Knowledge (XXG):Miscellany for deletion/User:AtionSong/World's Longest Poem (second nomination)

3923:- There's a lot of discussion here but I don't see how any of it really requires the page to be removed. There's so many things that could be described as distracting editors from editing Knowledge (XXG) - but I really think that some people are a bit nervous wading into the deep waters at first and tend to keep to the shallows of Department of Fun, plus these sorts of pages until they feel fully ready to contribute. In the process they meet a heap of other Wikipedians (including more experienced ones), learn how to edit pages properly, some syntactic type things, and whatever. If we're to open this thing up to everybody, we should expect some people learn or adapt at different rates. That being said, I'm not in favour of people who use disruptive (even if well-intentioned) edits to established articles to achieve the same purpose. The poem is harmless, amusing and for that matter survived an earlier XfD. 3365:

taking up space, then I would object to the Department of Fun. However, this is not the case. Even though it has been around for two years, only about 30 pages exists as pages for the Department of Fun, and over half of them are actively edited. Considering that now over 1,500,000 pages are being hosted on the Knowledge (XXG) server, 30 pages do not create any extra strain, and removing them will not make it run faster. Secondly, the Department of Fun is not the supposed huge blob of evil that sucks up editors precious editing time. Most of the active pages are edited from every two or three days at the least to five times a day at the most. The DoF is not attempting to compete with the rest of Knowledge (XXG), it is attempting to compliment it, and to give the users a stronger sense of community. -

834:

most optimal environment from which they can be deriving their fun. In any case, if an editor active in the poem goes to another Department of Fun project, it will hopefully be one much more finite in length, without quite so much potential for becoming such a massive sink of manpower. If an editor active in the poem leaves Knowledge (XXG) altogether, that is his or her decision, of course, but such a decision would reflect on the departing editor's sense of priorities. If a 1.9-million-word poem was the most important thing to them on Knowledge (XXG), then, again, in such a case Knowledge (XXG) might not have been the most optimal environment from which said departing editor could have been deriving their fun. —

1624:

Therefore, point (a) stands. With regards to your dismissal of (b) and (c) as irrelevant, you write off the very underlying arguments of the policies and guidelines that were cited above and forbid such entertainment-only subpages as the poem in question. Knowledge (XXG) is not a free webhost. It is not a place for social networking. It is not a place to do fun little entertaining projects. It is an online encyclopedia. Free webhosts, social networking, and fun little entertaining projects are, in and of themselves, not unworthy things; they deserve homes. This is not the place for same. —

933:- I'm put off by the fact it was relisted again in a matter of weeks. If this result is keep, will you relsit it again? And again? And again after that too? The tribe has spoken, let it be for a while. So I was going to vote delete, but because the nominator's sheer despise for this page forces him to relist it only a few weeks later, I'm hesistant to vote in favour of deletion. This I feel, is an abuse of the proccess - simply relist it again & again if you don't get your way. This page isn't really hurting anything. 1351:, why do you feel the page should be deleted? If you don't like it, don't go near it. If someone wants to spend their time on a harmless project, let them. What do you have against these people or their project? It's just a Department of Fun poem, and surely one poem isn't going to hurt 1,506,611 whole Knowledge (XXG) articles? It's peoples' choice. If they wish to spend their time on this, then let them do so, although if it could be changed to become more educational that would be great. 469:- Please realize that just because everything in policy says this page should go, it is not deterring any users from editing. In fact this MfD is taking up people's time more than the poem. If people don't like the poem, they don't need to have anything to do with it. It is not being disruptive, it is merely a Knowledge (XXG) user's collaborative project. However, I do think it would be better off in a subpage of the Sandbox - for example, "Knowledge (XXG):Sandbox/World's longest poem". 3156:(XXG) you are unable to access the rest of the internet. It's perfectly easy for an editor to work on an article for a while, get stressed out, go to another website and play some pong, de-stress, and chill, and then come back to Knowledge (XXG). WP's focus is broad enough, we need to stay focused on what the goal really is. To write an encyclopedia. Not to do whatever the heck we feel like as long as it's not in article space. 2592:, including RfA, MfD, AfD, RfC and anything else. If there is a suspicion that the nominator is either not working in good faith or is not experienced enough in actual article space edits to know what is worth deleting, doubly so--and if there is suspicion that the nominator is a sockpuppet of something, triply so. I am not making any accusations, I am simply defending the idea that people need investigating, as well as pages. 1216:

both use good editing skills and prose composition to create a line, and you have to work together with other editors to make it a decent poem. I do not see how this detracts from editing the encyclopedia. In addition, the poem is sortof about Wikipedian history, so it not only teaches new editors what has already happened here, but it creates community. Editing community cohesion is good. You need to severely calm down.

2403:"...evidently in Ationsong's mind, it's either a discussion about me ... or a discussion about me!" That's not what I was trying to say at all. I agree that yes, there is no point in arguing on the merits of an articles nominator whatsoever, unless there is suspicion that they are a sockpuppet, which I was not accusing you of. The comment was not directed at you, it was directed at the discussion. - 2452:, not a declaration. As for bringing up this Checkuser thing, that presupposes (a) my guilt and (b) the idea that the allegations are relevant to this discussion. As I agree to neither of these suppositions, I would not initiate nor assent to such a request — although it appears to me that you need neither my assent nor my initiation. Plus, who am I supposed to be a sock puppet 1383:

should be deleted for the feelings and reasonings that originally, presumably, inspired the policies and guidelines cited: the overriding purpose of this website is to build an encyclopedia, and things that subtract, slow down, and take away from that purpose do not have a place here. This poem is a frivolous and yet very huge energy suck, and, as the calculations show, would

1859:; it is about the merits of the World's Longest Poem. Perhaps one day someone will nominate the Department of Fun for deletion, and in such a vote, I would both cast my vote for, and strenuously argue for, its deletion. I would not nominate it for deletion, for the simple fact that there are wikipolitical implications to nominating such a largescale target. — 2205:: Whedonette's contributions show nothing but two months of nominating various items for MfD - aside from wondering why this champion of the Wiki never actually edits in the article namespace herself, I cannot help but wonder where this phenomenal grasp of Wikipolicy came from, given this person signed up and immediately leapt in Mfding? 3355:. I believe that this is just saying that all articles need to be about something that is widely considered as significant, not just something that you and your friends created, and somebody else will not know about (such as the term "frindle", which is from a book of the same name, in which a boy renames a pen a frindle). 2806:

instead of creating the encyclopedia," I'm looking at this for a test case to determine if we need to quantify how much time editors should spend on Knowledge (XXG) as a whole, or some sort of time balance between editing articles, editing silly poems, hanging out in a virtual coffee lounge, or arguing over MfDs. --

2173:

as an institution should not be responsible for providing for the relief of its editors' stress, given that there are a plethora of venues and ways in which an editor can relax themselves, whether it is reading a book, watching a television show, playing an online game, engaging in a sport, or what have you. —

1172:, unlike Esperanza, this is kept in userspace, promotes harmonious editing and collaboration, and creates a Wikipedian culture to which anyone can contribute. If someone wants to delete the Department of Fun, I'd vote delete, but you'll ahve a problem given Jimbo's a member... 15:04, 28 November 2006 (UTC) 1495:

you can't put basically whatever you like in your userspace. There are rules and they should be respected. What is more, I think I have stated my views on this at quite an adequate length, and I'm afraid I have better things to do with my life than bicker all day and night at this MfD - like actually

833:

If an editor doesn't enjoy the work associated with writing on any one of the sheer universe of topics that the 1.5 million articles in Knowledge (XXG) articlespace cover, and thus derives a sense of fun only out of contributing to Department of Fun projects, then I daresay Knowledge (XXG) is not the

449:

you linked to states, "If an issue doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell of getting an unexpected outcome from a certain process, then there is no need to run it through that process." I don't think this applies here; the former discussion arrived at no consensus. Finally, I will notify the user

2172:

would not be an acceptable argument in defense of keeping it. Additionally, I do not believe that Knowledge (XXG) is the only acceptable venue in which this poem can be constructed. Finally, I am sincerely sorry that you find yourself under a substantial amount of stress. However, Knowledge (XXG)

2087:

states, specifically, "If the rules prevent you from improving or maintaining Knowledge (XXG), ignore them." I do not think an argument can effectively be made that contributions to a 1.9-million-word poem composed of utter nonsense in any way improves Knowledge (XXG) or assists in maintaining it.

1387:

take a good 3,715 manhours of editing. That makes this project quite different than games of chess or checkers which were, in and of themselves, deleted when Esperanza's Coffee Lounge was. If those were considered timewasters and deleted, this meets that same standard of timewasting and multiplies

483:

Looking at the talk page, the truth of that statement is rather doubtful. Plus, here's some idle calculations. The page states 5,974 words in 701 lines. That's an average of 8.52 words per line. Divide that by your goal of 1.9 million, and you have 222,949 lines to write. Let's say a minute per

3252:

AtionSong, hopefully you can understand that there should be some discretion of what can be included under the department of fun, and that that is the point of this MfD, not whether it exists in user space. The user space arguments are primarily being made as reasons why this should be immune from

3223:

I've said before, if people are just bugged that this violates Userpage regulations, I'll be happy to move it to a Knowledge (XXG) project page, just like everything else in the Department of Fun. When I created it, I just was not being very bold, and only created is as a subpage. But I'll be happy

2238:

I find it distasteful that you insist on arguing with every person who has voted keep, but whatever. I find it somewhat interesting that you decided to sneer at my comment rather than deny my implicit accusation of sockpuppetry. I'm going to see if tehre are any blocked users known for deletionism.

2092:

assists your argument. (d) I replied to this where you laid out your argument above. (e) Proof that it distracts editors is not required (and, indeed, given that one cannot read minds, is an unfair burden to require) — the proof that it violates multiple Knowledge (XXG) policies and guidelines is

1985:

states that if a rule is preventing improvement to WP, we should ignore it. d)Your main argument seems to be that it distracts from other editors' time editing articles. Per my comments above, which I will repeat for those who are too lazy to scroll up, we don't know that deleting this will get any

1830:

has been around for over two years on Knowledge (XXG). It is basically a collection of things that "simply take up space, have no encyclopedic value, and take away the time of editors from doing other things" (arguments previously stated in the thread). So far, in two years, nobody has thought that

1738:

Knowledge (XXG) is not a free wiki host for you to use for your own purposes. It's an encyclopedia. Our primary goal here is to write an encyclopedia, not to provide free web hosting to people. Even if your article isn't taking up much space, you are still misusing Knowledge (XXG) and preventing it

1623:

With regards to your counterargument to point (a), your cite of the intended page does not support your cause, as the page's stated caveat starts off by saying, "When making some improvement to Knowledge (XXG)'s content ... " This is very obviously not an improvement of Knowledge (XXG)'s content.

1264:

I consider aggressively demanding "Kindly back up the rather pleasantly phrased sound bites" of someone who had made a single comment overly hyped up. I have never edited the poem, and do not intend to, but I have no problem with other people doing so, and do not understand why Whedonette has taken

393:

argument you and Elkman are mounting attempts to link time spent doing things external to Knowledge (XXG) with time spent writing the poem. The flaw in that is that time spent writing the poem is not being taken from time that would have otherwise been spent outside of Knowledge (XXG), doing scuba

3364:

As for if I believe that discretion should be used in the Department of Fun, the idea of the DoF is to create fun side projects for people to participate in when they're not editing. If there was a rush of people who created a bunch of pages that "think are fun", which proceeded to just sit there,

2587:

I have not employed any ad hominem attacks. You are trying to categorize everyone who disagrees with your position as someone who uses ad hominem attacks, and thus, by implication, someone who cannot back up their argument by any other means. Furthermore, it is completely reasonable to investigate

2117:

if they didn't have at least one way to simply have fun. Knowledge (XXG), or another wiki, is the only way that a project such as this could be carried out. Free wikis such as PBWiki are not a good option--they are significantly disadvantaged in usability. Therefore, this page must be on wikipedia

1215:

Why don't you back off and chill out? Where the hell were you when Esperanza was being MfDed? I am totally for deleting all and any unnecessary Wikipedian projects, including Esperanza, Concordia, and the Department of Fun, but I fail to see how a collaborative project merits deletion. You have to

488:

estimate given time to come up with the line and then the time spent to edit it. That's 222,949 minutes = 3,715 hours = 154 days = 5 months. So we're talking an extremely conservative estimate of 5 continuous months of editing, with no stop for sleep or food, of editing time spent to create this

346:

Supposedly, this poem would take up to 3,715 hours to complete ... There appears to be a concern about editor productivity being lost to this poem ... If spending a few minutes per day to add to a pointlessly long poem is a waste of time, how much more of a waste of time is it for someone to leave

3545:

histories. At their best, such activities help us to build the community, and this helps to build the encyclopedia. But at the same time, if user page activity becomes disruptive to the community or gets in the way of the task of building an encyclopedia, it must be modified to prevent disruption.

2249:

I was asked that question directly by another person on my talk page, and answered it there. I honestly don't think it's relevant to this discussion — or, for that matter, that I should be indulging your discourtesy — but, no, this is the only name I edit Knowledge (XXG) under. But a sockpuppet

1589:

Because (a) that's not what Knowledge (XXG) or its resources are for; (b) it's not a useful project, it's frivolous and useless entertainment that won't even — as you admit — succeed at its intended purpose; and (c) they could be contributing manhours towards articles and useful environments that

1279:

pleasantly phrased sound bites. Until you began blasting at me, after the "what the hell" stuff, that "ou have to both use good editing skills and prose composition to create a line" and "you have to work together with other editors to make it a decent poem," all that we were given in support of

1194:

Kindly back up the rather pleasantly phrased sound bites of "promotes harmonious editing and collaboration" and "creates a Wikipedian culture to which anyone can contribute" with proof as to same. And, for that matter, I have yet to hear one person's defense as to how said page isn't a massively

797:

This is not hurting anything. You argue that it ties up valuable editors and editing time; I counter, ho w do you know any editors at all would go the the articles if this page is deleted? It is more likely, in my opinion, that they would go to other Dept. of Fun projects or off WP altogether. If

731:

And pigeons perch on a wall and go "coo coo coo." Exactly how far do you want to go with this metaphor? In the above analogy, the brick would be the poem, and the wall would be the entire Department of Fun. Whether the entire Department of Fun would come down with or without a public outcry is

3544:

The Knowledge (XXG) community is generally tolerant and offers fairly wide latitude in applying these guidelines to regular participants. Particularly, community-building activities that are not strictly "on topic" may be allowed, especially when initiated by committed Wikipedians with good edit

3155:

per nom. This page is in violation of a number of policies. Knowledge (XXG) is here for writing an encyclopedia. This page seems to me to have nothing to do with writing an encyclopedia. The stress relief argument has never held any water for me. It's not as though when you are editing Knowledge

2805:

Actually, I wasn't voting, per se. I was wondering if there's a standard for productivity for editors, since the subject has come up before. (It came up in the MfD for Esperanza and all its subpages, for example.) Since the argument has come up before, saying "Editors are wasting time on this

2651:

Then we better delete it quick so we don't have to go through this again. :-) Actually, the issue is not space, it is on drawing a line on which activities belong here and which don't. This discuss here will not only decide the fate of this page, but also serves as a forum for users to express

2075:

I'm not sure if this commentary was directed to me, so I would make the following observations in response to your vote. (a) I note that I am not the individual who nominated this the first time. That would be Mr. Bell. This being my first attempt, this isn't a question of "never giving up."

1382:

Policy isn't something that should be set aside in this argument. To illustrate by exaggeration: "Listen, aside from the fact that I ax-murdered your husband, what do you have against me?" The core issue is policy. But to answer your question nonetheless, essentially, I believe that the page

2305:

Given that the mushroom accusation was brought with the conditional of me making a personal attack, and I was not making a personal attack, I wasn't actually calling Doug a mushroom. However, I have gone further into Whedonette's background and she has 109 edits, three of which are in the main

1249:

Whoa now, I'm not sure Whedonette is the one needing to chill out here. Whedonette asked a perfectly reasonable question regarding the issue and I don't think you needed to bite her head off for asking. As to your claims that good editing skills and prose are required to create a line in the

2443:

attacks, the civility or incivility of those making those attacks is now somehow my responsibility? My appreciation of the surreal and absurd is helping me deal with this in good humor. An editor's choice of whether to adopt a civil tone is theirs and theirs alone, Yuser. As for sockpuppet

2715:

regarding editor productivity: Supposedly, this poem would take up to 3,715 editor-hours (or five editor-months) to complete. There appears to be a concern about editor productivity being lost to this poem. Is there an expected standard of productivity for editors, or some expectation that

281:

It is interesting to note that the nomination was withdrawn when several people became concerned about Whedonette's very low edit ocunt in the article namespace for someone so anti-stuff that prevents people editing, especially considering her in depth knowledge of Knowledge (XXG) policy...

1475:

I agree, but just deleting a page is not going to stop them from wasting time. All it's going to do is induce bitterness on the part of the editors who've spent such a long time on it. Nobody would sign up if we said they had to have a fixed template on their page that didn't violate

3053:. I'm surprised many editors are working on the poem, to tell you the truth. I regarded the project as something to work on when I needed to take a break from an article. (It always helps me to switch my tasks every 30 minutes). Besides, writing a poem can improve your composition.-- 3270:"Wikipedians have their own user pages, but they may be used only to present information relevant to working on the encyclopedia"..."our user page is not yours. It is a part of Knowledge (XXG), and exists to make collaboration among Wikipedians easier, not for self-promotion"...The 1388:

it by a factor of a few thousand. Further, since the "people" do not own the Wikimedia servers, it is not the "people"'s choice — it is the Wikimedia Foundation's choice, as outlined in the policies and guidelines formulated by those who actually wish to compose an encyclopedia. —

3253:

deletion, and thus there are many counter user space arguments to make the case that user space does not afford some overarching protection for these kinds of pages. The same will apply in project space regardless of what umbrella (i.e. the Department of Fun) it is placed under.

1318:

My intention was never to change your vote; that obviously wasn't going to happen. Merely to point out the flaws in your reasoning and statements for when the closing admin reviews this document. And if you find differing viewpoints and critical analysis of your opinion to be

3317:

The WP:NOT policy states, "Knowledge (XXG) is not a place to publish your own thoughts and analyses or to publish new information not heretofore published." Point two of that subsection specifically forbids "original inventions"; point three forbids "ersonal essays or logs"

113:

2082:

of the arguments presented on each side. In my own opinion, those believing the article should be kept have not been able to cite policy to support their views, whereas there is an overwhelming amount of policy supporting the position of deleting this article. (c) Indeed,

394:

diving and such; the time spent writing the poem is being taken from time that would have otherwise been spent doing things on Knowledge (XXG), such as contributing to article namespace, that would have had a beneficial effect towards the goal of writing an encyclopedia. —

2293:

Please remain calm and do not make personal attacks (calling other a mushroom). Doug, Dev has a point. If Whedonette has gained her knowledge of policies by editing under a sockpuppet account before creating this one, sockpuppet vote stacking is serious offense.

1612:. I do think it should be in a subpage of the sandbox, but nobody seems to be listening. Why should this page be nominated for deletion when the Department of Fun isn't? That seems silly to me. And the Department of Fun is an established group, as far as I know. 2752:

certification to show for it. If spending a few minutes per day to add to a pointlessly long poem is a waste of time, how much more of a waste of time is it for someone to leave the computer for a weekend and do something other than Knowledge (XXG) editing?

3324:

The following discussion of user page policies and guidelines is, as I made the point above, to attack the arguments to keep presented at the first MfD that basically argue that people should be allowed whatever they want to have in user space so long as

1289:. Similarly, the supposedly "good editing skills" and "prose composition" 'skills' required to write a goofy limerick aren't very translatable to writing Knowledge (XXG) articles (and, BTW, prose != poetry — "literary medium distinguished from poetry" 3031:

I'm not sure how to interpret your tone, Ed, are you being sarcastic? Wouldn't you rather Knowledge (XXG) became well-known for being a good encyclopedia? A few editors working on this have edits primarily to this page. That's a bit worrying, I think.

859:

per well-argued nomination. I fail to see how this is anything other than entertainment and how this is related to Knowledge (XXG). To Amarkov, a page exclusively for non-Knowledge (XXG) related conversation "doesn't hurt" either, but well we have had

666:). This page is no different than any of those. If it's the userpage thing that's bothering people, then this can be moved to a project page like the other Department of Fun pages. Why is this any different than the other Department of Fun pages? - 622:. I think it was a flawed decision to have kept it the first time (not the closing admin's, but rather the majority of the keep !votes rationale), although I think it would have been preferrable to wait a little longer before renominating it. -- 377:

So you've killed your own argument that Wikipedians are "wasting their time on a doomed project". You've just stated Wikipedians can do whatever they like with their time, which is true. Your only argument left is that the page violates policy.

2330:

This is pointless road to head down. An anonymous IP can nominate an article for deletion, and that doesn't undermine the merits that such a deletion may have. Please stay focused on the discussion here, otherwise I might assume that you

2221:

argument is a logical fallacy, and thus offers no real defense as to the topic currently being discussed. Attacking the person instead of the argument is what's soured a lot of people on politics; I find it equally as distasteful here. —

1976:

a)You never give up, do you? That's not a compliment. We just did this a few weeks ago. I voted Keep then, and now I'm doing the same. b)This is not a meaningful MfD. We did this a few weeks ago and received no consensus. There is not a

2076:

Furthermore, I would request that you not insult your fellow editors and make your arguments civilly. (b) The closing administrator, when making a decision, should assess consensus not in a straight up-or-down count but based on the

304:

as you have, that's fine, but until you have something more substantial to back up your position, your continued reference to this and assumption of bad faith for Whedonette's actions amounts to a personal attack. Please stop now.

3628:

It might be fun to start a page specifically dedicated to the World's Longest MfD discussion. (Then again, MfDs are more contentious than the world's longest poem, and poems usually don't cause hard feelings. So, never mind.)

1854:

logical fallacy, and thus not a valid defense, to state, "Article X, which commits Error A, is allowed to continue; therefore all articles that exhibit Error A should be allowed to continue." (c) This is not about the merits of

2132:

takes care of the first point; my already-stated arguments take care of the second. In my view, you don't have a case. Also, I'm sorry I was uncivil about "never giving up"; that was mean-spirited. My arguments stand, however.

3290: 619: 83: 3698:. per Auburnpilot. I would also hope that such a keep would change WP culture - by discouraging nominations like this; which have taken more storage than the poem is ever likely to. If it gets above 255K, get back to us. 3854: 1465:

It would be far better if editors spent their writing talents actually improving the encyclopaedia for a change, rather than time-wasting on this nonsense. Quite apart from the multitude of policies this thing violates.

3710:. I fear the time spent on this XfD could have been spent on improving the encyclopedia, which ironically is what this deletion page seems to be about. I really don't care about a page like this being in userspace. -- 861: 1986:

editors onto article space. I contribute to articles on a regular basis, ditto with the poem, and I don't find them mutually exclusive, which leads me into e)There is no proof that this is distracting anyone anyway.

1848:: "The project namespace (prefix Knowledge (XXG):, also called the Knowledge (XXG) namespace) is a namespace that provides information about Knowledge (XXG) or its sister projects and how to use them." (b) It is a 1284:

vote were rather prettily phrased nouns and verbs. And although a porn actress knows how to assume the role of a character and how to be aware of where the camera is, I wouldn't call her ready to play Ophelia in

1254:

as a rationale to keep the poem. I think ability to write a poem is not particularly relevant to creating good encyclopedic articles and that any editing skills necessary are better honed contributing, but YMMV.

3329:. So I think my point above is still valid. You also didn't address the issue of discretion regarding the department of fun. Is it your view that whatever somebody thinks is fun should be allowed as long as 3357:

Personal essays or Blogs that state your particular opinions about a topic. Knowledge (XXG) is supposed to compile human knowledge. It is not a vehicle to make personal opinions become part of human knowledge.

360:

Knowledge (XXG) has no policy against editors taking time off to do whatever they like. Obviously. It does have policies about what its own resources can be used for, as quoted in the original nomination. —

108:

I renominate this page for deletion because I believe its violation of existing policies is rather egregious and was not given adequate coverage during its last nomination. Specifically, I cite the following:

1876: 91: 444:

policy you linked to states, "If the rules prevent you from improving or maintaining Knowledge (XXG), ignore them." I very obviously don't think that this page improves or maintains Knowledge (XXG). The

910:

The reason I pointed out the Coffee lounge MfD is that IMO these pages are being used for similar purposes - text unrelated to Knowledge (XXG). The fact one is contested and the other not doesn't matter.

3389:

I was only using the pagecount to show that the DoF is not an all encompassing blob, slowly eating away at the very lining that is Knowledge (XXG). I'm not going to argue about the size of another page.

3867:, especially when initiated by committed Wikipedians with good edit histories. At their best, such activities help us to build the community, and this helps to build the encyclopedia ..." Best regards, 3349:

Articles may not contain any unpublished arguments, ideas, data, or theories; or any unpublished analysis or synthesis of published arguments, ideas, data, or theories that serves to advance a position.

3342:

I don't believe that I ever said that this is not doing any harm, and I still won't(talk about double negatives!). I also believe that the points you cited from WP:NOT are irrelivant to this situation.

189: 2954:

category. Point stands. The citing of WP:USER fits. The citing of WP:NOT is rather tortured. Personally, I think the page is a ridiculous waste of time, that the arguments are spurious to the point of

1945:, just like to add that the transwiki option is still on the table. I hope in the future colaberative projects can be moved over to wikiversity without a deletion debate, just like dic defs or books.-- 3009:

There's nothing wrong with working on a 9000000000???-word poem during your spare time in between editing articles. The poem is a work in progress, and Knowledge (XXG) might actually become famous on

2254:

same thing, so there's no real way to satisfactorily answer that charge, is there? No one would ever say, "Yes, I'm a sockpuppet." So a "no" answer can either be treated with belief or disbelief. —

3071:

Thanks for responding politely (that's in short supply on this page). True, it may not be a problem for you and many others, who are able to balance themselves well. But a few seem unable to do so.

3873: 3962: 2617: 2557: 2158: 2063: 2011: 1121: 823: 2025:

has nothing to do with deleting rules. It has to do with ignoring rules, and not frivolously, but rather when there is a need to ignore rules. I haven't seen any claim here on this page of a

3377: 2642:

For those arguing that the poem is a waste of server space, this page is now larger than the poem itself, making the nomination for deletion more of a strain on the server than the article. -

1033:

Yeah, see, the problem with this is that neither you nor Yuser31415 have actually provided supportive policy for your keep votes, and MfDs aren't a strict up-or-down numerical vote. Neither

995:, such a project, if formulated right, could be transformed into a poetry learning project over at wikiversity. I'm always on the lookout to see if I can find stuff like this to move over.-- 3611:, lets stop nominating these kind of things and actually edit articles. Interestingly enough, this discussion is longer (71 kilobytes) than the subpage in question (37 Kilobytes). Keep. -- 1491:

If they wish to waste their time, they can do so on an external website - just not on Knowledge (XXG), where it distracts other users from editing the encyclopaedia. And no, actually, per

1275:

Well, here's the problem: you tell us that the poem "promotes harmonious editing and collaboration" and "creates a Wikipedian culture to which anyone can contribute." To me, those

96: 2938:(Relisted comment removed by Amarkov.) I'll pretend I didn't read any of the above aside from Whedonette's opening statement. It was nominated as violating multiple components of 658:, please. This is no different than any of those pages, except I created it as a user subpage instead of a project page (although, I would note, some pages are also user subpages 48:, 16 delete, 14 keep with 7 suggestions to transwiki and 3 suggestions to move. I must say that transwiki or moving this into the Sandbox would be the best idea here as this does 145:

guideline states, "Generally, you should avoid substantial content on your user page that is unrelated to Knowledge (XXG)," and then goes on to state unrelated content includes:

3266:...that that is the point of this MfD, not whether it exists in user space...The user space argument are primarily being made as reasons why this should be immune from deletion 2274:

I have to say that an ad hominem attack here is only going to undermine the strength of your other statements. Please be civil and stay focused on the subject of this page. --

679:, because it has the precise same problems as this does. But it doesn't follow to say "hey, Article X violates all these policies, so Article Y should be allowed to, too!". — 1527:

put what they like on it. And, seperately, if you don't consider a 1.9-million-word poem "excessive," I marvel to wonder what the scope of something you might find excessive

2950:

is rarely utilized to delete the userpages of members in good standing. Unfortunately, neither the author (AtionSong) nor the nominator (Whedonette) can be classified in the

2518:

personal attacks against you, you obviously have no problem with certain ad hominem attacks made against me BY DELETIONISTS responding to my Keep votes in prominent MfDs:

1831:

it posed a threatening problem to the Knowledge (XXG) community. If it's the user subpage thing that's bothering people, I would be happy to move in to a project page at

132:

That policy also states "our user page is not yours. It is a part of Knowledge (XXG), and exists to make collaboration among Wikipedians easier, not for self-promotion" (

2958:

and that Whedonette is almost certainly a sockpuppet or at least a rabblerouser intent on using deletions to make a point....but sadly, Whedonette is correct, and it is

1081:. I think it would be better either moved to Wikiversity, or moved to a subpage of the Sandbox, like several other similiar projects. The page I would suggest would be 3967: 3927: 3915: 3887: 3828: 3787: 3778: 3760: 3744: 3719: 3702: 3684: 3647: 3637: 3589: 3575: 3555: 3527: 3509: 3498: 3481: 3463: 3454: 3428: 3419: 3394: 3384: 3369: 3337: 3306: 3297: 3284: 3259: 3247: 3228: 3218: 3200: 3188: 3165: 3147: 3109: 3083: 3066: 3044: 3026: 3001: 2930: 2914: 2860: 2834: 2814: 2800: 2784: 2761: 2699: 2690: 2673: 2656: 2646: 2622: 2582: 2562: 2509: 2467: 2431: 2407: 2397: 2374: 2353: 2341: 2325: 2311: 2300: 2288: 2283:

I'm not arguing here. I am expressing concern that this apparent all-knowing deletionist hasn't any real edits. If that's an ad hominem attack then you're a mushroom.

2278: 2265: 2244: 2233: 2210: 2184: 2163: 2104: 2068: 2033: 2016: 1966: 1949: 1937: 1898: 1883: 1870: 1839: 1814: 1798: 1773: 1756: 1723: 1705: 1685: 1635: 1618: 1601: 1584: 1573: 1557: 1542: 1500: 1486: 1470: 1460: 1449: 1399: 1377: 1357: 1340: 1313: 1303: 1270: 1259: 1244: 1221: 1210: 1164: 1142: 1091: 1060: 1028: 1016: 999: 981: 965: 956: 937: 921: 905: 894: 874: 845: 828: 792: 776: 743: 726: 715: 699: 690: 670: 646: 626: 604: 584: 569: 537: 500: 475: 461: 435: 405: 384: 372: 355: 326: 309: 287: 276: 260: 215: 68: 781:

Yes, it is hurting anything. Look at the amount of people involved in it, and how deeply they're involved in it. This is not an idle endeavour for these editors. —

200:

Some rudimentary calculations outlined in a comment below indicates that the article up for MfD has the ability to consume, if carried to completion, approximately

123:

Later, that policy also states "Wikipedians have their own user pages, but they may be used only to present information relevant to working on the encyclopedia" (

2168:

I don't agree with any of the premises in your statement: I do not believe that this poem improves Knowledge (XXG) or assists in its maintenance, and therefore,

249:. I withdraw the nomination and my active participation in this discussion but leave others to take whatever actions they see fit, with malice towards none. — 241:. However, precedent is evidently unclear as to whether after a discussion has progressed at such length, the nominator's withdrawal closes the discussion. 3424:

After is fine, unless the conclusion of this is to delete. Then recreating in project space would be circumventing the decision and would be disruptive. —

2349:

That depends on whether this continues as simply a discussion on the merits of Whedonette or whether there is the possibility of sock puppeting going on. -

1609: 2113:. I am not referring to users whose only priority on WP is this poem; I am referring to users--like me--who are under a substantial amount of stress and 1175: 489:

project. Even dividing the manpower among, say, five editors yields a continuous month's worth of five editors' editing lost to a nonsense project. —

2767:

Is there an expected standard of productivity for editors, or some expectation that Knowledge (XXG) editors put a certain amount of time into editing?

913: 866: 3333:

Because this, I think, is the defining separation in the positions of the keep and delete proponents, not the user space vs. project space issue. —

3302:

Sorry about that! My bad. The error is now fixed. However, it still stands, that the argument that this is about userspace policies still stands. -

3353:

Original inventions. If you invent the word frindle or a new type of dance move, it is not article material until a secondary source reports on it

2386:. What a delightfully revealing Freudian slip — evidently in Ationsong's mind, it's either a discussion about me ... or a discussion about me! — 1562:

So you find the page's stated goal to be excessive, and furthermore believe that the editors will not reach their stated goal. Illuminating. —

1077:

are reasonably flexible. You've already had an ANI for overciting policy. Sure, the page is in the wrong place, but that doesn't mean it should

3311:

Well, not to continue back and forth here until we're indented off the right side of the page, but the nomination starts with a description of

2366:

the suspected sockpuppeteer is, I'm not sure I understand your point. If you suspect actual sockpuppetry, then may I suggest you take it to

3607:. I can't see how this hurts the process here at Knowledge (XXG) or why it has causes such an uproar. If people are really so worried about 634:- Interesting, perhaps, but not of any encyclopedic value. I'd also like to echo some of the above comments in saying that I can't see how 1096: 17: 3280:

was relating to what should not be on a userpage, I respectfully disagree with your comment that this debate is not over the userspace. -

52:

belong on Knowledge (XXG), even in a user page. Personally, I think this issue merits further discussion, and a no consensus result is

3820: 3817: 3814: 3811: 3808: 3805: 3802: 3799: 3796: 3793: 3754: 3728: 2829: 2795: 2335: 2332: 2317: 1809: 889: 771: 271: 3092:). Anyway, if it's for the greater good for the other editors, then I might be inclined to vote delete. But for now, I'm going more 1480:

policies. To an extent, a user subpage is a user page and people can put what they like on it, as long as they don't get excessive.

1365:? Policy is the cornerstone of this encyclopedic work. Process and policy (and guidelines) prevent this place from becoming chaos.-- 3359:

The article in question is neither an essay, nor a blog, and shows no opinions on any topic (except perhaps that vandals are bad).

1714: 1082: 1120:

quoted above are "less likely to have exceptions," and rarely do, and they forbid this kind of user subpage. As for bringing up

659: 590: 575: 3459:

Well, the World's "never gonna be" Longest Poem was added long after Jimbo joined, so I don't see any endorsement value here. —

3345:

Knowledge (XXG) is not a place to publish your own thoughts and analyses or to publish new information not heretofore published

2978: 1325: 899:

The deletion of this page seems to be more contested than that of the Esperanza coffee lounge, which was not contested at all.

1199:

catchall, which really doesn't apply as this isn't a project whose intent is to improve Knowledge (XXG) as an encyclopedia. —

1160:. This does not belong on Knowledge (XXG), even in the userspace. That said, I'd hate to see the work be deleted outright.-- 1856: 1742: 676: 655: 3274:

guideline states, "Generally, you should avoid substantial content on your user page that is unrelated to Knowledge (XXG),"

3642:

Well, nothing's going to beat the 200k Esperanza discussion for some time, if ever, so I think you're onto a loser there.

1832: 1681: 1373: 3413:

this MfD, then is there any policy that specifically says AtionSong may not create it in another namespace? Best wishes,

74: 3727:

After Whedonette has argued above that users spend too much time on the userpage in question, take a look at the user's

2721: 1432: 1187: 3982: 3883:

Ever heard of fun? And i think it would work better if it were to be placed in a community thingy. Definitely keep.--

2362:, otherwise I suggest that continuing with innuendo would be bad faith and possible incivility. Since nobody has said 36: 3943: 2598: 2538: 2139: 2044: 1992: 804: 265:

Withdrawing a nomination ends the discussion only when nobody else reccommends deletion, which is not the case here. -

204:

that could instead be devoted towards what Knowledge (XXG) is truly supposed to be about: building an encyclopedia. —

3143: 2896:"If it ain't broke don't fix it." I would translate this to, "If it ain't harming Knowledge (XXG) don't delete it." 2716:

Knowledge (XXG) editors put a certain amount of time into editing? As an example, I spent a weekend last month at

1916:

Games, roleplaying sessions, and other things pertaining to "entertainment" rather than "writing an encyclopedia."

160:"ames, roleplaying sessions, and other things pertaining to 'entertainment' rather than 'writing an encyclopedia'" 3478: 2358:

If there is a legitimate suspicion of sockpuppetry then it would be best to confront that head on, as Yuser31415

1421:

somewhere, no idea where. It would be a shame to lose the info here, but it isn't relevant to Knowledge (XXG). --

554:

is supposed to be. I'd merely ask the reviewing admin to take that into account when examining said user's vote

2661:

This is why I'm arguing that there is a sister project that this would be perfect for. As for the wikilayering,

1608:

B. and C. are irrelevant as they apply to the editors in question; A. is the most important. May I alert you to

1523:. That's outlined both by policy and guideline (which I cited in my second nomination). Therefore, no, people 3924: 3903: 3676: 3380:—that one page multiplied out to 111. Pretty sure you're not going to put all 1.9 million words on one page. — 1114:(an "actionable" page "authorized by consensus" that can be "treated with ... the occasional exception"), the 60: 3981:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a

3844:- absolutely NOT what Knowledge (XXG) is providing userspace for. Go chase world records somewhere else. -- 3490: 3131:

as long as the owner has copied it to his computer (if it gets deleted, which it loogs like may happen). —

1730:

not a place to publish your own thoughts and analyses or to publish new information not heretofore published

318: 56:

an endorsement by any means. Please do not use a no consensus result as an argument to keep in the future. —

35:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a

3756:

reviewed the contents of this page since this is not the first time this ad hominem attack has been made. —

2966: 2567:

First, I'm not going to take people to task for arguing for the same position I am. Second, if you employ

1506:

a user subpage is a user page and people can put what they like on it, as long as they don't get excessive.

3953: 3783:

I don't know, you brought up the subject of edit counts as if they meant something here, so you tell me. —

3289:

This is the second time you seem to be making the same mistake in thinking that I wrote this nomination.

3078: 3039: 3010: 2996: 2737: 2608: 2548: 2149: 2054: 2002: 814: 3908: 3177: 2422: 1845: 65: 3617: 3185: 3132: 2501:, the sneering all-knowing deletionist, who of course might be mistaken about the personal attack thing 1895: 3209: 2789:

You know, it might help your case if you weren't sarcastic to every single person who says to keep... -

3182: 3174: 3089: 1728:

Even stripping away the userpage-specific policy cites from the nomination above, Knowledge (XXG) is "

29:

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellany page below.

3570: 2955: 2779: 2577: 2504: 2462: 2392: 2260: 2228: 2179: 2099: 1865: 1793: 1751: 1630: 1596: 1568: 1537: 1394: 1335: 1298: 1239: 1205: 1137: 1055: 1025: 976: 840: 787: 738: 710: 685: 663: 599: 564: 495: 456: 400: 367: 255: 226: 210: 184: 3448:

is a member of the Department of Fun, of which the World's Longest Poem project belongs to. Thanks.

3238: 2306:

namespace and 65 of which are nominating and defending MfDs. There's something funny going on here.

798:

there is no fun to be had on WP, then the edit counts would drop dramatically from editors leaving.

551: 528: 57: 3898: 3850: 2974: 2748:. I lost some 56 hours or so of Knowledge (XXG) editing time in that weekend, with nothing but an 2491:

is, quite simply, attacking the person instead of the argument he or she is putting forth. That's

1012: 761:. The argument I'm about to give holds no water usually, but for user subpages, it is appropriate. 654:- Alright, once again, I am biased, because this is my project, but may I direct your attention to 3489:

Editors seem to be acive. If this diversion helps them edit more productively, sounds good to me.

3255:

And to Yuser, moving an article under discussion at XfD is considered disruptive. Don't do it. —

2733: 1743:

is a Knowledge (XXG) namespace page designed for testing and experimentation with the Wiki syntax

2418: 317:

The point has been made and is probably not germaine. Let's move on.16:06, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

174:

Because of the violation of the above policies and established guidelines, I strongly urge this

3948: 3938: 3715: 3585: 3197: 3073: 3034: 2991: 2603: 2593: 2543: 2533: 2144: 2134: 2049: 2039: 1997: 1987: 1678: 1370: 809: 799: 3860: 3539: 3293:

is the nomination I wrote. You'll notice the word "user" does not appear in my nomination. —

3271: 3264:

The following comment is not intended as an attack or to be sarcastic, it is just a comment:

3234: 2947: 2943: 2854:. Poem doesn't really belong on an encyclopedia, but may be a worthy Wiki project elsewhere. 2683: 2666: 1978: 1911: 1782: 1694: 1670: 1492: 1104: 1074: 1038: 695:

But there's a difference between voting to take down a wall and voting to take out a brick. -

639: 547: 524: 519:- while this 'poem' clearly doesn't benefit the encyclopedia, it doesn't hurt it either. Per 446: 426: 142: 3669: 3634: 3612: 3445: 3160: 2811: 2758: 2729: 2384:"on the merits of Whedonette or whether there is the possibility of sock puppeting going on" 1429: 1183: 3319: 3312: 2989:

Fails WP:USER. If I say anything more I'll say something rude, so I'll just stick to that.

2939: 2891:

The poem is related to Knowledge (XXG), in the form of a poetic history of Knowledge (XXG).

2679: 2662: 2367: 2169: 2129: 2110: 2089: 2084: 2022: 1982: 1827: 1737: 1733: 1729: 1698: 1666: 1578:

So if the editors wish to waste their time on an already doomed project, why not let them?

1509: 1442: 1320: 1196: 1125: 1034: 917: 880: 870: 635: 543: 520: 441: 429:. It is also good ettiquette to notify the user in question on their talk page. Thank you. 422: 242: 133: 124: 115: 3868: 3823: 3699: 3565: 3550: 3504: 3474: 3449: 3414: 3242: 3213: 2909: 2868:. I would like to again lay down the evidence why this page should be kept or transwikied. 2774: 2572: 2498: 2457: 2426: 2387: 2320: 2295: 2255: 2223: 2174: 2094: 1928: 1860: 1803:

That's getting kinda annoying. I think by now we get that the policies are against it... -

1788: 1768: 1746: 1718: 1625: 1613: 1591: 1579: 1563: 1552: 1532: 1481: 1455: 1389: 1352: 1330: 1293: 1234: 1200: 1132: 1086: 1050: 971: 951: 900: 835: 782: 733: 721: 705: 680: 594: 579: 559: 532: 490: 470: 451: 430: 395: 379: 362: 350: 250: 221: 205: 179: 246: 3846: 3731:, which makes it clear that the user hasn't been actively engaging in article editing.-- 2686:? I've not invoked those in the argument, or were those comments directed elsewhere? -- 3956: 3784: 3757: 3664: 3460: 3425: 3391: 3381: 3366: 3334: 3303: 3294: 3281: 3256: 3225: 2970: 2927: 2687: 2653: 2643: 2611: 2551: 2404: 2371: 2350: 2338: 2275: 2152: 2057: 2030: 2005: 1880: 1836: 1256: 1161: 1008: 962: 934: 817: 696: 667: 623: 306: 2514:

Now you're being sarcastic again. Although you seem to have a problem with Dev making

1065:

No policy says it should stay there. Your arguments, I believe, are correct. However,

675:

I'd certainly support, and strenuously argue in favor of, an MfD attempting to delete

3884: 2855: 1963: 1497: 1467: 1446: 643: 3711: 3581: 2824: 2790: 2725: 1804: 1674: 1366: 884: 766: 266: 578:. You are insulting my judgement of how I understand the two policies. Thank you. 1290: 3643: 3630: 3560:

The problem is that many — not all, mind you, but many — of the contributors do

3157: 2807: 2754: 2307: 2284: 2240: 2206: 2021:

I'm not sure which "you" you are referring to. I just wanted to point out that

1426: 1422: 1309: 1266: 1217: 1179: 347:

the computer for a weekend and do something other than Knowledge (XXG) editing?

341: 283: 3376:

Well, I'm not making the page count argument, but your math is a bit off. See

3276:(from the original nomination). Because about half the nomination for deletion 3173:, violates policies, Knowledge (XXG) is an encyclopedia, write this elsewhere. 2881:

In no way does the article harm Knowledge (XXG) or any other Wikimedia project.

3750: 3662:

The Esperanza MfD had it's own WP:SHORTCUT. And the talk page was huge too. --

2717: 2487: 2217: 1918: 1745:" — not as a catch-all for anything forbidden elsewhere on Knowledge (XXG). — 1702: 293: 3865:

community-building activities that are not strictly "on topic" may be allowed

2962:

for me to vote anything but delete simply due to my dislike for this person.

591:

what things Knowledge (XXG) policy explicitly states are not personal attacks

3088:=P I've made it a point to emphasize kindness here on Knowledge (XXG). (see 2770: 2696: 2670: 2571:

attacks, you are not in a good position to complain about receiving them. —

1946: 1850: 1157: 996: 542:

Per above, I'm not really sure this user understands the purposes of either

390: 2118:

for it to have any real meaning. And anyway, your main arguments are thus:

1894:

a project whose explicit goal is to produce 1.9 million words of nonsense.

1454:

Hi Moreschi! Could you give me an example of how it's destracting? Cheers!

1195:

flagrant violation of multiple Knowledge (XXG) policies ... aside from the

3347:. This fact links to the original research page, wich basically says that 1906:

When the community considers a page for deletion, the decision is made by

2741: 1914:(the section regarding "What can I not have on my user page?"), I quote: 297: 3564:

have edit histories showing much contribution at all to articlespace. —

3937:

This discussion really needs to be closed. I'll ask an admin about it.

3768: 3734: 3517: 3099: 3056: 3016: 2414: 1713:- the page in question could be moved to a subpage of the Sandbox, ie. 165:"ommunications with people uninvolved with the project or related work" 3514:

Same here. Writing poems are one of the ways to improve composition.--

3237:? I personally feel it would have a better chance in a subpage of the 2745: 1877:

Knowledge (XXG):Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Once upon a time...

92:

Knowledge (XXG):Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Once upon a time...

942:

Hi SpawnMan, I just wanted to point out to you that Whedonette is a

970:

Not to mention that I'm not the one who originally nominated it. —

2669:

is for debates that are so one sided, that it's predetermined. --

3975:

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.

2749: 1957:- I agree that the Department of Fun has not been put up at MfD. 3473:- harmless fun is semi-private user namespace is perfectly OK. 2665:

is for things that help the encyclopedia but go against rules,

704:

But a wall does not come down without the removal of bricks. —

481:

In fact this MfD is taking up people's time more than the poem.

3621: 3378:

Knowledge (XXG):Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Mind Benders

1835:, just like all the other projects in the Department of Fun. - 961:

My apologies monsieur! (Hopefully that means miss in Arabic!)

2819:

Editor productivity standards? I'm sorry, but are you really

1229:

I can definitely see now how it promotes harmonious editing!

2421:. I have never said you were a sockpuppet. Would you like a 2886:

The project is in userspace, is active, and nonintrusive.

2695:

Actually, Yuser31415, I just got lost in all this talk.--

1227:

Why don't you back off and chill out? Where the hell ...

97:

Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Once upon a time...

1665:

per well detailed nomination; this page is a failure of

1308:

My vote stands. Harrassing me isn't going to change it.

2449: 2445: 2359: 1551:

excessive, but it shows no sign of getting that large.

301: 238: 3765:

What does my edit count have to do with any of this?--

2448:— your mention of sockpuppetry came in the form of an 2038:

The "delete" was a mistake. I meant to type "ignore".

1767:, it is in userspace and it doesn't hurt to keep it.__ 1445:

a place for social networking. Silly and distracting.

732:

really not a question being discussed on this page. —

2875:

Evidence that the World's Longest Poem should be kept

3859:

I'm sorry, but I consider your statement incorrect.

150:"xtensive discussion not related to Knowledge (XXG)" 3208:, Does not help the encyclopedia. And does violate 3096:. A lot of interesting points are coming up here.-- 720:A wall does not come down without a public outcry. 39:). No further edits should be made to this page. 527:I suggest putting this page into a subpage of the 3753:attacks. Also, it would probably be good if you 2652:their views on where the line should be drawn. -- 1122:the discussion on the administrators' noticeboard 879:It wasn't in userspace either. I do realize that 3985:). No further edits should be made to this page. 3351:This does not apply to the article in question. 202:five (continuous, 24/7) months' worth of editing 73: 550:, or, for that matter, what the purpose of the 1590:have little or no chance of being "doomed." — 1981:that it will produce any different result. c) 1610:Knowledge (XXG):Don't_worry_about_performance 8: 1715:Knowledge (XXG):Sandbox/World's longest poem 1292:). That was a weak argument ... at best. — 1250:poem...well, that seems a bit of a stretch, 1083:Knowledge (XXG):Sandbox/World's longest poem 2740:, I was instead experiencing problems with 2425:to be carried out to remove all suspicion? 300:regarding Whedonette. If you want to make 3409:Well, I suppose you are correct, however, 2678:Pray tell, why are you lecturing me about 1875:You do make a good point, so I nominated 292:I'm really getting sick and tired of the 3224:to move it to conform to WP standards. - 2926:Irrelevant to building an encyclopedia. 2530:I suggest you reconsider your priorities 1508:Here's the problem with that statement: 2728:. Instead of working on articles like 1347:Look Whedonette, that's not the point. 18:Knowledge (XXG):Miscellany for deletion 3196:for the reasons given by Doug Bell. -- 2347:"This is pointless road to head down." 2337:previous nomination was funny also. -- 3534:I would like to assert that there is 1736:," no matter where same is housed. " 1693:in agreement with the nomination and 618:for the reasons I nominated this the 7: 1833:Knowledge (XXG):World's Longest Poem 1739:from becoming a usable encyclopedia. 3049:It's not sarcasm. I seriously vote 243:Policy village pump discussion here 237:I have withdrawn this nomination — 75:User:AtionSong/World's Longest Poem 1785:which explicitly say otherwise ... 1326:"Halp! Halp! I'm being harrassed!" 24: 1857:Knowledge (XXG):Department of Fun 1783:Knowledge (XXG) userpage policies 1131:doesn't support your case any. — 677:Knowledge (XXG):Department of Fun 656:Knowledge (XXG):Department of Fun 3013:for making the longest poem!!!-- 2956:hysterical equine necrobrutality 1439:Delete - or maybe send to Wikia? 1323:," you are in a strange locale. 155:"ther non-encyclopedic material" 2521:Furthermore, Alethiophile, and 556:(yes, I know MfD isn't a vote) 220:I withdraw this nomination. — 44:The result of the debate was 1: 3444:: I hope everyone knows that 3429:22:37, 30 November 2006 (UTC) 3420:22:34, 30 November 2006 (UTC) 3260:22:28, 30 November 2006 (UTC) 3248:22:23, 30 November 2006 (UTC) 3229:22:09, 30 November 2006 (UTC) 3219:16:11, 30 November 2006 (UTC) 3201:07:11, 30 November 2006 (UTC) 3189:06:15, 30 November 2006 (UTC) 3166:05:39, 30 November 2006 (UTC) 3148:05:37, 30 November 2006 (UTC) 3110:04:33, 30 November 2006 (UTC) 3084:04:29, 30 November 2006 (UTC) 3067:04:15, 30 November 2006 (UTC) 3045:04:09, 30 November 2006 (UTC) 3027:03:58, 30 November 2006 (UTC) 3002:03:30, 30 November 2006 (UTC) 2931:03:15, 30 November 2006 (UTC) 2915:03:13, 30 November 2006 (UTC) 2861:02:47, 30 November 2006 (UTC) 2835:03:25, 30 November 2006 (UTC) 2815:03:21, 30 November 2006 (UTC) 2801:02:48, 30 November 2006 (UTC) 2785:00:51, 30 November 2006 (UTC) 2762:23:30, 29 November 2006 (UTC) 2691:00:14, 30 November 2006 (UTC) 2674:00:11, 30 November 2006 (UTC) 2657:22:55, 29 November 2006 (UTC) 2647:22:52, 29 November 2006 (UTC) 2588:the person who is nominating 2583:22:32, 30 November 2006 (UTC) 2563:22:21, 30 November 2006 (UTC) 2510:23:06, 29 November 2006 (UTC) 2468:02:26, 30 November 2006 (UTC) 2444:allegations, that was indeed 2432:02:13, 30 November 2006 (UTC) 2417:might encourage others to be 2408:02:58, 30 November 2006 (UTC) 2398:02:06, 30 November 2006 (UTC) 2375:02:01, 30 November 2006 (UTC) 2354:01:47, 30 November 2006 (UTC) 2342:01:25, 30 November 2006 (UTC) 2326:00:10, 30 November 2006 (UTC) 2312:23:26, 29 November 2006 (UTC) 2301:23:04, 29 November 2006 (UTC) 2289:23:00, 29 November 2006 (UTC) 2279:22:55, 29 November 2006 (UTC) 2266:23:06, 29 November 2006 (UTC) 2245:23:00, 29 November 2006 (UTC) 2234:22:43, 29 November 2006 (UTC) 2211:22:29, 29 November 2006 (UTC) 2185:22:43, 29 November 2006 (UTC) 2164:22:28, 29 November 2006 (UTC) 2105:20:56, 29 November 2006 (UTC) 2069:22:18, 29 November 2006 (UTC) 2034:20:44, 29 November 2006 (UTC) 2017:20:32, 29 November 2006 (UTC) 1967:18:34, 29 November 2006 (UTC) 1950:16:39, 29 November 2006 (UTC) 1938:12:52, 29 November 2006 (UTC) 1899:04:59, 29 November 2006 (UTC) 1884:10:29, 29 November 2006 (UTC) 1871:00:44, 29 November 2006 (UTC) 1846:frown on such a proposed move 1840:22:55, 28 November 2006 (UTC) 1815:22:49, 28 November 2006 (UTC) 1799:22:47, 28 November 2006 (UTC) 1774:22:37, 28 November 2006 (UTC) 1757:22:08, 28 November 2006 (UTC) 1724:21:57, 28 November 2006 (UTC) 1706:21:09, 28 November 2006 (UTC) 1686:21:00, 28 November 2006 (UTC) 1636:21:59, 28 November 2006 (UTC) 1619:21:49, 28 November 2006 (UTC) 1602:21:41, 28 November 2006 (UTC) 1585:21:37, 28 November 2006 (UTC) 1574:21:25, 28 November 2006 (UTC) 1558:21:17, 28 November 2006 (UTC) 1543:20:57, 28 November 2006 (UTC) 1501:20:17, 28 November 2006 (UTC) 1487:20:04, 28 November 2006 (UTC) 1471:19:51, 28 November 2006 (UTC) 1461:19:33, 28 November 2006 (UTC) 1450:19:25, 28 November 2006 (UTC) 1400:20:57, 28 November 2006 (UTC) 1378:20:54, 28 November 2006 (UTC) 1358:19:43, 28 November 2006 (UTC) 1341:20:57, 28 November 2006 (UTC) 1314:19:52, 28 November 2006 (UTC) 1304:18:48, 28 November 2006 (UTC) 1271:18:33, 28 November 2006 (UTC) 1260:17:02, 28 November 2006 (UTC) 1245:16:56, 28 November 2006 (UTC) 1222:16:47, 28 November 2006 (UTC) 1211:16:39, 28 November 2006 (UTC) 1165:15:02, 28 November 2006 (UTC) 1143:18:17, 28 November 2006 (UTC) 1092:18:00, 28 November 2006 (UTC) 1061:16:29, 28 November 2006 (UTC) 1029:13:54, 28 November 2006 (UTC) 1017:05:40, 28 November 2006 (UTC) 1000:04:04, 28 November 2006 (UTC) 982:04:06, 28 November 2006 (UTC) 966:03:42, 28 November 2006 (UTC) 957:02:33, 28 November 2006 (UTC) 938:02:26, 28 November 2006 (UTC) 922:03:05, 28 November 2006 (UTC) 906:02:09, 28 November 2006 (UTC) 895:01:46, 28 November 2006 (UTC) 875:01:45, 28 November 2006 (UTC) 846:20:56, 29 November 2006 (UTC) 829:20:19, 29 November 2006 (UTC) 793:01:58, 28 November 2006 (UTC) 777:01:36, 28 November 2006 (UTC) 744:21:25, 28 November 2006 (UTC) 727:21:18, 28 November 2006 (UTC) 716:01:32, 28 November 2006 (UTC) 700:00:05, 28 November 2006 (UTC) 691:23:02, 27 November 2006 (UTC) 671:22:48, 27 November 2006 (UTC) 647:22:18, 27 November 2006 (UTC) 627:21:54, 27 November 2006 (UTC) 605:01:32, 28 November 2006 (UTC) 585:00:23, 28 November 2006 (UTC) 570:21:49, 27 November 2006 (UTC) 538:21:37, 27 November 2006 (UTC) 501:01:58, 28 November 2006 (UTC) 476:00:34, 28 November 2006 (UTC) 462:20:42, 27 November 2006 (UTC) 436:19:52, 27 November 2006 (UTC) 406:01:14, 30 November 2006 (UTC) 385:01:02, 30 November 2006 (UTC) 373:00:53, 30 November 2006 (UTC) 356:00:50, 30 November 2006 (UTC) 231:16:42, 1 December 2006 (CST) 216:01:58, 28 November 2006 (UTC) 190:19:21, 27 November 2006 (UTC) 3968:19:54, 4 December 2006 (UTC) 3928:14:28, 4 December 2006 (UTC) 3916:05:28, 4 December 2006 (UTC) 3888:16:09, 2 December 2006 (UTC) 3874:00:21, 2 December 2006 (UTC) 3855:00:01, 2 December 2006 (UTC) 3829:23:40, 2 December 2006 (UTC) 3788:23:14, 2 December 2006 (UTC) 3779:21:04, 2 December 2006 (UTC) 3761:12:25, 2 December 2006 (UTC) 3745:21:42, 1 December 2006 (UTC) 3720:17:17, 1 December 2006 (UTC) 3703:06:18, 1 December 2006 (UTC) 3685:21:57, 1 December 2006 (UTC) 3648:19:08, 1 December 2006 (UTC) 3638:17:25, 1 December 2006 (UTC) 3590:17:17, 1 December 2006 (UTC) 3576:13:22, 1 December 2006 (UTC) 3556:03:43, 1 December 2006 (UTC) 3528:03:40, 1 December 2006 (UTC) 3510:03:10, 1 December 2006 (UTC) 3499:02:51, 1 December 2006 (UTC) 3482:02:33, 1 December 2006 (UTC) 3464:02:56, 1 December 2006 (UTC) 3455:00:18, 1 December 2006 (UTC) 3395:15:38, 1 December 2006 (UTC) 3385:14:23, 1 December 2006 (UTC) 3370:13:57, 1 December 2006 (UTC) 3338:01:39, 1 December 2006 (UTC) 3307:01:24, 1 December 2006 (UTC) 3298:01:06, 1 December 2006 (UTC) 3285:00:26, 1 December 2006 (UTC) 2722:Black River Falls, Wisconsin 2700:01:14, 1 December 2006 (UTC) 2623:21:35, 1 December 2006 (UTC) 2439:So in the midst of multiple 2413:Stopping your not-so-gentle 1265:such a harsh dislike to it. 450:in question now. Thanks. — 327:16:07, 2 December 2006 (UTC) 310:12:42, 2 December 2006 (UTC) 288:11:56, 2 December 2006 (UTC) 277:00:51, 2 December 2006 (UTC) 261:00:25, 2 December 2006 (UTC) 69:23:58, 4 December 2006 (UTC) 3580:Nor do you, might I add. -- 2769:No, there's not. Very nice 2088:Therefore, I don't believe 178:user subpage's deletion. — 4002: 1732:," nor is it a place for " 3233:Why not just move it per 2750:Advanced Open Water Diver 2423:Knowledge (XXG):Checkuser 1979:snowball's chance in hell 1425:17:06, 28 November 2006 ( 883:supports deleting this. - 589:I suggest you read up on 3978:Please do not modify it. 3620:04:25, 1 December 2006 ( 3331:it's not doing any harm? 2121:It violates policy, and; 1547:A 1.9 million word poem 1067:policy is not everything 32:Please do not modify it. 3532:As per above, I wrote: 3327:it's not doing any harm 3241:, but it is up to you. 3239:Knowledge (XXG):Sandbox 2960:completely hypocritical 2029:to ignore the rules. -- 1085:. How about it, folks? 763:Is it hurting anything? 642:relate to this issue.-- 302:a claim of sockpuppetry 3542:specifically states, " 3268:(from directly above) 3011:Guinness World Records 2857:Firsfron of Ronchester 2738:Battle of Birch Coulee 2532: 2527: 2197:Random section break 1 2528: 2519: 2497:what you're doing. — 2334:are implying that my 2124:It distracts editors. 1496:write some articles! 1178:comment was added by 862:one such page deleted 3749:Please refrain from 2115:would probably leave 1777:(Changed to Delete) 1741:" And the Sandbox " 1073:, and policies like 1045:any support for the 3646:(Have a nice day!) 2924:Delete or transwiki 2310:(Have a nice day!) 2287:(Have a nice day!) 2243:(Have a nice day!) 2209:(Have a nice day!) 2093:already present. — 1844:(a) I think they'd 1734:original inventions 1312:(Have a nice day!) 1269:(Have a nice day!) 1220:(Have a nice day!) 574:Please do not make 286:(Have a nice day!) 239:reasons stated here 99:from 18 months ago. 77:(second nomination) 3609:productive editing 3503:I strongly agree. 864:not too long ago. 421:- please remember 247:Google search here 192: 166: 161: 156: 151: 146: 137: 128: 119: 109: 3961: 3885:ANDY+MCI=Andy Mci 3718: 3682: 3625: 3588: 3574: 3536:supportive policy 3146: 2983: 2969:comment added by 2833: 2799: 2783: 2616: 2581: 2556: 2525:should know this, 2508: 2466: 2396: 2264: 2232: 2183: 2157: 2103: 2062: 2010: 1869: 1828:Department of Fun 1813: 1797: 1786: 1755: 1684: 1634: 1600: 1572: 1541: 1398: 1376: 1363:Apart from policy 1349:Apart from policy 1339: 1328: 1302: 1243: 1209: 1191: 1141: 1059: 980: 893: 844: 822: 791: 775: 742: 714: 689: 603: 568: 557: 499: 460: 404: 371: 275: 259: 230: 214: 188: 173: 164: 159: 154: 149: 140: 131: 122: 112: 104: 100: 3993: 3980: 3959: 3955: 3951: 3946: 3941: 3911: 3906: 3901: 3871: 3826: 3774: 3771: 3740: 3737: 3714: 3683: 3681: 3679: 3674: 3667: 3619: 3615: 3584: 3568: 3553: 3523: 3520: 3507: 3495: 3494::) Dlohcierekim 3452: 3417: 3245: 3216: 3180: 3163: 3142: 3140: 3105: 3102: 3090:User:Ed/Kindness 3082: 3062: 3059: 3043: 3022: 3019: 3000: 2982: 2963: 2912: 2858: 2827: 2793: 2777: 2730:Antoine Auguelle 2614: 2610: 2606: 2601: 2596: 2575: 2554: 2550: 2546: 2541: 2536: 2502: 2460: 2429: 2390: 2323: 2298: 2258: 2226: 2177: 2155: 2151: 2147: 2142: 2137: 2097: 2060: 2056: 2052: 2047: 2042: 2008: 2004: 2000: 1995: 1990: 1935: 1925: 1896:Opabinia regalis 1863: 1807: 1791: 1781:... despite the 1780: 1771: 1749: 1721: 1677: 1628: 1616: 1594: 1582: 1566: 1555: 1535: 1484: 1458: 1392: 1369: 1355: 1333: 1324: 1296: 1237: 1203: 1174:--The preceding 1173: 1135: 1089: 1069:. A policy is a 1053: 1007:to Wikiversity. 974: 954: 920: 903: 887: 873: 838: 820: 816: 812: 807: 802: 785: 769: 736: 724: 708: 683: 597: 582: 576:personal attacks 562: 555: 535: 493: 473: 454: 433: 398: 382: 365: 353: 323: 322::) Dlohcierekim 269: 253: 224: 208: 199: 182: 94: 90:See similar MfD 84:first nomination 63: 34: 4001: 4000: 3996: 3995: 3994: 3992: 3991: 3990: 3989: 3983:deletion review 3976: 3965: 3957: 3949: 3944: 3939: 3909: 3904: 3899: 3869: 3824: 3772: 3769: 3738: 3735: 3700:Septentrionalis 3677: 3670: 3665: 3663: 3613: 3551: 3538:for this page. 3521: 3518: 3505: 3493: 3450: 3415: 3278:that syou wrote 3243: 3214: 3178: 3161: 3133: 3103: 3100: 3072: 3060: 3057: 3033: 3020: 3017: 2990: 2964: 2910: 2856: 2832: 2798: 2620: 2612: 2604: 2599: 2594: 2560: 2552: 2544: 2539: 2534: 2427: 2380:(edit conflict) 2321: 2296: 2199: 2161: 2153: 2145: 2140: 2135: 2066: 2058: 2050: 2045: 2040: 2014: 2006: 1998: 1993: 1988: 1929: 1920: 1812: 1769: 1719: 1614: 1580: 1553: 1482: 1456: 1353: 1087: 1024:per Yuser31415 952: 912: 901: 892: 865: 826: 818: 810: 805: 800: 774: 722: 580: 533: 471: 447:snowball clause 431: 380: 351: 321: 274: 195: 79: 61: 37:deletion review 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 3999: 3997: 3988: 3987: 3971: 3970: 3963: 3931: 3930: 3925:Orderinchaos78 3918: 3890: 3878: 3877: 3876: 3839: 3838: 3837: 3836: 3835: 3834: 3833: 3832: 3831: 3722: 3705: 3692: 3691: 3690: 3689: 3688: 3687: 3655: 3654: 3653: 3652: 3651: 3650: 3602: 3601: 3600: 3599: 3598: 3597: 3596: 3595: 3594: 3593: 3592: 3549:Best regards, 3487:Keep per zocky 3484: 3479:picture popups 3468: 3467: 3466: 3439: 3438: 3437: 3436: 3435: 3434: 3433: 3432: 3431: 3407: 3406: 3405: 3404: 3403: 3402: 3401: 3400: 3399: 3398: 3397: 3373: 3372: 3361: 3360: 3254: 3250: 3203: 3191: 3168: 3150: 3121: 3120: 3119: 3118: 3117: 3116: 3115: 3114: 3113: 3112: 3004: 2984: 2933: 2920: 2919: 2918: 2917: 2907: 2905: 2902: 2900: 2899: 2898: 2893: 2888: 2883: 2876: 2870: 2869: 2863: 2845: 2844: 2843: 2842: 2841: 2840: 2839: 2838: 2837: 2828: 2794: 2710: 2709: 2708: 2707: 2706: 2705: 2704: 2703: 2702: 2637: 2636: 2635: 2634: 2633: 2632: 2631: 2630: 2629: 2628: 2627: 2626: 2625: 2618: 2558: 2484: 2483: 2482: 2481: 2480: 2479: 2478: 2477: 2476: 2475: 2474: 2473: 2472: 2471: 2470: 2437:*gentle smile* 2411: 2377: 2272: 2271: 2270: 2269: 2268: 2250:would say the 2198: 2195: 2194: 2193: 2192: 2191: 2190: 2189: 2188: 2187: 2159: 2127: 2126: 2125: 2122: 2073: 2072: 2071: 2064: 2012: 1970: 1969: 1959: 1958: 1952: 1940: 1910:As such, from 1904:Strong delete. 1901: 1888: 1887: 1886: 1873: 1821: 1820: 1819: 1818: 1817: 1808: 1761: 1760: 1759: 1708: 1688: 1660: 1659: 1658: 1657: 1656: 1655: 1654: 1653: 1652: 1651: 1650: 1649: 1648: 1647: 1646: 1645: 1644: 1643: 1642: 1641: 1640: 1639: 1638: 1503: 1436: 1416: 1415: 1414: 1413: 1412: 1411: 1410: 1409: 1408: 1407: 1406: 1405: 1404: 1403: 1402: 1385:conservatively 1380: 1345: 1344: 1343: 1247: 1167: 1151: 1150: 1149: 1148: 1147: 1146: 1145: 1019: 1002: 990: 989: 988: 987: 986: 985: 984: 928: 927: 926: 925: 924: 897: 888: 854: 853: 852: 851: 850: 849: 848: 824: 770: 756: 755: 754: 753: 752: 751: 750: 749: 748: 747: 746: 649: 629: 613: 612: 611: 610: 609: 608: 607: 509: 508: 507: 506: 505: 504: 503: 416: 415: 414: 413: 412: 411: 410: 409: 408: 335: 334: 333: 332: 331: 330: 329: 312: 279: 270: 235:Clarification: 193: 171: 170: 169: 168: 167: 162: 157: 152: 138: 129: 120: 78: 72: 42: 41: 25: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 3998: 3986: 3984: 3979: 3973: 3972: 3969: 3966: 3960: 3954: 3952: 3947: 3942: 3936: 3933: 3932: 3929: 3926: 3922: 3919: 3917: 3914: 3913: 3912: 3907: 3902: 3894: 3891: 3889: 3886: 3882: 3879: 3875: 3872: 3866: 3862: 3858: 3857: 3856: 3853: 3852: 3848: 3843: 3840: 3830: 3827: 3822: 3819: 3816: 3813: 3810: 3807: 3804: 3801: 3798: 3795: 3791: 3790: 3789: 3786: 3782: 3781: 3780: 3777: 3776: 3775: 3764: 3763: 3762: 3759: 3755: 3752: 3748: 3747: 3746: 3743: 3742: 3741: 3730: 3726: 3723: 3721: 3717: 3713: 3709: 3706: 3704: 3701: 3697: 3694: 3693: 3686: 3680: 3675: 3673: 3668: 3661: 3660: 3659: 3658: 3657: 3656: 3649: 3645: 3641: 3640: 3639: 3636: 3632: 3627: 3626: 3623: 3618: 3616: 3610: 3606: 3603: 3591: 3587: 3583: 3579: 3578: 3577: 3572: 3567: 3563: 3559: 3558: 3557: 3554: 3548: 3546: 3541: 3537: 3531: 3530: 3529: 3526: 3525: 3524: 3513: 3512: 3511: 3508: 3502: 3501: 3500: 3497: 3496: 3488: 3485: 3483: 3480: 3476: 3472: 3469: 3465: 3462: 3458: 3457: 3456: 3453: 3447: 3443: 3440: 3430: 3427: 3423: 3422: 3421: 3418: 3412: 3408: 3396: 3393: 3388: 3387: 3386: 3383: 3379: 3375: 3374: 3371: 3368: 3363: 3362: 3358: 3354: 3350: 3346: 3341: 3340: 3339: 3336: 3332: 3328: 3323: 3321: 3314: 3310: 3309: 3308: 3305: 3301: 3300: 3299: 3296: 3292: 3288: 3287: 3286: 3283: 3279: 3275: 3273: 3267: 3263: 3262: 3261: 3258: 3251: 3249: 3246: 3240: 3236: 3232: 3231: 3230: 3227: 3222: 3221: 3220: 3217: 3211: 3207: 3204: 3202: 3199: 3195: 3192: 3190: 3187: 3184: 3181: 3176: 3172: 3169: 3167: 3164: 3159: 3154: 3151: 3149: 3145: 3144:Always loyal! 3141: 3138: 3137: 3130: 3126: 3123: 3122: 3111: 3108: 3107: 3106: 3095: 3091: 3087: 3086: 3085: 3081: 3080: 3075: 3070: 3069: 3068: 3065: 3064: 3063: 3052: 3048: 3047: 3046: 3042: 3041: 3036: 3030: 3029: 3028: 3025: 3024: 3023: 3012: 3008: 3005: 3003: 2999: 2998: 2993: 2988: 2985: 2980: 2976: 2972: 2968: 2961: 2957: 2953: 2952:good standing 2949: 2945: 2941: 2937: 2934: 2932: 2929: 2925: 2922: 2921: 2916: 2913: 2908: 2906: 2904:Best regards, 2903: 2901: 2897: 2894: 2892: 2889: 2887: 2884: 2882: 2879: 2878: 2877: 2874: 2873: 2872: 2871: 2867: 2864: 2862: 2859: 2853: 2849: 2846: 2836: 2831: 2826: 2822: 2818: 2817: 2816: 2813: 2809: 2804: 2803: 2802: 2797: 2792: 2788: 2787: 2786: 2781: 2776: 2772: 2768: 2765: 2764: 2763: 2760: 2756: 2751: 2747: 2743: 2739: 2735: 2731: 2727: 2724:, doing some 2723: 2719: 2714: 2711: 2701: 2698: 2694: 2693: 2692: 2689: 2685: 2681: 2677: 2676: 2675: 2672: 2668: 2664: 2660: 2659: 2658: 2655: 2650: 2649: 2648: 2645: 2641: 2638: 2624: 2621: 2615: 2609: 2607: 2602: 2597: 2591: 2586: 2585: 2584: 2579: 2574: 2570: 2566: 2565: 2564: 2561: 2555: 2549: 2547: 2542: 2537: 2531: 2526: 2524: 2517: 2513: 2512: 2511: 2506: 2500: 2496: 2495: 2490: 2489: 2485: 2469: 2464: 2459: 2455: 2451: 2450:interrogatory 2447: 2442: 2438: 2435: 2434: 2433: 2430: 2424: 2420: 2416: 2412: 2410: 2409: 2406: 2401: 2400: 2399: 2394: 2389: 2385: 2381: 2378: 2376: 2373: 2369: 2365: 2361: 2357: 2356: 2355: 2352: 2348: 2345: 2344: 2343: 2340: 2336: 2333: 2329: 2328: 2327: 2324: 2318: 2315: 2314: 2313: 2309: 2304: 2303: 2302: 2299: 2292: 2291: 2290: 2286: 2282: 2281: 2280: 2277: 2273: 2267: 2262: 2257: 2253: 2248: 2247: 2246: 2242: 2237: 2236: 2235: 2230: 2225: 2220: 2219: 2214: 2213: 2212: 2208: 2204: 2201: 2200: 2196: 2186: 2181: 2176: 2171: 2167: 2166: 2165: 2162: 2156: 2150: 2148: 2143: 2138: 2131: 2128: 2123: 2120: 2119: 2116: 2112: 2108: 2107: 2106: 2101: 2096: 2091: 2086: 2081: 2080: 2074: 2070: 2067: 2061: 2055: 2053: 2048: 2043: 2037: 2036: 2035: 2032: 2028: 2024: 2020: 2019: 2018: 2015: 2009: 2003: 2001: 1996: 1991: 1984: 1980: 1975: 1972: 1971: 1968: 1965: 1961: 1960: 1956: 1953: 1951: 1948: 1944: 1941: 1939: 1936: 1933: 1927: 1926: 1924: 1917: 1913: 1909: 1905: 1902: 1900: 1897: 1893: 1889: 1885: 1882: 1878: 1874: 1872: 1867: 1862: 1858: 1853: 1852: 1847: 1843: 1842: 1841: 1838: 1834: 1829: 1825: 1822: 1816: 1811: 1806: 1802: 1801: 1800: 1795: 1790: 1784: 1779: 1778: 1776: 1775: 1772: 1766: 1762: 1758: 1753: 1748: 1744: 1740: 1735: 1731: 1727: 1726: 1725: 1722: 1716: 1712: 1709: 1707: 1704: 1700: 1696: 1692: 1689: 1687: 1683: 1680: 1676: 1672: 1668: 1664: 1661: 1637: 1632: 1627: 1622: 1621: 1620: 1617: 1611: 1607: 1606: 1605: 1604: 1603: 1598: 1593: 1588: 1587: 1586: 1583: 1577: 1576: 1575: 1570: 1565: 1561: 1560: 1559: 1556: 1550: 1546: 1545: 1544: 1539: 1534: 1530: 1526: 1522: 1521:your userpage 1520: 1519: 1514: 1513: 1507: 1504: 1502: 1499: 1494: 1490: 1489: 1488: 1485: 1479: 1474: 1473: 1472: 1469: 1464: 1463: 1462: 1459: 1453: 1452: 1451: 1448: 1444: 1440: 1437: 1434: 1431: 1428: 1424: 1420: 1417: 1401: 1396: 1391: 1386: 1381: 1379: 1375: 1372: 1368: 1364: 1361: 1360: 1359: 1356: 1350: 1346: 1342: 1337: 1332: 1327: 1322: 1317: 1316: 1315: 1311: 1307: 1306: 1305: 1300: 1295: 1291: 1288: 1283: 1278: 1274: 1273: 1272: 1268: 1263: 1262: 1261: 1258: 1253: 1248: 1246: 1241: 1236: 1232: 1228: 1225: 1224: 1223: 1219: 1214: 1213: 1212: 1207: 1202: 1198: 1193: 1192: 1189: 1185: 1181: 1177: 1171: 1168: 1166: 1163: 1159: 1155: 1152: 1144: 1139: 1134: 1130: 1128: 1123: 1119: 1118: 1113: 1109: 1106: 1102: 1100: 1095: 1094: 1093: 1090: 1084: 1080: 1076: 1072: 1068: 1064: 1063: 1062: 1057: 1052: 1048: 1044: 1040: 1036: 1032: 1031: 1030: 1027: 1023: 1020: 1018: 1014: 1010: 1006: 1003: 1001: 998: 994: 991: 983: 978: 973: 969: 968: 967: 964: 960: 959: 958: 955: 949: 945: 941: 940: 939: 936: 932: 929: 923: 919: 915: 909: 908: 907: 904: 898: 896: 891: 886: 882: 878: 877: 876: 872: 868: 863: 858: 855: 847: 842: 837: 832: 831: 830: 827: 821: 815: 813: 808: 803: 796: 795: 794: 789: 784: 780: 779: 778: 773: 768: 764: 760: 757: 745: 740: 735: 730: 729: 728: 725: 719: 718: 717: 712: 707: 703: 702: 701: 698: 694: 693: 692: 687: 682: 678: 674: 673: 672: 669: 665: 661: 657: 653: 650: 648: 645: 641: 637: 633: 630: 628: 625: 621: 617: 614: 606: 601: 596: 592: 588: 587: 586: 583: 577: 573: 572: 571: 566: 561: 553: 549: 545: 541: 540: 539: 536: 530: 526: 522: 518: 515: 514: 510: 502: 497: 492: 487: 482: 479: 478: 477: 474: 468: 465: 464: 463: 458: 453: 448: 443: 439: 438: 437: 434: 428: 424: 420: 417: 407: 402: 397: 392: 388: 387: 386: 383: 376: 375: 374: 369: 364: 359: 358: 357: 354: 348: 343: 339: 336: 328: 325: 324: 316: 313: 311: 308: 303: 299: 295: 291: 290: 289: 285: 280: 278: 273: 268: 264: 263: 262: 257: 252: 248: 244: 240: 236: 233: 232: 228: 223: 219: 218: 217: 212: 207: 203: 198: 194: 191: 186: 181: 177: 172: 163: 158: 153: 148: 147: 144: 139: 135: 130: 126: 121: 117: 111: 110: 107: 103: 102: 101: 98: 93: 88: 87: 85: 81:Also see the 76: 71: 70: 67: 64: 59: 55: 51: 47: 40: 38: 33: 27: 26: 19: 3977: 3974: 3934: 3920: 3900:bibliomaniac 3897: 3896: 3895:to sandbox. 3892: 3880: 3864: 3845: 3841: 3767: 3766: 3733: 3732: 3724: 3707: 3695: 3671: 3608: 3604: 3561: 3543: 3535: 3533: 3516: 3515: 3491: 3486: 3470: 3441: 3410: 3356: 3352: 3348: 3344: 3330: 3326: 3316: 3277: 3269: 3265: 3212:. I think.__ 3205: 3198:MichaelMaggs 3193: 3170: 3152: 3135: 3134: 3128: 3124: 3098: 3097: 3093: 3077: 3055: 3054: 3050: 3038: 3015: 3014: 3006: 2995: 2986: 2965:— Preceding 2959: 2951: 2935: 2923: 2895: 2890: 2885: 2880: 2865: 2851: 2847: 2820: 2766: 2744:and blowing 2726:scuba diving 2712: 2639: 2589: 2568: 2529: 2522: 2520: 2515: 2493: 2492: 2486: 2453: 2440: 2436: 2402: 2383: 2379: 2363: 2346: 2251: 2216: 2202: 2114: 2078: 2077: 2026: 1973: 1954: 1942: 1931: 1922: 1919: 1915: 1907: 1903: 1891: 1849: 1823: 1764: 1763: 1710: 1690: 1662: 1548: 1528: 1524: 1517: 1516: 1511: 1510: 1505: 1477: 1438: 1418: 1384: 1362: 1348: 1286: 1281: 1276: 1251: 1230: 1226: 1169: 1153: 1126: 1116: 1115: 1111: 1107: 1103:. Although 1098: 1097:A policy is 1078: 1070: 1066: 1049:position. — 1046: 1042: 1021: 1004: 992: 947: 943: 930: 856: 762: 758: 651: 631: 615: 516: 512: 511: 486:conservative 485: 480: 466: 418: 345: 337: 319: 314: 296:attacks and 234: 201: 196: 175: 105: 89: 82: 80: 53: 49: 46:no consensus 45: 43: 31: 28: 3863:says, "... 3614:AuburnPilot 3446:Jimbo Wales 3210:WP:USERPAGE 2734:Ard Godfrey 2446:just a typo 1974:Strong keep 1699:WP:NOT#USER 1101:a guideline 652:Strong Keep 517:Strong keep 342:User:Elkman 3870:Yuser31415 3825:Yuser31415 3792:Errrm ... 3751:ad hominem 3729:edit count 3635:(Elkspeak) 3566:Whedonette 3552:Yuser31415 3506:Yuser31415 3451:Yuser31415 3416:Yuser31415 3244:Yuser31415 2911:Yuser31415 2812:(Elkspeak) 2775:Whedonette 2759:(Elkspeak) 2718:Wazee Lake 2573:Whedonette 2569:ad hominem 2499:Whedonette 2488:Ad hominem 2458:Whedonette 2441:ad hominem 2428:Yuser31415 2388:Whedonette 2322:Yuser31415 2297:Yuser31415 2256:Whedonette 2224:Whedonette 2218:ad hominem 2175:Whedonette 2095:Whedonette 1890:Obviously 1861:Whedonette 1789:Whedonette 1747:Whedonette 1720:Yuser31415 1626:Whedonette 1615:Yuser31415 1592:Whedonette 1581:Yuser31415 1564:Whedonette 1554:Yuser31415 1533:Whedonette 1483:Yuser31415 1457:Yuser31415 1390:Whedonette 1354:Yuser31415 1331:Whedonette 1321:harrassing 1294:Whedonette 1252:especially 1235:Whedonette 1201:Whedonette 1133:Whedonette 1127:ad hominem 1088:Yuser31415 1051:Whedonette 1026:Yao Ziyuan 972:Whedonette 953:Yuser31415 902:Yuser31415 836:Whedonette 783:Whedonette 734:Whedonette 723:Yuser31415 706:Whedonette 681:Whedonette 620:first time 595:Whedonette 581:Yuser31415 560:Whedonette 534:Yuser31415 491:Whedonette 472:Yuser31415 452:Whedonette 432:Yuser31415 396:Whedonette 381:Yuser31415 363:Whedonette 352:Yuser31415 294:ad hominem 251:Whedonette 222:Whedonette 206:Whedonette 180:Whedonette 3950:thiophile 3921:Keep/move 3881:Keep/Move 3785:Doug Bell 3758:Doug Bell 3708:Weak keep 3461:Doug Bell 3426:Doug Bell 3392:AtionSong 3382:Doug Bell 3367:AtionSong 3335:Doug Bell 3304:AtionSong 3295:Doug Bell 3282:AtionSong 3257:Doug Bell 3226:AtionSong 3129:weak keep 3125:Transwiki 2971:Elaragirl 2928:JChap2007 2852:Transwiki 2773:setup. — 2771:straw man 2688:Doug Bell 2654:Doug Bell 2644:AtionSong 2605:thiophile 2545:thiophile 2494:precisely 2405:AtionSong 2372:Doug Bell 2351:AtionSong 2339:Doug Bell 2276:Doug Bell 2146:thiophile 2051:thiophile 2031:Doug Bell 1999:thiophile 1881:Doug Bell 1851:tu quoque 1837:AtionSong 1765:Weak Keep 1419:Transwiki 1257:Doug Bell 1162:Isotope23 1154:Transwiki 1112:guideline 1071:guideline 1041:actually 1009:AmiDaniel 1005:Transwiki 993:Transwiki 963:Spawn Man 935:Spawn Man 811:thiophile 697:AtionSong 668:AtionSong 624:Doug Bell 513:Weak keep 484:line — a 391:straw man 307:Doug Bell 197:Addition: 2979:contribs 2967:unsigned 2742:buoyancy 2640:Comment: 2590:anything 1964:Moreschi 1879:also. -- 1824:Comment: 1682:(Contr.) 1498:Moreschi 1468:Moreschi 1447:Moreschi 1374:(Contr.) 1188:contribs 1176:unsigned 1129:argument 1117:policies 644:Fyre2387 344:below, " 298:innuendo 3935:Comment 3861:WP:USER 3725:Comment 3712:Deskana 3582:Deskana 3540:WP:USER 3492:Cheers, 3442:Comment 3272:WP:USER 3235:WP:BOLD 3136:$ PЯING 3094:Neutral 2948:WP:USER 2944:WP:USER 2866:Comment 2825:Amarkov 2821:serious 2791:Amarkov 2746:O-rings 2713:Comment 2684:WP:SNOW 2667:WP:SNOW 2516:alleged 2415:sarcasm 2252:precise 2203:Comment 2109:Again: 1955:Comment 1943:Comment 1912:WP:USER 1908:policy. 1805:Amarkov 1711:Comment 1695:WP:USER 1675:Gay Cdn 1671:WP:USER 1493:WP:USER 1367:Gay Cdn 1105:WP:USER 1075:WP:USER 1043:provide 1039:WP:SNOW 931:Neutral 885:Amarkov 767:Amarkov 640:WP:SNOW 552:Sandbox 548:WP:SNOW 529:Sandbox 525:WP:SNOW 467:Comment 427:WP:SNOW 419:Comment 338:Comment 320:Cheers, 267:Amarkov 176:article 143:WP:USER 106:Delete. 3842:Delete 3644:Dev920 3631:Elkman 3313:WP:NOT 3215:Seadog 3206:Delete 3194:Delete 3171:Delete 3162:(talk) 3153:Delete 3079:dzasta 3040:dzasta 2997:dzasta 2987:Delete 2940:WP:NOT 2936:Delete 2848:Delete 2808:Elkman 2755:Elkman 2680:WP:IAR 2663:WP:IAR 2368:WP:SSP 2308:Dev920 2285:Dev920 2241:Dev920 2207:Dev920 2170:WP:IAR 2130:WP:IAR 2111:WP:IAR 2090:WP:IAR 2085:WP:IAR 2079:weight 2023:WP:IAR 1983:WP:IAR 1892:delete 1770:Seadog 1691:Delete 1679:(talk) 1667:WP:NOT 1663:Delete 1531:be. — 1515:don't 1443:WP:NOT 1423:ais523 1371:(talk) 1310:Dev920 1287:Hamlet 1267:Dev920 1218:Dev920 1197:WP:IAR 1180:Dev920 1035:WP:IAR 950:) :). 914:Kimchi 881:WP:NOT 867:Kimchi 857:Delete 636:WP:IAR 632:Delete 616:Delete 544:WP:IAR 521:WP:IAR 442:WP:IAR 423:WP:IAR 315:Indeed 284:Dev920 3475:Zocky 3411:after 3186:e Ong 3139:rαgђ 3074:riana 3035:riana 2992:riana 2830:edits 2796:edits 2720:near 2419:civil 1962:Yet. 1810:edits 1703:Barno 1529:would 1525:can't 1280:your 1124:, an 946:(not 890:edits 772:edits 272:edits 58:Cuivi 16:< 3893:Move 3851:blis 3716:talk 3696:Keep 3678:girl 3666:Elar 3605:Keep 3586:talk 3571:ping 3471:Keep 3320:cite 3291:Here 3051:keep 3007:Keep 2975:talk 2942:and 2780:ping 2697:Rayc 2682:and 2671:Rayc 2578:ping 2505:ping 2463:ping 2456:? — 2393:ping 2370:. -- 2316:See 2261:ping 2229:ping 2180:ping 2100:ping 2027:need 1947:Rayc 1932:talk 1923:rose 1866:ping 1826:The 1794:ping 1752:ping 1697:and 1669:and 1631:ping 1597:ping 1569:ping 1538:ping 1395:ping 1336:ping 1299:ping 1282:keep 1240:ping 1206:ping 1184:talk 1170:Keep 1158:Rayc 1156:per 1138:ping 1056:ping 1047:keep 1037:nor 1022:Keep 1013:talk 997:Rayc 977:ping 841:ping 788:ping 759:Keep 739:ping 711:ping 686:ping 600:ping 593:. — 565:ping 558:. — 523:and 496:ping 457:ping 440:The 425:and 401:ping 389:The 368:ping 340:Per 256:ping 227:ping 211:ping 185:ping 141:The 134:cite 125:cite 116:cite 95:and 3847:nae 3622:UTC 3562:not 3175:Ter 3158:Mak 3127:or 2850:or 2823:? - 2736:or 2523:you 2364:who 2360:did 2215:An 1701:. 1518:own 1512:you 1478:any 1277:are 1231::-) 1190:) . 1186:* 1099:not 948:him 944:she 638:or 66:nen 54:not 50:not 3940:Al 3633:- 3629:-- 3477:| 3322:). 3315:: 3183:nc 2981:) 2977:• 2946:. 2810:- 2757:- 2753:-- 2732:, 2595:Al 2535:Al 2454:of 2382:— 2319:. 2136:Al 2041:Al 1989:Al 1787:— 1717:. 1673:-- 1549:is 1441:. 1329:— 1255:-- 1233:— 1110:a 1108:is 1079:go 1015:) 918:sg 871:sg 801:Al 662:, 546:, 531:. 349:" 245:, 136:). 127:). 118:). 3964:3 3958:2 3945:e 3910:5 3905:1 3849:' 3821:d 3818:n 3815:i 3812:m 3809:- 3806:r 3803:e 3800:v 3797:e 3794:N 3773:d 3770:E 3739:d 3736:E 3672:a 3624:) 3573:) 3569:( 3547:" 3522:d 3519:E 3390:- 3318:( 3179:e 3104:d 3101:E 3076:_ 3061:d 3058:E 3037:_ 3021:d 3018:E 2994:_ 2973:( 2782:) 2778:( 2619:3 2613:2 2600:e 2580:) 2576:( 2559:3 2553:2 2540:e 2507:) 2503:( 2465:) 2461:( 2395:) 2391:( 2263:) 2259:( 2231:) 2227:( 2182:) 2178:( 2160:3 2154:2 2141:e 2102:) 2098:( 2065:3 2059:2 2046:e 2013:3 2007:2 1994:e 1934:) 1930:( 1921:S 1868:) 1864:( 1796:) 1792:( 1754:) 1750:( 1633:) 1629:( 1599:) 1595:( 1571:) 1567:( 1540:) 1536:( 1435:) 1433:C 1430:T 1427:U 1397:) 1393:( 1338:) 1334:( 1319:" 1301:) 1297:( 1242:) 1238:( 1208:) 1204:( 1182:( 1140:) 1136:( 1058:) 1054:( 1011:( 979:) 975:( 916:. 869:. 843:) 839:( 825:3 819:2 806:e 790:) 786:( 765:- 741:) 737:( 713:) 709:( 688:) 684:( 664:2 660:1 602:) 598:( 567:) 563:( 498:) 494:( 459:) 455:( 403:) 399:( 370:) 366:( 305:— 258:) 254:( 229:) 225:( 213:) 209:( 187:) 183:( 114:( 86:. 62:é

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

Knowledge (XXG)

:Miscellany for deletion/User:AtionSong/World's Longest Poem (second nomination) - Knowledge (XXG)

Index