781: 2778: 2776: 2773: 2771: 2766: 2762: 2759: 2757: 2754: 2751: 2747: 2743: 2740: 2738: 2734: 2730: 2726: 2721: 2718: 2716: 2712: 2706: 2700: 2692: 2689: 2687: 2683: 2679: 2675: 2672: 2664: 2661: 2660: 2659: 2655: 2651: 2646: 2642: 2638: 2634: 2630: 2627: 2626: 2625: 2621: 2617: 2613: 2609: 2605: 2602: 2600: 2597: 2593: 2592: 2587: 2583: 2581: 2577: 2573: 2572: 2567: 2564: 2560: 2557: 2553: 2552: 2547: 2543: 2538: 2534: 2533: 2532: 2529: 2525: 2524: 2519: 2515: 2512: 2508: 2504: 2500: 2496: 2492: 2491: 2490: 2486: 2482: 2478: 2474: 2471: 2469: 2465: 2461: 2456: 2453: 2452: 2451: 2447: 2443: 2439: 2435: 2428: 2424: 2420: 2416: 2412: 2408: 2404: 2400: 2396: 2392: 2381: 2374: 2367: 2359: 2355: 2351: 2347: 2342: 2338: 2333: 2329: 2325: 2321: 2317: 2316: 2307: 2303: 2295: 2291: 2285: 2279: 2275: 2269: 2263: 2259: 2253: 2249: 2245: 2243: 2239: 2233: 2229: 2228: 2223: 2219: 2215: 2214: 2209: 2206: 2202: 2201: 2198: 2197: 2194: 2192: 2187: 2182: 2181: 2176: 2173: 2168: 2163: 2159: 2155: 2154: 2150: 2149: 2148: 2147: 2140: 2138: 2133: 2128: 2127: 2122: 2118: 2114: 2113:69.140.152.55 2110: 2106: 2098: 2094: 2090: 2089:RossPatterson 2086: 2082: 2070: 2066: 2062: 2058: 2053: 2052: 2051: 2046: 2041: 2039: 2032: 2028: 2024: 2021: 2017: 2012: 2011: 2010: 2009: 2005: 2001: 1994: 1989: 1988: 1987: 1982: 1977: 1975: 1969: 1964: 1963: 1962: 1958: 1954: 1950: 1946: 1942: 1937: 1936: 1935: 1930: 1925: 1923: 1917: 1915: 1909: 1905: 1904: 1903: 1899: 1895: 1891: 1887: 1886: 1885: 1880: 1875: 1873: 1867: 1864: 1863: 1862: 1858: 1854: 1849: 1845: 1841: 1837: 1833: 1830: 1829: 1824: 1820: 1816: 1811: 1810: 1809: 1808: 1805: 1802: 1801: 1798: 1794: 1790: 1786: 1782: 1779: 1778: 1769: 1765: 1761: 1757: 1752: 1751: 1745: 1743: 1737: 1733: 1730: 1727: 1724: 1721: 1718: 1715: 1712: 1709: 1706: 1703: 1699: 1698:Hugo_Weisgall 1696: 1695: 1694: 1693: 1689: 1685: 1683: 1679: 1673: 1672: 1671: 1670: 1669: 1668: 1667: 1666: 1657: 1653: 1649: 1645: 1641: 1637: 1634: 1630: 1626: 1622: 1621: 1620: 1619: 1618: 1617: 1616: 1615: 1606: 1602: 1598: 1593: 1592: 1591: 1590: 1589: 1588: 1587: 1586: 1579: 1575: 1571: 1570:RossPatterson 1567: 1563: 1559: 1555: 1551: 1546: 1545: 1544: 1543: 1542: 1541: 1536: 1532: 1528: 1523: 1519: 1516: 1515: 1514: 1513: 1510: 1506: 1502: 1497: 1492: 1489: 1488: 1483: 1479: 1475: 1470: 1469: 1468: 1467: 1464: 1460: 1456: 1455: 1450: 1447: 1445: 1440: 1435: 1433: 1426: 1422: 1419: 1418: 1415: 1411: 1407: 1406:RossPatterson 1402: 1399: 1398: 1395: 1391: 1387: 1383: 1380: 1378: 1374: 1370: 1366: 1363: 1362: 1353: 1349: 1345: 1341: 1336: 1332: 1328: 1324: 1323: 1322: 1321: 1320: 1319: 1318: 1317: 1310: 1306: 1302: 1301:RossPatterson 1297: 1296: 1295: 1294: 1293: 1292: 1287: 1283: 1279: 1275: 1274: 1273: 1272: 1269: 1263: 1259: 1255: 1248: 1243: 1240: 1239: 1236: 1232: 1228: 1224: 1216: 1212: 1208: 1203: 1199: 1195: 1192: 1191: 1186: 1182: 1178: 1173: 1169: 1164: 1163: 1162: 1161: 1158: 1154: 1150: 1146: 1142: 1137: 1133: 1129: 1126: 1125: 1122: 1118: 1114: 1113: 1108: 1104: 1100: 1097: 1095: 1092: 1088: 1085: 1083: 1079: 1075: 1071: 1068: 1067: 1066: 1065: 1061: 1057: 1053: 1049: 1045: 1041: 1037: 1032: 1031: 1028: 1026: 1021: 1016: 1015: 1010: 1007: 1002: 997: 993: 989: 985: 982: 981: 980: 979: 972: 970: 965: 960: 959: 954: 950: 946: 942: 939: 938: 935: 931: 927: 923: 919: 916: 915: 908: 904: 900: 896: 895: 894: 893: 892: 891: 886: 882: 878: 874: 871: 870: 869: 865: 861: 857: 856: 851: 846: 839: 832: 828: 825: 823: 819: 815: 811: 807: 804: 802: 798: 794: 790: 788: 784: 780: 776: 772: 768: 764: 760: 756: 752: 748: 745: 744: 743: 739: 735: 731: 727: 723: 719: 716: 715: 714: 713: 709: 705: 695: 688: 681: 673: 669: 665: 661: 656: 652: 647: 643: 639: 635: 631: 630: 629: 628: 625: 623: 618: 613: 612: 607: 603: 599: 595: 594: 590: 589: 588: 587: 580: 578: 573: 568: 567: 562: 558: 554: 550: 549: 548: 547: 543: 539: 529: 522: 515: 507: 503: 499: 495: 490: 486: 481: 477: 473: 469: 465: 464: 463: 462: 459: 457: 452: 447: 446: 441: 437: 433: 429: 428: 424: 423: 422: 421: 414: 412: 407: 402: 401: 396: 392: 388: 387:69.140.152.55 384: 381: 379: 376: 373: 368: 365: 363: 359: 355: 350: 347: 345: 342: 338: 335: 333: 328: 324: 319: 315: 311: 307: 304: 302: 298: 294: 290: 287: 283: 280: 276: 272: 271: 270: 266: 262: 258: 255: 253: 248: 244: 239: 238: 233: 229: 225: 222:Ah, hmmm... 221: 220: 219: 218: 215: 208: 201: 191: 184: 177: 169: 165: 161: 157: 152: 148: 143: 139: 135: 131: 127: 126: 125: 124: 121: 119: 114: 109: 108: 103: 99: 95: 91: 87: 83: 79: 78: 74: 73: 72: 71: 66: 63: 53: 48: 44: 39: 32: 23: 19: 4839: 4832: 4816: 4799: 4771: 4753:Uncyclopedia 4731:Keep deleted 4730: 4684: 4619: 4615: 4610: 4606: 4582:The Observer 4574: 4547: 4519: 4493: 4482: 4477: 4460: 4394: 4353: 4328: 4312: 4279: 4238: 4234: 4217: 4200: 4178: 4140: 4127: 4040:Ku Klux Klan 4035: 4017: 3936: 3901: 3891: 3820: 3809: 3803: 3801: 3798: 3790: 3784: 3773: 3749: 3732: 3722: 3718: 3700:Everyking). 3681: 3664: 3647: 3626: 3605: 3598: 3577: 3530: 3526:Speedy close 3525: 3524: 3507: 3490: 3469: 3465: 3402: 3391: 3374: 3354: 3353: 3349: 3332: 3324: 3297:on March 6th 3290:User:Shii/ED 3285: 3272: 3267: 3262: 3231: 3227: 3196: 3192: 3183: 3178: 3172: 3133: 3116: 3105: 3097: 3072: 3054: 3033: 3019: 3003: 2971: 2953:Speedy close 2952: 2927: 2911: 2894: 2871: 2861: 2852: 2851: 2847: 2843: 2822: 2800: 2796: 2779: 2769: 2760: 2746:User:Shii/ED 2741: 2725:WP:WIKIDRAMA 2719: 2690: 2673: 2628: 2608:Uncyclopedia 2603: 2589: 2569: 2565: 2549: 2536: 2521: 2517: 2513: 2473:Speedy close 2472: 2454: 2432:— Preceding 2426: 2410: 2406: 2401:proposed by 2394: 2387: 2305: 2293: 2284:sockpuppetry 2277: 2266:; suspected 2261: 2247: 2235: 2231: 2225: 2217: 2211: 2190: 2183: 2157: 2151: 2136: 2129: 2108: 2084: 2056: 2037: 2026: 1997: 1973: 1948: 1921: 1914:all attempts 1913: 1911: 1889: 1871: 1847: 1839: 1831: 1800: 1793:WP:BATHWATER 1788: 1784: 1780: 1739: 1735: 1675: 1643: 1565: 1549: 1517: 1490: 1452: 1448: 1431: 1420: 1400: 1381: 1364: 1339: 1325:It's called 1241: 1218: 1214: 1201: 1197: 1193: 1171: 1127: 1110: 1106: 1102: 1098: 1086: 1069: 1039: 1033: 1024: 1017: 995: 987: 983: 968: 961: 940: 917: 872: 849: 848: 844: 826: 805: 774: 770: 766: 765: 746: 717: 704:EarthBoundX5 701: 621: 614: 591: 576: 569: 535: 455: 448: 425: 410: 403: 382: 366: 348: 336: 305: 288: 274: 256: 236: 231: 197: 117: 110: 81: 75: 64: 4690:dorftrottel 4625:dorftrottel 4533:dorftrottel 4499:shock sites 3971:Enric Naval 3861:Cube lurker 3804:list at AfD 3802:, possibly 3780:RichardΩ612 3752:, notable. 3582:KleenupKrew 3535:KleenupKrew 3432:Enric Naval 3162:) has made 3020:Good God no 3002:article. -- 2899:Cube lurker 2729:Enric Naval 2678:Mdsummermsw 2633:Livejournal 2425:, there is 2061:Enric Naval 2000:Enric Naval 1953:Enric Naval 1894:Enric Naval 1815:Enric Naval 1797:Bencherlite 1760:Enric Naval 1726:Abel_Wolman 1648:Enric Naval 1597:Enric Naval 1527:Enric Naval 1474:Enric Naval 1344:Enric Naval 1278:Enric Naval 1227:Enric Naval 1172:interesting 1048:deep regret 926:Mdsummermsw 899:Enric Naval 877:Mdsummermsw 860:Enric Naval 793:Mdsummermsw 783:Mdsummermsw 354:Enric Naval 314:google hits 202:. It had a 4772:Smashville 4483:Smashville 3651:approach. 2218:discussion 1866:WP:SOFIXIT 1708:Henry_West 1196:wtf? WP:V 1042:but after 779:verifiable 730:notability 200:WP:CSD#G10 65:8 May 2008 4757:Truthseeq 4552:Everyking 4416:SmokeyJoe 4376:SmokeyJoe 3737:SmokeyJoe 3669:Everyking 3301:Microsoft 2784:Truthseeq 2403:User:Shii 2274:canvassed 2268:canvassed 2227:consensus 2167:Sjakkalle 1688:Leon Uris 1682:Baltimore 1522:WP:BURDEN 1107:interpret 1001:Sjakkalle 814:UsaSatsui 598:UsaSatsui 261:UsaSatsui 4821:Kbdank71 4804:Oakshade 4648:*Dan T.* 4589:NY Times 4364:Contribs 4354:lifebaka 4255:*Dan T.* 4222:VegaDark 4018:Overturn 3892:Comment: 3810:Celarnor 3733:Overturn 3639:contribs 3564:*Dan T.* 3478:Rividian 3447:Rividian 3413:Contribs 3403:lifebaka 3337:Fullstop 3268:Merkin's 3179:Merkin's 3160:contribs 3137:sites.-- 3060:Davewild 2831:*Dan T.* 2666:popular. 2446:contribs 2434:unsigned 2417:and the 2306:username 2300:{{subst: 2294:username 2288:{{subst: 2278:username 2272:{{subst: 2262:username 2256:{{subst: 2171:(Check!) 2158:recreate 2038:xDanielx 1974:xDanielx 1922:xDanielx 1872:xDanielx 1740:Born in 1432:xDanielx 1340:at least 1258:contribs 1177:Otto4711 1128:Keep all 1091:Kbdank71 1087:Overturn 1056:Otto4711 1005:(Check!) 855:WP:MUSIC 734:Otto4711 538:Nelsonbu 432:Davewild 279:Elliskev 247:Contribs 237:lifebaka 214:Elliskev 47:2008 May 20:‎ | 4785:JoshuaZ 4708:JoshuaZ 4667:JoshuaZ 4663:WP:NPOV 4329:Comment 4318:Blueboy 4280:Comment 4245:Running 4235:Comment 4160:JoshuaZ 4132:Amarkov 4101:JoshuaZ 4058:JoshuaZ 4044:Amarkov 3937:Comment 3847:JoshuaZ 3821:Comment 3702:JoshuaZ 3682:Comment 3653:Viridae 3602:ninemsn 3550:JoshuaZ 3512:Sonjaaa 3379:Merzbow 3312:Stormie 3248:JoshuaZ 3238:Running 3173:comment 3081:WP:NPOV 3034:Comment 3024:Spartaz 3022:No ta. 3010:Running 2972:Comment 2928:Comment 2863:Sceptre 2629:Comment 2596:Running 2556:Running 2528:Running 2499:JoshuaZ 2481:WaltCip 2460:JoshuaZ 2427:nothing 2391:article 2366:restore 2337:protect 2332:history 2270:users: 1945:madness 1853:Bearcat 1848:entries 1836:WP:OCAT 1518:Comment 1449:Restore 1421:Restore 1382:Comment 1247:davidwr 1242:RESTORE 1141:crucial 1099:Comment 1074:WaltCip 1070:Restore 945:Rjd0060 922:correct 918:Restore 873:Comment 850:Endorse 806:Restore 767:Endorse 751:Rjd0060 718:Endorse 680:restore 651:protect 646:history 553:Rjd0060 514:restore 485:protect 480:history 372:Blueboy 341:GRBerry 306:Comment 257:Endorse 176:restore 147:protect 142:history 4817:Relist 4735:WP:WEB 4616:either 4611:cannot 4605:). We 4575:at all 4503:Shalom 4181:. Per 4179:Relist 3906:figura 3687:Estemi 3508:Relist 3491:Relist 3470:Relist 3375:Relist 3356:Editor 3350:Relist 3325:Relist 3218:(tock) 3152:Advwar 3139:Advwar 3106:Naerii 3098:Relist 3073:Relist 2957:Stifle 2917:Durova 2823:Relist 2797:Relist 2780:Relist 2753:(tock) 2742:Relist 2691:Relist 2674:Relist 2616:Estemi 2604:Relist 2566:Relist 2514:Relist 2477:WP:IAR 2423:WP:IAR 2415:WP:WEB 2341:delete 2109:relist 1501:Occuli 1386:Stifle 1369:Stifle 1262:e-mail 1202:almost 1040:delete 831:WP:CSD 827:Relist 655:delete 489:delete 293:Stifle 228:WP:DEL 207:hangon 151:delete 94:Wafulz 86:Wafulz 4603:NU.nl 4596:Danas 4511:Peace 4507:Hello 4399:carlb 4334:carlb 4286:Urban 4086:Urban 3988:Urban 3950:Urban 3263:title 3204:Help! 3039:Urban 3000:4chan 2981:Urban 2976:penis 2937:Urban 2885:disp. 2809:Urban 2770:juice 2765:Mango 2650:carlb 2645:Wikia 2637:Alexa 2407:about 2395:about 2373:cache 2358:views 2350:watch 2346:links 2248:Note: 1970:.) — 1842:fail 1103:trump 838:db-g4 812:. -- 775:might 722:notes 687:cache 672:views 664:watch 660:links 521:cache 506:views 498:watch 494:links 234:. -- 183:cache 168:views 160:watch 156:links 55:: --> 52:May 9 38:May 7 16:< 4808:talk 4789:talk 4761:talk 4743:talk 4712:talk 4694:talk 4671:talk 4652:talk 4629:talk 4556:talk 4537:talk 4469:talk 4446:talk 4420:talk 4403:talk 4380:talk 4360:Talk 4338:talk 4291:Rose 4259:talk 4226:talk 4209:talk 4192:talk 4164:talk 4143:moo! 4128:more 4105:talk 4091:Rose 4062:talk 4048:moo! 3993:Rose 3975:talk 3955:Rose 3883:talk 3879:MHGW 3877:. -- 3865:talk 3851:talk 3833:talk 3829:MHGW 3827:. -- 3758:talk 3741:talk 3706:talk 3691:talk 3673:talk 3635:talk 3586:talk 3568:talk 3554:talk 3539:talk 3516:talk 3499:talk 3482:talk 3474:WP:N 3451:talk 3436:talk 3409:Talk 3397:WP:N 3383:talk 3365:wiki 3341:talk 3316:talk 3303:and 3252:talk 3215:Shii 3156:talk 3143:talk 3125:talk 3089:talk 3079:and 3075:per 3064:talk 3044:Rose 2986:Rose 2961:talk 2942:Rose 2903:talk 2876:here 2853:Just 2848:just 2835:talk 2814:Rose 2788:talk 2750:Shii 2733:talk 2682:talk 2654:talk 2620:talk 2576:talk 2503:talk 2485:talk 2475:per 2464:talk 2442:talk 2354:logs 2328:talk 2324:edit 2117:talk 2093:talk 2065:talk 2004:talk 1957:talk 1941:WP:V 1898:talk 1857:talk 1844:WP:V 1819:talk 1781:Keep 1764:talk 1680:and 1652:talk 1601:talk 1574:talk 1550:e.g. 1531:talk 1520:The 1505:talk 1496:WP:V 1491:Keep 1478:talk 1459:talk 1425:WP:V 1410:talk 1401:Keep 1390:talk 1373:talk 1348:talk 1305:talk 1282:talk 1254:talk 1231:talk 1225:. -- 1198:does 1181:talk 1153:talk 1136:WP:V 1117:talk 1078:talk 1060:talk 1052:WP:V 992:WP:V 949:talk 930:talk 903:talk 881:talk 864:talk 858:. -- 818:talk 797:talk 787:talk 755:talk 747:Note 738:talk 708:talk 668:logs 642:talk 638:edit 602:talk 557:talk 542:talk 502:logs 476:talk 472:edit 436:talk 391:talk 383:List 358:talk 327:talk 320:. - 297:talk 275:very 265:talk 243:Talk 164:logs 138:talk 134:edit 98:talk 90:talk 35:< 4685:not 4607:can 4598:), 4591:), 4584:), 4029:• 3724:Lid 3633:| { 3531:One 3529:. 3362:the 3333:not 3305:PBL 3273:mum 3198:Guy 3184:mum 3121:EJF 2934:.-- 2806:.-- 2571:DGG 2537:are 2380:AfD 2302:csp 2298:or 2290:csm 2258:spa 2232:not 2111:. 1943:is 1840:can 1454:DGG 1260:)/( 1256:)/( 1112:DGG 1038:as 1036:CFD 996:all 810:AFD 694:AfD 528:AfD 385:. 224:G10 190:AfD 22:Log 4810:) 4791:) 4763:) 4745:) 4737:. 4714:) 4673:) 4654:) 4620:or 4618:- 4558:) 4530:. 4513:) 4509:• 4471:) 4448:) 4422:) 4414:-- 4405:) 4382:) 4374:-- 4362:- 4351:-- 4340:) 4321:96 4261:) 4243:. 4228:) 4211:) 4194:) 4166:) 4107:) 4064:) 3977:) 3885:) 3867:) 3853:) 3845:. 3835:) 3760:) 3743:) 3708:) 3693:) 3685:-- 3675:) 3641:} 3637:- 3588:) 3580:. 3570:) 3556:) 3541:) 3518:) 3501:) 3484:) 3468:/ 3453:) 3445:-- 3438:) 3411:- 3400:-- 3385:) 3359:of 3343:) 3318:) 3254:) 3236:. 3158:• 3150:— 3145:) 3127:) 3091:) 3066:) 3008:. 2963:) 2905:) 2837:) 2829:. 2790:) 2735:) 2701:§ 2684:) 2656:) 2622:) 2594:. 2578:) 2554:. 2548:-- 2526:. 2505:) 2497:. 2487:) 2466:) 2448:) 2444:• 2356:| 2352:| 2348:| 2344:| 2339:| 2335:| 2330:| 2326:| 2308:}} 2296:}} 2286:: 2280:}} 2264:}} 2254:: 2156:– 2119:) 2095:) 2067:) 2059:-- 2048:\ 2027:or 2006:) 1984:\ 1959:) 1932:\ 1918:— 1910:: 1900:) 1882:\ 1868:— 1859:) 1821:) 1813:-- 1766:) 1686:" 1654:) 1603:) 1576:) 1560:, 1556:, 1552:, 1533:) 1507:) 1480:) 1461:) 1442:\ 1412:) 1392:) 1375:) 1350:) 1307:) 1284:) 1233:) 1217:. 1183:) 1155:) 1134:. 1119:) 1080:) 1062:) 986:– 951:) 932:) 905:) 883:) 866:) 847:" 841:}} 835:{{ 820:) 799:) 791:- 771:no 757:) 740:) 710:) 670:| 666:| 662:| 658:| 653:| 649:| 644:| 640:| 604:) 559:) 544:) 504:| 500:| 496:| 492:| 487:| 483:| 478:| 474:| 438:) 393:) 375:96 360:) 318:AP 299:) 267:) 245:- 210:}} 204:{{ 166:| 162:| 158:| 154:| 149:| 145:| 140:| 136:| 100:) 84:.- 80:– 45:: 4806:( 4787:( 4759:( 4741:( 4710:( 4696:) 4692:( 4669:( 4650:( 4631:) 4627:( 4601:( 4594:( 4587:( 4580:( 4554:( 4539:) 4535:( 4505:( 4467:( 4444:( 4418:( 4401:( 4378:( 4366:) 4358:( 4336:( 4257:( 4224:( 4207:( 4190:( 4162:( 4103:( 4060:( 3973:( 3902:B 3881:( 3863:( 3849:( 3831:( 3791:ɸ 3788:| 3785:Ɣ 3756:( 3739:( 3704:( 3689:( 3671:( 3619:) 3617:O 3615:2 3613:H 3611:( 3584:( 3566:( 3552:( 3537:( 3514:( 3497:( 3480:( 3449:( 3434:( 3415:) 3407:( 3381:( 3339:( 3314:( 3250:( 3226:( 3206:) 3202:( 3154:( 3141:( 3123:( 3087:( 3062:( 2959:( 2901:( 2887:) 2883:( 2833:( 2786:( 2731:( 2710:e 2707:/ 2704:t 2680:( 2652:( 2618:( 2610:( 2574:( 2501:( 2483:( 2462:( 2440:( 2383:) 2377:| 2369:| 2363:( 2360:) 2322:( 2310:. 2304:| 2292:| 2276:| 2260:| 2115:( 2091:( 2063:( 2045:C 2042:/ 2022:. 2002:( 1981:C 1978:/ 1955:( 1929:C 1926:/ 1896:( 1879:C 1876:/ 1855:( 1817:( 1762:( 1746:" 1650:( 1599:( 1572:( 1548:( 1529:( 1503:( 1476:( 1457:( 1439:C 1436:/ 1408:( 1388:( 1371:( 1346:( 1303:( 1280:( 1264:) 1252:( 1249:/ 1229:( 1179:( 1151:( 1115:( 1076:( 1058:( 947:( 928:( 901:( 879:( 862:( 843:" 816:( 795:( 785:( 753:( 736:( 706:( 697:) 691:| 683:| 677:( 674:) 636:( 600:( 555:( 540:( 531:) 525:| 517:| 511:( 508:) 470:( 434:( 389:( 356:( 295:( 263:( 249:) 241:( 193:) 187:| 179:| 173:( 170:) 132:( 96:( 88:(

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

Knowledge

:Deletion review/Log/2008 May 8 - Knowledge

Index