2614:. I don't want to criticise MuZemike but I do feel that we have been gamed here. The author(s) of the article wrote it in a highly misleading way to make it seem more notable than it was and then used sockpuppetry to make it look like it had more support than it did. I hate the fact that they have been successful. I do note that near the end some people who had initially voted to keep were realising that they had been tricked and were changing their votes but I realise that MuZemike had limited scope for interpreting the result to take this trend into account while there were still keep votes that had not been retracted. We can afford to be charitable and wait until the album does, or does not, get RS reviews but I would not be at all surprised to see this back at AfD quite soon. In the meantime I strongly endorse the decision to cut the article down to a few verifiable paragraphs. --
251:
recommendations for non-admin closure) will assess the discussion and make a decision to Keep, Delete, Merge, Redirect, or
Transwiki the article based on a judgment of the consensus of the discussion. If there has been no obvious consensus to change the status of the article, the person closing the AfD will state No consensus, and the article will be kept." There was no consensus. Therefore the person closing the AfD should have stated "No Consensus". That is why the deletion was improper. As for you, you haven't explained why the arguments for deletion were stronger than those for retention, other than because you say so.
269:. As noted above, mine was one of two keep-type !votes in this discussion, although mine was a "weak keep". However, I agree that the points put forward by those !voting to delete were stronger than the reasons for keeping the article. Black Kite shows all signs of independence in the discussion process, and I accept his decision to delete the article. AfD is not a show of hands; the merits of the arguments are considered more than the number of people on each "side" of the issue.
1672:. My reading of the discussion was that there was a lack of consensus (then again, I was in favor of keeping the category, so though I think that is a fair summary the possiblity exists that I may be looking at this unwittingly through POV-glasses). For that reason (as well as the substantive points made in the underlying discussion), I believe it would be helpful for an admin to take another look at the record.--
2208:
shown on non-local TV and was not mentioned anywhere on MTV's website)—voters such as
Charles Gillingham said that fills the "won or placed in a major competition" criterion of WP:BAND, whereas I think a non-notable award doesn't count as a major competition. As far as I know, no other criteria of WP:BAND or the GNG have been met, as they have no albums released and no non-trivial coverage in reliable sources.
300:, not to mention the fact that the article is being used as a campaigning tool. As I said in the AfD close, if he wins the 2010 election, then fine - at the moment, no. Also, if I was assuming bad faith, there is a hint of COI here. Note: I salted this article after the user who brought this to DRV recreated it immediately after the AfD. If this is overturned, clearly unsalting is appropriate.
2342:-- and deletion of descriptions of the award and the nomination/selection process, the fact that the band was the top three of 190 bands considered, the battle of the bands taking place at a major NY venue (Fillmore at Irving Plaza), the judging being by MTV and prominent VMA singers, the fact that this VMA was awarded at the actual VMA Ceremony in NYC, etc. (
1937:
conflate this discussion with the merits, or otherwise, of a tranche of other categories which were not themselves nominated and which themselves may have far stronger claims to exist. Nominate them and see what consensus is for deletion or retention, but the idea that this category tree merits an all-or-nothing approach does not bear close examination.
1756:
chaotic, and immature, but we should try to be a little less so. Otto, I strongly object to your attempt to blame people for bringing appeals here. Consensus can change, and bringing obscure processes to general attention is one of the good and proper ways of accomplishing this. I look at CfD more frequently now, and perhaps others will do so also.
2063:
German-American politicians, and the valid deletion arguments pointed this out. Given that the Fooian-American category structure really has no meaningful inclusion threshold (I suppose find one source identifying one ancestor, no matter how far back), do we really want every such ethnicity/nationality category intersected with every occupation?
2348:. Concurrently, Rjanang misleadingly characterized the award as "a little award" and incorrectly stated that it "was only tangentially related to MTV" and that it is not "a real VMA" -- coupled with the deletions, one's understanding that the band was nominated for an MTV VMA could have been impaired.
2442:
Sheesh, it was a joke. If you actually looked at the diff you would see that OhC accidentally left the same message twice and I was teasing him about it. What the hell does my "voting advice" have to do with DRV discussion, and why do you feel it necessary to go back weeks and weeks to try to dig up
2207:
Disagree with the closing administrator's "no consensus" close: while the number of keep and delete votes may be more or less split, most of the keep votes seem to hinge on the band's nomination for an MTV-related award which is not notable (its article on WP was redirected, the award itself was not
1990:
I think deciding that ethnicity only affects some politicians is a great example of modern bias. The world wars of the previous century demonized German-Americans in actual US Government propaganda, and some
Germans were interned under the Alien Enemies Act. This basic knowledge of American History
1780:
and I strongly object to your unsupportable claim. You are also mistaken about the supposed need to discuss each of a series of categories before being able to discuss any of the series, as CFD discussions have shown time and again that some categories within a series are fine while others are not.
1228:
and troutslap commenters for making the discussion about the nominator rather than the article. There's no call for that, whatever the previous disagreements have been. DRVs have been closed in the past as "endorse but the usual expected waiting time for renominating is waived," and that would be
2585:
Did you see my response to the same comment by Miami above? I understand that DRV is not AfD2, but as I explained above I think the closing admin missed an important part of the discussion. And I've seen other people come here for blatant forum-shopping and still get a full hearing, so I don't see
1320:
I just read that article and every single cited reference. I know this opinion goes against the current standards and practices of reviewing deletion. Deletion is broken if referencing this bad is standing up simply because a lot of people like it and closing administrators aren't willing to judge
1594:
close. I don't understand the "all or none" argument. Why couldn't consensus be in favor of keeping one but also be in favor of deleting the other? Why does consensus have to be internally logical across all cases? I can point to countless examples where it has not been. I can also easily imagine
274:
I believe that the correct next step is that, if
QuantockWarrior feels strongly that Formosa deserves an article, that he crafts a completely new article with stronger claims of notability and less weight to campaign platform planks. However, that should be done in user space right now - there is
1755:
Lack of consensus describes it--it's absurd to delete one of a series of categories at AfD, without general discussion of the concept as a while. There has to be a way of appealing these. We have no precedents, but this sort of inconsistency is a sign of a very immature enterprise. Sure, we're
1152:
and renominate, after 6 months to see if consensus will have changed. i didn't comment at this AfD, but the community makes the requirements for sourcing, and can interpret them as it decides to do. Since IAR always applies, a community decision can always be given as an exception to almost any
1936:
Closing admin made good judgement of consensus in discussion. Admins closing Cfd nominations, except in very rare situations, will only ever take action on categories actually listed for discussion. Accordingly, in this case, that is exactly what the closing admin did - it is unreasonable to
1704:
This has officially become tiresome. Every CFD that gets brought here, you feel compelled to point out how wrong the entire CFD process supposedly is. And you base this on a sample size of practically zero. We all get it, you think CFD is broken. We really don't need to hear it from you again.
2062:
per Occuli. The existence of one Fooian-American category for a particular occupation by no means warrants the existence of ALL such intersections. Some certainly have received significant historical attention, such as
African-American politicians, but there was no good argument made for
250:
Mr Rjanag, this is what the guidelines on deletion state: "After seven days have passed, the discussion is moved to
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Old, and a disinterested (i.e. one who has not participated in the deletion discussion) admin or editor in good standing (observing the
173:
No consensus was reached on the discussion page. Views on both sides were expressed, but two people (myself and an administrator by the name of C.Fred) supported its retention. In this case the proper procedure is to revert to keep. Please undelete this page ASAP.
1916:
I'm not sure how the closing administrator determined that the consensus was delete, when it seems clear that this is a classic no consensus. CMBJ hit the nail on the head as to how there is no means to bypass DRV once a category has finally been deleted.
2393:. Similarly, Psantora deleted album information from the band article, describing his rationale with the following edit summary: “remove discography section, they only have one album and its track listing is covered sufficiently on the album's page”.
1284:
in the matter--his active participation in response clearly fueled the fire and distracted from the AfD. Had he not participated, and simply let off-topic comments remain unanswered or answered only once, his desired outcome may have been reached.
1193:
The Keep !votes were pretty much "I like it," "It is notable,""Other crap exists," and especially "I don't like the nominator." More time is needed to see if editors will make keep or delete arguments properly based in policies and guidelines.
1335:. If the closer had latitude to disregard so high a proportion of "keep" !votes from editors in good standing, then there would be no point in the AfD process at all and we might as well just let an admin decide without anyone else's input.—
1084:, would have been impossible to close as delete, but I'd recommend re-listing in the hope of generating a real discussion that actually addresses the points raised by the nominator using reliable sources rather than unverifiable assertions.
2362:. Psantora also, during the discussion, deleted reviews of the band and its work by magazines of long-standing (each over 30 years old) with large readerships (ranging from the hundreds of thousands to the millions) -- specifically
481:
I don't generally hold with challenging the basis for other people's votes, but I do think that a Google News search showing 9 mentions in the local press or online write-ups of his press release does not really establish notability.
1654:
Of course, this is not XfD2 - but #1, there were times in
American history when German ethnic heritage was a career killer. #2, there should be a wider range of discussion involving ethnic-American categories and not one-offs.
2335:
that he not delete such pertinent information from the article – especially when the article was under deletion review. To no avail. He followed my request with further deletion of the fact that the award was an MTV VMA -–
2249:
Yes, I understand that this isn't AfD2 and I've never done DRV before partly because I always feared it would be like forum-shopping...but in this case I went ahead because it seemed ok per the second criterion listed at
658:
2549:
close as no consensus. The admin who closed made no errors. This is not the place to reargue the merits of the AfD. Simple question to be considered, is it a reasonable decision based upon the arguments? Yes. If
1858:
the bureaucratic process by gathering sufficient sources and recreating the article...but there is no such recourse for counterintuitive CfD conclusions, because all deleted categories are inadvertently salted by
1101:- not the world's greatest AFD discussion, but there is no egregious failure of process. The nominator of an AFD should bear in mind that their particular interpretation of policy is not necessarily the only one.
675:
This page was deleted a second time around because it was presumed to be no more than a recreation of the first version. This was not the case. The second version, I believe, sufficiently demonstrated notability.
2351:
This is especially troubling as nomination for a major music award (criterion 8), and placing in a major music competition (criterion 9), are two indicia (each sufficient in its own right) of notability under
423:
If I had seen this I might have favored weak keeping per my general attitude about local politicians but consensus and strength of arguments seem to both point in the same direction. Closing was reasonable.
928:, very poor arguments were put forward. The notability concerns weren't disputed or addressed. AFDs are not supposed to be closed by numbers but by strength of arguments. So easily should've been a delete.
728:
If the notability has improved, there is no need for a DRV; just re-create the article with references to show the notability (and enough to demonstrate why it's different than it was when it was deleted).
2649:
Ok, I accept that nothing is going to come of listing this now; I'll wait until after their one album comes out and then re-AfD this assuming they don't suddenly get famous. Feel free to roll up this DRV.
460:
2527:
close as no consensus. Although I felt that the article should be deleted, or more specifically userified until notability can be demonstrated, the no consensus close was absolutely correct. This really
2399:
Rjanag then had the album article deleted. But
Psantora did not then restore the discography information to the band article. In fact, Psantora himself then again deleted the discography information (
462:. The !votes to delete didn't address policy in any meaningful way. Not meeting a specialized notability guideline isn't relevant if WP:N is met so all those arguments should have been discounted.
334:, this DR appears to be premature anyway, given that they're supposed to take place after a user has already discussed the issue with the closing admin and failed to reach a resolution with them, and
192:
AfD is not a vote, and the "delete" arguments there were stronger than the "keep" ones. And in your statement above you haven't explained why deletion was "improper", other than because you say so.
1253:
is on those who are trying to prove that the subject is notable, not on those saying it isn't. Otter has also gotten on my nerves before but people shouldn't be taking personal disputes to AfD. --
1280:
closure, mostly per Black Kite, and allow relist. Mind you, when 3/4 comments are accusing the nom of bad faith, that's a sign that something is seriously amiss. Furthermore, Otterathome lacks
2235:
Maybe you should wait a month and re-nominate when the teenyboppers have stopped paying attention, or the band will release a major record that shoots up the charts making the suggestion moot.
1830:
an
American politician of Native American descent is a very different context from an American politician of any European background. Thus, Category:Native American politicians is valid, but
1515:
2494:
2301:
Had all of the editors seen all of that information in the article, the views expressed in favor of the article being notable may well have been even greater in number and stronger.
2436:” Whether he is advising inappropriate voting, or merely chortling in the proposed deletion of the article, I can’t say. But I found that to be curious behavior by a fellow editor.
2290:
Even that discussion may not have reflected fully editors' support for keeping the article. That is because when looking at the article page during the discussion, they did not see
1843:
1527:
500:
Striking !vote. There were a bunch of articles that came up in a news search, but looking closer they were largely PR releases or non-RSes with the rest being in-passing. My bad.
441:, even if the close hadn't been a correct reading of consensus in the deletion debate, there is a long consensus that Parliamentary candidate in itself is no claim of notability.
1536:
947:
1888:: I formed the decision based on the consensus available in the discussion. If you think that the other categories should be deleted, then nominate those for CfD as well. --
2010:- this isn't AFD2, the only question is "did the closer correctly interpret policy-based consensus" and in this example they did. Most of the opposing arguments were per
48:
34:
1020:- There was no delete rationale offered in the AFD aside from the nom's. Closer could have closed no other way. As an aside, recomend nominator to have a nice cup of
2411:. I also note that Rjanang wrote to OhConfucius (an editor with whom he had worked closely on another matter, and who supported him here) “Voting -- As they say, "
156:
43:
2311:
the article is notable, with one reason being that the band was nominated for an MTV VMA, Psantora repeatedly deleted mention of the fact that the award was an
1854:" categories only when said ethnic group is adequately represented in a single CfD. Now, now, if this had been an AfD, a future layman editor could have simply
2190:
899:
1572:
are not deleted, constitutes both POV and obstruction of the category system. Either the category and its content must be restored, or the other categories
1624:, agree with the delete voters that being German-American is not as defining for politicians as some other backgrounds are. The nom's pushiness italicize "
1172:- Of the four responses given in the AfD, three were accusations against Otter, not actual reasons given that the article satisfies WP:N. The fourth was
356:), although in reality my reply would merely have been that I believed my close to be correct and that the user should proceed to DRV, so no harm done.
1245:
which really doesn't do anything but justify Otter's deletion campaign (for good or ill). An argument like "I'm not sure how this doesn't qualify for
352:
No, that didn't take place (the user merely re-created the article only for it to be deleted again under CSD#G4, and has since created it again under
1776:
Excuse me? I have no idea how you can possibly misinterpret my endorsement comment as blaming anyone for anything. It's ridiculous to the point of
646:
1153:
policy. It this case, the people seem to have felt that in this particular case, the level of sourcing was adequate. Who else gets to decide?
1851:
1569:
2322:
335:
526:, the discussion was closed properly, and we don't want Knowledge (XXG) silting up with promotional campaign fluff by wannabe politicians.
235:. The last year's worth of Google News hits are all talking about his aspiring candidacy -- no showing of notability outside that context.--
1902:
1686:
Sigh, another broken CFD. We have no binding precedents on
Knowledge (XXG), so there's no reason why if X-Z is deleted, Y-Z should go too.
1561:
714:
Because I believe that the notability of the subject has significantly improved since and that now, it is actually eligible for an entry.
39:
2532:
AFD part 2, and unless the nominator believes "no consensus" does not reflect the AFD discussion, then there's nothing to discuss here.--
2489:
To whoever's reviewing this discussion: I should point out that Epeefleche, the writer of the TL;DR comment above, is the same person as
2469:
In short, I commend the admin who closed this out as a "keep" for doing so despite the process having been poisoned as reflected above.--
1066:
but allow reAfDing. Impossible to close any other way, as mentioned above, but this is an awful AfD, practically all of the !votes were
667:
144:
1024:
and relax. This article remaining on wikipedia, no matter how much you think it doesn't belong, is not a planet ending catastrophe.
2178:
1346:
887:
21:
1485:
2554:
wishes, he is certainly allowed to wait a few months and bring the article back to AfD is he feels it had not been improved.
1850:
ethnic groups, but not for others" is, in my opinion, deeply disturbing, because it essentially means that we will keep the "
2284:
close as no consensus (the admin’s holding to keep the article). For the reasons discussed extensively on the review page.
1969:
1965:
1836:
1565:
1549:
1973:
1831:
1557:
1545:
1481:
1441:
165:
1781:
The idea that any time a category is nominated all similar categories have to be nominated along with it is nonsensical.
1553:
1242:
2663:
2599:
2510:
2456:
2428:
2267:
2221:
1641:
742:
704:
580:
205:
2678:
2128:
2083:
1465:
1420:
1173:
837:
792:
596:
542:
94:
17:
2199:
1976:, because Fooian-American is thought to be relevant to the career of the politician for some Foos but not for others.
988:
908:
1799:
Well, "We really don't need to hear it from you again " certainly sounds like personally blaming someone to me.
1738:- no indication that the close was in error, no new information presented here indicating that anything's changed.
756:
Yeah, just go ahead and recreate it. This is, of course, without prejudice to another AfD at editorial discretion.
2559:
256:
179:
2011:
1595:
some arguments as to why being an Irish-American politician is defining but being a German-American one is not.
1897:
1326:
2326:
2668:
2640:
2636:
2623:
2604:
2580:
2563:
2541:
2515:
2478:
2461:
2433:
2272:
2244:
2226:
2117:
2072:
2050:
2020:
2000:
1985:
1954:
1926:
1908:
1880:
1810:
1790:
1767:
1747:
1730:
1714:
1695:
1681:
1664:
1646:
1616:
1599:
1585:
1454:
1409:
1388:
1371:
1353:
1312:
1294:
1272:
1233:
1220:
1203:
1185:
1164:
1144:
1127:
1110:
1093:
1076:
1058:
1033:
1012:
993:
962:
937:
826:
779:
765:
747:
723:
709:
685:
616:
585:
530:
512:
495:
491:
471:
450:
446:
433:
415:
398:
381:
362:
347:
306:
286:
260:
244:
240:
227:
210:
183:
83:
2321:. Despite that clearly being part of its official name, as reflected in the sourced references (including
1299:
Close was valid, but if it's not significantly improved in short order there's no reason not to try again.
1246:
1067:
315:
297:
1241:- There were basically 4 comments opposed to the nominator (not the nomination), and one that argues that
1010:
971:
822:
319:
252:
175:
79:
2383:
This is troubling as reviews by reliable sources is by itself indicia of notability under criterion 1 of
1118:
with leave to renominate immediately; had it been closed any other way, we would be here overturning it.
2619:
1106:
1029:
933:
353:
970:
Since Otter didn't mention it, this matter was 'discussed' between us prior to the DR getting started.
612:
563:
114:
2285:
2555:
2474:
2240:
2015:
1996:
1677:
1660:
1450:
1343:
1140:
1089:
1071:
817:– Closure endorsed. Relisting is permitted (preferably by an uninvolved editor), but not mandated. –
357:
301:
1321:
it. You can just throw all of our content policies out the window when mobocracy is the end result.
1991:
is being ignored in deciding that this ethnicity is not, and has never been, an issue in politics.
1892:
1889:
1596:
1581:
1322:
1211:
It's not the greatest article, but consensus was clear at AfD that the article should be retained.
1825:
1250:
322:
that they may be too close to the subject to disinterestedly compare our policies with reality. --
110:
70:
2632:
2364:
1922:
1786:
1743:
1710:
1612:
1364:
1290:
1216:
1178:
1054:
1046:
958:
761:
487:
442:
343:
327:
314:- (Full disclosure, I nominated the AfD), Black Kite correctly gauged consensus on policy - that
236:
223:
2443:
random crap to discredit me? Next time, try actually reading the diffs that you're presenting.
2374:(which still remains deleted from the article), and also deleted the magazines as references –
2068:
1003:
818:
429:
75:
2384:
2353:
2615:
2576:
2537:
2370:
2356:. Yet Psantora deleted this properly sourced information during the notability discussion.
2113:
1981:
1691:
1230:
1199:
1123:
1102:
1025:
929:
775:
719:
681:
377:
282:
2251:
1860:
1855:
1376:
1021:
925:
2470:
2236:
2148:
1992:
1673:
1656:
1446:
1405:
1384:
1336:
1267:
1136:
1085:
857:
508:
486:
requires multiple independent sources which are on the subject, not ones that mention it.
467:
394:
1577:
527:
411:
921:
917:
483:
1918:
1806:
1782:
1763:
1739:
1727:
1706:
1608:
1307:
1301:
1286:
1281:
1212:
1160:
1050:
1042:
954:
757:
339:
323:
219:
2298:, editors deleted material from the article that supports the article's notability.
2254:: "Deletion Review is to be used if the closer interpreted the debate incorrectly."
2490:
2064:
425:
1726:
per CFD and other arguments here pointing out how "all or none" doesn't apply. --
691:
That deletion was in November 2008. Why are you suddenly bringing this back now?
2652:
2588:
2572:
2551:
2533:
2499:
2445:
2417:
2256:
2210:
2109:
1977:
1687:
1630:
1195:
1119:
771:
731:
715:
693:
677:
569:
373:
277:
194:
2486:
The admin didn't close it as keep, he closed it as no consensus. But nice try.
2144:
2104:
1943:
1401:
1380:
1255:
853:
813:
504:
463:
390:
2040:
1870:
407:
1049:) 15:16, 28 September 2009 (UTC) Note: I have no objections to relisting.
2323:
MTV's VMA Best Breakout New York City Artist Award Contest Official Rules
1801:
1758:
1155:
2387:. Yet Psantora deleted this material during the notability discussion.
1001:
because no admin would have delete that against unanimous consensus. –
275:
consensus that Formosa not have an encyclopedia article at this time. —
1176:. Relisting for a better consensus seems the practical thing to do. —
1968:
was discussed at length on the same day and was not deleted. We have
1628:" in the nom statement also has not left me with a good impression.
2307:
Particularly troubling is that in the middle of a discussion as to
948:
Knowledge (XXG):Administrators'_noticeboard/Archive202#AFD_closing
916:
No sources were ever added that weren't trivial and complied with
2033:
CfD2 until an undeletion policy is established for categories.
318:
was not met. I hope I wasn't out of line, when I suggested to
1607:- I notified the closing admin, as the nom should have done.
2495:
Knowledge (XXG):Sockpuppet investigations/Epeefleche/Archive
1652:
Nothing wrong with the closure, but the discussion was wrong
2252:
WP:DRV#Principal purpose – challenging deletion decisions
1842:". Not only was this guideline partially invalidated by
2412:
2403:
2397:
2394:
2378:
2346:
2340:
2333:
2319:
2316:
2185:
2171:
2163:
2155:
1522:
1508:
1500:
1492:
1249:" isn't a valid argument; in a deletion discussion the
951:
894:
880:
872:
864:
653:
639:
631:
623:
151:
137:
129:
121:
1070:. It may well be notable, but no-one explained why.
950:, also see changes to article since AFD nomination.
406:- closing admin's decision reflected consensus. --
2493:who was blocked indefinitely as a sockpuppet, see
459:(lone voice in the wilderness) easily meets WP:N.
1570:American politicians by ethnic or national origin
2396:Psantora invited Rjanag to join the discussion.
2233:Clearly fails Notability, but this is not AfD2
1379:is policy, and they were firmly rooted there.
1041:. It's impossible to close it any other way.
8:
2127:The following is an archived debate of the
1464:The following is an archived debate of the
836:The following is an archived debate of the
595:The following is an archived debate of the
567:– No action necessary, article re-created.
93:The following is an archived debate of the
2097:
1828:, the relevant guideline, specifies that "
1434:
806:
556:
63:
2586:why this should be dismissed so easily.
1135:- For all the reasons mentioned above.--
2014:- so nominate those categories too....
2305:MTV Video Music Award and Competition.
1362:of the Keeps were rooted in policy. —
2294:indicia of notability. Because even
1970:Category:African American politicians
1966:Category:Italian-American politicians
1837:Category:Italian-American politicians
1566:Category:African American politicians
1550:Category:Italian-American politicians
218:. I see no clear error in the close.
7:
1974:Category:Kenyan-American politicians
1846:, but the notion of "categories for
1832:Category:German-American politicians
1562:Category:Jewish American politicians
1558:Category:Polish-American politicians
1546:Category:German-American_politicians
1482:Category:German-American politicians
1442:Category:German-American politicians
2681:of the page listed in the heading.
2086:of the page listed in the heading.
1554:Category:Irish-American politicians
1423:of the page listed in the heading.
1400:and no immediate relist. Per DGG.
795:of the page listed in the heading.
545:of the page listed in the heading.
2651:
2631:no-consensus to keep or delete. --
2587:
2498:
2444:
2416:
2255:
2209:
1629:
730:
692:
568:
336:there is no evidence that happened
296:my own close; simply doesn't pass
193:
28:
330:) 17:28, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
1852:Ethnicity-Nationality occupation
389:. I see no error in this close.
2677:The above is an archive of the
2082:The above is an archive of the
1824:for lack of broader consensus.
1419:The above is an archive of the
791:The above is an archive of the
541:The above is an archive of the
18:Knowledge (XXG):Deletion review
2669:12:19, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
2641:12:14, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
2624:09:20, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
2605:11:57, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
2581:08:28, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
2564:06:46, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
2542:06:15, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
2516:11:53, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
2479:05:18, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
2462:11:49, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
2434:04:50, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
2273:03:54, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
2245:03:41, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
2227:00:31, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
2118:15:50, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
1986:12:55, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
1955:11:59, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
1927:01:23, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
1909:21:45, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
1881:19:23, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
1811:12:03, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
1791:18:40, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
1768:17:54, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
1748:16:01, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
1731:13:00, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
1715:16:01, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
1696:08:27, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
1682:07:42, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
1665:03:38, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
1647:02:30, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
1617:01:45, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
1600:01:42, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
1586:00:35, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
1273:21:42, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
1234:01:47, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
1221:18:54, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
1204:17:55, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
1186:14:56, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
1165:11:32, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
1145:08:36, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
1128:08:12, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
1111:22:14, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
1094:17:53, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
1077:17:33, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
1059:17:57, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
1034:14:33, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
1013:13:20, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
994:13:55, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
963:12:46, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
938:11:45, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
780:17:18, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
766:15:15, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
748:14:54, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
724:12:42, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
710:12:38, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
686:12:25, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
586:19:13, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
451:19:11, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
434:16:02, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
416:13:07, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
399:09:11, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
382:20:39, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
372:, valid reading of consensus.
363:17:53, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
348:17:49, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
307:17:21, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
287:16:52, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
261:16:25, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
245:15:16, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
228:15:14, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
211:15:09, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
184:14:56, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
1:
2360:Reviews from reliable sources
2296:as the discussion was ongoing
2073:13:52, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
2051:06:07, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
2021:20:06, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
2001:16:23, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
1455:07:24, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
1410:13:28, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
1389:17:25, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
1372:15:45, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
1354:07:46, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
1313:20:08, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
1295:03:24, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
827:18:00, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
531:10:51, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
513:23:52, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
496:19:14, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
472:13:25, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
84:02:07, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
2704:
2571:, DRV is not AFD round 2.
2684:Please do not modify it.
2327:the award's MTV VMA logo
2134:Please do not modify it.
2089:Please do not modify it.
1914:Overturn as no consensus
1471:Please do not modify it.
1426:Please do not modify it.
843:Please do not modify it.
798:Please do not modify it.
602:Please do not modify it.
548:Please do not modify it.
100:Please do not modify it.
40:Deletion review archives
1366:The Hand That Feeds You
1180:The Hand That Feeds You
74:– Deletion endorsed. –
2131:of the article above.
2029:In all fairness, this
1468:of the article above.
1445:– Deletion endorsed –
840:of the article above.
599:of the article above.
97:of the article above.
920:. The article failed
2413:vote early and often
320:User:QuantockWarrior
1318:Overturn and delete
2365:Seventeen Magazine
2315:. For example at
1243:other stuff exists
1229:appropriate here.
1174:WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS
944:Related Discussion
354:Mark Formosa (PPC)
2691:
2690:
2667:
2603:
2514:
2460:
2432:
2271:
2225:
2096:
2095:
1670:Lack of consensus
1645:
1433:
1432:
1311:
805:
804:
746:
708:
613:Gatehouse Gazette
584:
564:Gatehouse Gazette
555:
554:
209:
59:28 September 2009
49:2009 September 29
35:2009 September 27
2695:
2686:
2660:
2656:
2596:
2592:
2507:
2503:
2453:
2449:
2425:
2421:
2371:Queens Chronicle
2264:
2260:
2218:
2214:
2202:
2197:
2188:
2174:
2166:
2158:
2136:
2098:
2091:
2049:
2047:
1951:
1950:
1947:
1905:
1900:
1895:
1879:
1877:
1840:should not exist
1638:
1634:
1622:Endorse deletion
1544:The deletion of
1539:
1534:
1525:
1511:
1503:
1495:
1473:
1435:
1428:
1367:
1351:
1341:
1305:
1270:
1264:
1261:
1258:
1181:
1006:
985:
911:
906:
897:
883:
875:
867:
845:
807:
800:
739:
735:
701:
697:
670:
665:
656:
642:
634:
626:
604:
577:
573:
557:
550:
202:
198:
190:Endorse deletion
168:
163:
154:
140:
132:
124:
102:
64:
53:
33:
2703:
2702:
2698:
2697:
2696:
2694:
2693:
2692:
2682:
2679:deletion review
2666:
2654:
2602:
2590:
2556:MichaelQSchmidt
2513:
2501:
2459:
2447:
2431:
2419:
2332:I requested at
2270:
2258:
2224:
2212:
2198:
2196:
2193:
2184:
2183:
2177:
2170:
2169:
2162:
2161:
2154:
2153:
2132:
2129:deletion review
2087:
2084:deletion review
2041:
2034:
2012:WP:ALLORNOTHING
1948:
1945:
1944:
1903:
1898:
1893:
1871:
1864:
1644:
1632:
1597:Good Ol’factory
1535:
1533:
1530:
1521:
1520:
1514:
1507:
1506:
1499:
1498:
1491:
1490:
1469:
1466:deletion review
1424:
1421:deletion review
1365:
1350:
1347:
1337:
1268:
1262:
1259:
1256:
1179:
1004:
991:
990:Call me MoP! :D
972:
907:
905:
902:
893:
892:
886:
879:
878:
871:
870:
863:
862:
841:
838:deletion review
796:
793:deletion review
770:Ok, done that.
745:
733:
707:
695:
666:
664:
661:
652:
651:
645:
638:
637:
630:
629:
622:
621:
600:
597:deletion review
583:
571:
546:
543:deletion review
253:QuantockWarrior
208:
196:
176:QuantockWarrior
164:
162:
159:
150:
149:
143:
136:
135:
128:
127:
120:
119:
98:
95:deletion review
62:
55:
54:
51:
46:
37:
31:
26:
25:
24:
12:
11:
5:
2701:
2699:
2689:
2688:
2673:
2672:
2662:
2644:
2643:
2626:
2609:
2608:
2607:
2598:
2566:
2544:
2521:
2520:
2519:
2518:
2509:
2487:
2467:
2466:
2465:
2464:
2455:
2427:
2288:
2287:
2278:
2277:
2276:
2275:
2266:
2220:
2205:
2204:
2194:
2181:
2175:
2167:
2159:
2151:
2139:
2138:
2123:
2122:
2121:
2120:
2108:– Withdrawn –
2094:
2093:
2078:
2077:
2076:
2075:
2056:
2055:
2054:
2053:
2024:
2023:
2005:
2004:
2003:
1958:
1957:
1939:
1938:
1930:
1929:
1911:
1883:
1818:
1817:
1816:
1815:
1814:
1813:
1794:
1793:
1771:
1770:
1750:
1733:
1720:
1719:
1718:
1717:
1699:
1698:
1684:
1667:
1649:
1640:
1619:
1602:
1542:
1541:
1531:
1518:
1512:
1504:
1496:
1488:
1476:
1475:
1460:
1459:
1458:
1457:
1431:
1430:
1415:
1414:
1413:
1412:
1395:
1394:
1393:
1392:
1391:
1348:
1330:
1323:SchmuckyTheCat
1315:
1297:
1275:
1236:
1223:
1206:
1188:
1167:
1147:
1130:
1113:
1096:
1082:Weakly endorse
1079:
1064:Weakly endorse
1061:
1036:
1015:
996:
989:
965:
914:
913:
903:
890:
884:
876:
868:
860:
848:
847:
832:
831:
830:
829:
803:
802:
787:
786:
785:
784:
783:
782:
754:
753:
752:
751:
750:
741:
703:
673:
672:
662:
649:
643:
635:
627:
619:
607:
606:
591:
590:
589:
588:
579:
553:
552:
537:
536:
535:
534:
520:
519:
518:
517:
516:
515:
476:
475:
453:
436:
418:
401:
384:
367:
366:
365:
309:
290:
289:
271:
270:
248:
247:
230:
213:
204:
171:
170:
160:
147:
141:
133:
125:
117:
105:
104:
89:
88:
87:
86:
61:
56:
47:
44:2009 September
38:
30:
29:
27:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
2700:
2687:
2685:
2680:
2675:
2674:
2671:
2670:
2665:
2659:
2658:
2648:
2642:
2638:
2634:
2633:SarekOfVulcan
2630:
2627:
2625:
2621:
2617:
2613:
2610:
2606:
2601:
2595:
2594:
2584:
2583:
2582:
2578:
2574:
2570:
2567:
2565:
2561:
2557:
2553:
2548:
2545:
2543:
2539:
2535:
2531:
2526:
2523:
2522:
2517:
2512:
2506:
2505:
2496:
2492:
2488:
2485:
2484:
2483:
2482:
2481:
2480:
2476:
2472:
2463:
2458:
2452:
2451:
2441:
2440:
2439:
2438:
2437:
2435:
2430:
2424:
2423:
2414:
2410:
2409:Voting advice
2406:
2404:
2402:
2398:
2395:
2392:
2388:
2386:
2381:
2379:
2377:
2373:
2372:
2367:
2366:
2361:
2357:
2355:
2349:
2347:
2345:
2341:
2339:
2334:
2330:
2328:
2324:
2320:
2317:
2314:
2310:
2306:
2302:
2299:
2297:
2293:
2286:
2283:
2280:
2279:
2274:
2269:
2263:
2262:
2253:
2248:
2247:
2246:
2242:
2238:
2234:
2231:
2230:
2229:
2228:
2223:
2217:
2216:
2201:
2192:
2187:
2180:
2173:
2165:
2157:
2150:
2146:
2143:
2142:
2141:
2140:
2137:
2135:
2130:
2125:
2124:
2119:
2115:
2111:
2107:
2106:
2102:
2101:
2100:
2099:
2092:
2090:
2085:
2080:
2079:
2074:
2070:
2066:
2061:
2058:
2057:
2052:
2048:
2046:
2045:
2039:
2038:
2032:
2028:
2027:
2026:
2025:
2022:
2019:
2018:
2013:
2009:
2006:
2002:
1998:
1994:
1989:
1988:
1987:
1983:
1979:
1975:
1971:
1967:
1963:
1960:
1959:
1956:
1953:
1952:
1941:
1940:
1935:
1932:
1931:
1928:
1924:
1920:
1915:
1912:
1910:
1906:
1901:
1896:
1891:
1887:
1886:Closing admin
1884:
1882:
1878:
1876:
1875:
1869:
1868:
1862:
1857:
1853:
1849:
1845:
1841:
1839:
1838:
1833:
1827:
1823:
1820:
1819:
1812:
1808:
1804:
1803:
1798:
1797:
1796:
1795:
1792:
1788:
1784:
1779:
1775:
1774:
1773:
1772:
1769:
1765:
1761:
1760:
1754:
1751:
1749:
1745:
1741:
1737:
1734:
1732:
1729:
1725:
1722:
1721:
1716:
1712:
1708:
1703:
1702:
1701:
1700:
1697:
1693:
1689:
1685:
1683:
1679:
1675:
1671:
1668:
1666:
1662:
1658:
1653:
1650:
1648:
1643:
1637:
1636:
1627:
1623:
1620:
1618:
1614:
1610:
1606:
1603:
1601:
1598:
1593:
1590:
1589:
1588:
1587:
1583:
1579:
1575:
1571:
1567:
1563:
1559:
1555:
1551:
1547:
1538:
1529:
1524:
1517:
1510:
1502:
1494:
1487:
1483:
1480:
1479:
1478:
1477:
1474:
1472:
1467:
1462:
1461:
1456:
1452:
1448:
1444:
1443:
1439:
1438:
1437:
1436:
1429:
1427:
1422:
1417:
1416:
1411:
1407:
1403:
1399:
1396:
1390:
1386:
1382:
1378:
1375:
1374:
1373:
1370:
1368:
1361:
1358:Do note that
1357:
1356:
1355:
1352:
1344:
1342:
1340:
1334:
1331:
1328:
1324:
1319:
1316:
1314:
1309:
1304:
1303:
1298:
1296:
1292:
1288:
1283:
1279:
1276:
1274:
1271:
1266:
1265:
1252:
1248:
1247:WP:NOTABILITY
1244:
1240:
1237:
1235:
1232:
1227:
1224:
1222:
1218:
1214:
1210:
1207:
1205:
1201:
1197:
1192:
1189:
1187:
1184:
1182:
1175:
1171:
1168:
1166:
1162:
1158:
1157:
1151:
1148:
1146:
1142:
1138:
1134:
1131:
1129:
1125:
1121:
1117:
1114:
1112:
1108:
1104:
1100:
1097:
1095:
1091:
1087:
1083:
1080:
1078:
1075:
1074:
1069:
1068:WP:ITSNOTABLE
1065:
1062:
1060:
1056:
1052:
1048:
1044:
1040:
1037:
1035:
1031:
1027:
1023:
1019:
1016:
1014:
1011:
1008:
1007:
1000:
997:
995:
992:
986:
983:
979:
975:
969:
966:
964:
960:
956:
952:
949:
945:
942:
941:
940:
939:
935:
931:
927:
923:
919:
910:
901:
896:
889:
882:
874:
866:
859:
855:
852:
851:
850:
849:
846:
844:
839:
834:
833:
828:
824:
820:
816:
815:
811:
810:
809:
808:
801:
799:
794:
789:
788:
781:
777:
773:
769:
768:
767:
763:
759:
755:
749:
744:
738:
737:
727:
726:
725:
721:
717:
713:
712:
711:
706:
700:
699:
690:
689:
688:
687:
683:
679:
669:
660:
655:
648:
641:
633:
625:
618:
614:
611:
610:
609:
608:
605:
603:
598:
593:
592:
587:
582:
576:
575:
566:
565:
561:
560:
559:
558:
551:
549:
544:
539:
538:
532:
529:
525:
522:
521:
514:
510:
506:
503:
499:
498:
497:
493:
489:
488:Sam Blacketer
485:
480:
479:
478:
477:
474:
473:
469:
465:
461:
458:
454:
452:
448:
444:
443:Sam Blacketer
440:
437:
435:
431:
427:
422:
419:
417:
413:
409:
405:
402:
400:
396:
392:
388:
385:
383:
379:
375:
371:
368:
364:
361:
360:
355:
351:
350:
349:
345:
341:
337:
333:
329:
325:
321:
317:
316:WP:POLITICIAN
313:
310:
308:
305:
304:
299:
298:WP:POLITICIAN
295:
292:
291:
288:
284:
280:
279:
273:
272:
268:
265:
264:
263:
262:
258:
254:
246:
242:
238:
237:SarekOfVulcan
234:
231:
229:
225:
221:
217:
214:
212:
207:
201:
200:
191:
188:
187:
186:
185:
181:
177:
167:
158:
153:
146:
139:
131:
123:
116:
112:
109:
108:
107:
106:
103:
101:
96:
91:
90:
85:
81:
77:
73:
72:
68:
67:
66:
65:
60:
57:
50:
45:
41:
36:
23:
19:
2683:
2676:
2646:
2645:
2628:
2611:
2568:
2546:
2529:
2524:
2491:User:VMAsNYC
2468:
2408:
2407:
2400:
2390:
2389:
2382:
2375:
2369:
2363:
2359:
2358:
2350:
2343:
2337:
2331:
2312:
2308:
2304:
2303:
2300:
2295:
2291:
2289:
2281:
2232:
2206:
2133:
2126:
2103:
2088:
2081:
2059:
2043:
2042:
2036:
2035:
2030:
2016:
2007:
1961:
1942:
1933:
1913:
1885:
1873:
1872:
1866:
1865:
1847:
1835:
1829:
1821:
1800:
1778:non sequitur
1777:
1757:
1752:
1735:
1723:
1669:
1651:
1625:
1621:
1604:
1591:
1576:be deleted.
1573:
1543:
1470:
1463:
1440:
1425:
1418:
1397:
1363:
1359:
1338:
1332:
1317:
1300:
1277:
1254:
1238:
1226:Allow relist
1225:
1208:
1190:
1177:
1169:
1154:
1149:
1132:
1116:Weak endorse
1115:
1098:
1081:
1072:
1063:
1038:
1017:
1005:Juliancolton
1002:
998:
981:
977:
973:
967:
943:
915:
842:
835:
819:IronGargoyle
812:
797:
790:
674:
601:
594:
562:
547:
540:
523:
501:
456:
455:
438:
420:
403:
386:
369:
358:
331:
311:
302:
293:
276:
266:
249:
232:
215:
189:
172:
111:Mark Formosa
99:
92:
76:IronGargoyle
71:Mark Formosa
69:
58:
2616:DanielRigal
2552:User:Rjanag
2391:Discography
1282:clean hands
1231:Chick Bowen
1103:Ben Kidwell
1086:Tim Vickers
1026:Umbralcorax
930:Otterathome
332:In addition
2471:Epeefleche
2237:Miami33139
2145:The Shells
2105:The Shells
2017:Black Kite
1993:Miami33139
1674:Epeefleche
1657:Miami33139
1568:and other
1447:Eluchil404
1339:S Marshall
1137:Epeefleche
1073:Black Kite
854:Tubefilter
814:Tubefilter
359:Black Kite
303:Black Kite
1861:WP:CSD#G4
1848:important
1844:consensus
1826:WP:CATGRS
1578:Urban XII
528:Lankiveil
2664:contribs
2647:Withdraw
2600:contribs
2511:contribs
2457:contribs
2429:contribs
2268:contribs
2222:contribs
1972:but not
1919:Alansohn
1856:bypassed
1822:Overturn
1783:Otto4711
1753:Overturn
1740:Otto4711
1728:Kbdank71
1707:Otto4711
1642:contribs
1609:Tim Song
1548:, while
1287:Jclemens
1213:Alansohn
1051:Tim Song
1043:Tim Song
955:Milowent
758:Tim Song
743:contribs
705:contribs
581:contribs
457:Overturn
340:Saalstin
324:Saalstin
220:Tim Song
206:contribs
20: |
2629:Endorse
2612:Comment
2569:Endorse
2547:Endorse
2525:Endorse
2385:WP:BAND
2354:WP:BAND
2313:MTV VMA
2282:Endorse
2200:restore
2164:history
2065:Postdlf
2060:Endorse
2044:CÂ MÂ BÂ J
2008:Endorse
1962:Endorse
1934:Endorse
1890:King of
1874:CÂ MÂ BÂ J
1736:Endorse
1724:Endorse
1605:Comment
1592:Endorse
1537:restore
1501:history
1398:Endorse
1333:Endorse
1278:Endorse
1209:Endorse
1150:Endorse
1133:Endorse
1099:Endorse
1039:Endorse
1018:Endorse
999:Endorse
968:Comment
909:restore
873:history
668:restore
632:history
524:Endorse
502:Endorse
439:Endorse
426:JoshuaZ
421:endorse
404:Endorse
387:Endorse
370:Endorse
312:Endorse
294:Endorse
267:Endorse
233:Endorse
216:Endorse
166:restore
130:history
2573:Stifle
2534:Michig
2110:Stifle
1978:Occuli
1688:Stifle
1377:WP:IAR
1251:burden
1239:Relist
1196:Edison
1191:Relist
1170:Relist
1120:Stifle
984:uppets
976:aster
926:WP:WEB
772:Ottens
716:Ottens
678:Ottens
374:Stifle
278:C.Fred
2530:isn't
2415:"Â ;)
2329:).
2186:watch
2179:links
1807:talk
1764:talk
1523:watch
1516:links
1402:Hobit
1381:Hobit
1308:Help!
1161:talk
895:watch
888:links
654:watch
647:links
505:Hobit
464:Hobit
391:Kevin
152:watch
145:links
52:: -->
16:<
2657:anaɢ
2637:talk
2620:talk
2593:anaɢ
2577:talk
2560:talk
2538:talk
2504:anaɢ
2475:talk
2450:anaɢ
2422:anaɢ
2380:.
2368:and
2325:and
2318:and
2261:anaɢ
2241:talk
2215:anaɢ
2172:logs
2156:edit
2149:talk
2114:talk
2069:talk
1997:talk
1982:talk
1949:damr
1923:talk
1834:and
1787:talk
1744:talk
1711:talk
1692:talk
1678:talk
1661:talk
1635:anaɢ
1626:must
1613:talk
1582:talk
1574:must
1509:logs
1493:edit
1486:talk
1451:talk
1406:talk
1385:talk
1360:none
1349:Cont
1327:talk
1291:talk
1217:talk
1200:talk
1141:talk
1124:talk
1107:talk
1090:talk
1055:talk
1047:talk
1030:talk
959:talk
934:talk
924:and
922:WP:N
918:WP:N
881:logs
865:edit
858:talk
823:talk
776:talk
762:talk
736:anaɢ
720:talk
698:anaɢ
682:talk
640:logs
624:edit
617:talk
574:anaɢ
509:talk
492:talk
484:WP:N
468:talk
447:talk
430:talk
412:talk
408:Whpq
395:talk
378:talk
344:talk
328:talk
283:talk
257:talk
241:talk
224:talk
199:anaɢ
180:talk
138:logs
122:edit
115:talk
80:talk
32:<
2405:).
2401:see
2376:see
2344:see
2338:see
2309:why
2292:all
2191:XfD
2189:) (
1863:.
1802:DGG
1759:DGG
1528:XfD
1526:) (
1302:Guy
1156:DGG
1022:tea
900:XfD
898:) (
659:XfD
657:) (
157:XfD
155:) (
22:Log
2639:)
2622:)
2579:)
2562:)
2540:)
2497:.
2477:)
2243:)
2116:)
2071:)
2037:—
2031:is
1999:)
1984:)
1964:–
1925:)
1907:â™
1867:—
1809:)
1789:)
1766:)
1746:)
1713:)
1694:)
1680:)
1663:)
1615:)
1584:)
1564:,
1560:,
1556:,
1552:,
1453:)
1408:)
1387:)
1293:)
1260:am
1257:At
1219:)
1202:)
1163:)
1143:)
1126:)
1109:)
1092:)
1057:)
1032:)
1009:|
987:-
980:f
961:)
953:--
946::
936:)
825:)
778:)
764:)
722:)
684:)
511:)
494:)
470:)
449:)
432:)
414:)
397:)
380:)
346:)
338:--
285:)
259:)
243:)
226:)
182:)
82:)
42::
2661:/
2655:ʨ
2653:r
2635:(
2618:(
2597:/
2591:ʨ
2589:r
2575:(
2558:(
2536:(
2508:/
2502:ʨ
2500:r
2473:(
2454:/
2448:ʨ
2446:r
2426:/
2420:ʨ
2418:r
2265:/
2259:ʨ
2257:r
2239:(
2219:/
2213:ʨ
2211:r
2203:)
2195:|
2182:|
2176:|
2168:|
2160:|
2152:|
2147:(
2112:(
2067:(
1995:(
1980:(
1946:X
1921:(
1904:♣
1899:♦
1894:♥
1805:(
1785:(
1762:(
1742:(
1709:(
1690:(
1676:(
1659:(
1639:/
1633:ʨ
1631:r
1611:(
1580:(
1540:)
1532:|
1519:|
1513:|
1505:|
1497:|
1489:|
1484:(
1449:(
1404:(
1383:(
1369::
1345:/
1329:)
1325:(
1310:)
1306:(
1289:(
1269:é
1263:a
1215:(
1198:(
1183::
1159:(
1139:(
1122:(
1105:(
1088:(
1053:(
1045:(
1028:(
982:P
978:o
974:M
957:(
932:(
912:)
904:|
891:|
885:|
877:|
869:|
861:|
856:(
821:(
774:(
760:(
740:/
734:ʨ
732:r
718:(
702:/
696:ʨ
694:r
680:(
671:)
663:|
650:|
644:|
636:|
628:|
620:|
615:(
578:/
572:ʨ
570:r
533:.
507:(
490:(
466:(
445:(
428:(
410:(
393:(
376:(
342:(
326:(
281:(
255:(
239:(
222:(
203:/
197:ʨ
195:r
178:(
169:)
161:|
148:|
142:|
134:|
126:|
118:|
113:(
78:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.