Knowledge:Requests for adminship/Nev1 2

261:

but if their areas of interest overlap any agreement reached that way is probably not going to last. If the dispute is a conflict of personalities with disruption solely on talk pages it's a slightly easier issue to resolve and asking them to steer clear of each other might have some success (or an interaction ban in persistent cases). If the behaviour continues, I'd recommend taking the issue to RfC/U, although I don't have a lot of experience in that area. I don't like the concept of having a black mark against your name each time you disagree with someone, but if there's a long-term pattern it needs to be dealt with. RfCs are time consuming and generally undesirable as they can lead to one side feeling persecuted. If one party adopts a siege mentality, the RfC is not going to be useful so tone and approach is important. After that... well that's as far as my experience takes me. I'm reluctant to use the block button except on vandalism and obviously disruptive accounts, so it would be last resort.

175:. It's somewhat less active than it used to be, but the project's members have helped many editors become familiar with the way Knowledge works and produces some excellent articles. I've worked on a variety of articles on a range of subjects. Different subjects require different skills, for example settlement articles require a collection of sources and different styles of writing as you have to integrate sections on history and economy into a single article. I'm not sure I could objectively say which contribution is my best as I've enjoyed working on many articles (it's easier to put the effort into something you enjoy), but I suppose it would have to be something like 238:

awful. Including the image as part of the hook would be out of the question. Knowledge and its editors should not respond to reasonable requests by what is tantamount to taunting. Until Mike Godwin resolves this situation, it's probably not a good idea to stick the visual equivalent of "fuck you FBI" on the front page. Leaving the hook off altogether might not be a bad idea. While the hook reads ok, I doubt the FBI would be happy about the Knowledge article, complete with the seal, having increased publicity. The

95:. The reason for standing again is essentially the same as it was first time round: while I don't intend to be massively active in administrative areas (and still intend to focus on articles) I think an extra pair of hands doing the odd task here and there can be of help. To answer the obvious and inevitable question "why did I relinquish the tools", it was because I wanted some time without the responsibility. As I have been an admin before, there is the uncommon opportunity to review my administrative actions: 5521:

make me seriously consider supporting but, while it looks as if this RfA will likely pass, your username is distinctly familiar. I've a feeling we came across each other in less-than-ideal circumstances, but I've neither the time nor the energy to work out where, so I won't oppose. I'd also advise you to tone down the language- I don't have a problem with "bad language", but admins need to be able to calmly and carefully explain their actions when queried, even by people who don't show the same courtesy.

3610:- Even if I didn't think this was an excellent candidate, with a strong background in content creation and no history of abusing the tools, I would be tempted to support based almost solely on the "holier-than-thou" opposes below. The odd strong word is much less damaging to this project than the default passive-aggressive bullshit that WP:CIVIL tends to encourage. I am not saying use of strong language is a good thing, but it is more forgiveable than most of the sins that we stone people for here. -- 422:(interesting to see that the parent concept is only a guideline, while WP:CIVIL is policy). It can be quite condescending to ask someone to be civil if done without care, and rather than soothing a situation serves to annoy. Another problem is it's possible to be impeccably polite and still be disruptive, which WP:CIV does not address. As you have noted, I have blocked people for making personal attacks. WP:NPA is a more serious policy and less open to interpretation. Comments such as 380:. It was based on specific situation, but I think the underlying question was interesting in how we deal with banned users. Paring down the question, it was along the lines of "should all edits by banned editors be reverted"? My own view on this is to take each edit on its merits; if it improves an article then it should be a straightforward decision to let it stand IMO. There's no point in cutting off your nose to spite you face. 5316:, per Esteffect. Unfortunately, I am opposing due to recent and on repeat occasions, the use of swear/cuss words aggressively towards other editors. I myself have been incivil before during content disputes although I did not use swear words, I do understand how stressful wikipedia can be. If the editor was to rerun in 6 months or more time, and shows no repeated incivility from now until then, I would most likely support.-- 479:

I don't think there's a problem with an admin handing out a ban, however less clear cut cases should involve more opinions. That's part of the role of ANI: to gain more input from both admins and non-admins. Actions such as banning should not be taken lightly and it's best to search for a range of opinions. One of the benefits might be that other options are suggested by others that might otherwise have been overlooked.

3156: 4092:- agree completely with many of the above comments. Candidate is a strong content creator and was previously a competent admin. While this RfA is by the current "rules" and standards of Knowledge unnecessary, its existence to my mind proves the candidate's character and responsibility to the Knowledge community (not to mention, given the sometimes combative nature of RfA, his(?) courage ;-) 5430:. I appreciate that my standard for civil conduct may be different from yours, however, I still do not completely understand why you and your many friends, who are obviously intelligent and educated people, feel the need to resort to potentially offensive language. You (all of you) should be clever enough to realise that it weakens rather than strengthens any reasoned argument. 231:

right to the maximum, including putting it on the main page. Some say that WP should not be that assertive and put the seal on the main page. Still others probably think the seal should be removed from WP entirely. What would you decide for the DYK hook? Ask that the hook not be on the main page or something else? Jimbo Wales' talk page has some discussion.

3001:- If this man isn't suitable for adminship, I'm certainly not. I was talking to Ironholds the other day - and a few prominent WFM officials - and we all agreed that there's a lack of admins here. Enough candidates of good quality, just too many opposes based on shitty reasoning. And yes, I said shitty. It is shitty. One of my opposes in my RFA was based on 2833: 2964:, mainly per the opposes. Someone remind me; when did we decide that actually expressing opinions was a negative thing? Or did I miss the memo which added to the adminship requirements "must have a stick rammed so far up his jacksie that, with the application of some caramelised sugar, the candidate could be used as a toffee apple". 299:

website being on the blacklist you can ask for an exemption for that article. If that happened to me, I'd first try to find an alternative link, something which contains the same information but isn't blocked. If that's unsuccessful, I'd find out which list is causing the problem and the ask one of the people who've

5453:

I would suggest to everyone who has made this point (in any column) that this process does less harm than admins exercising their "right" to ask for the bit back, when they may or may not have universal support. Nev will surely have known that any uncivil outbursts were going to come out in this RfA.

3689:

Anyone with the balls to tell it like it is instead of prancing around the issue in strict line with our policy and guideline pages is bound to be a good admin. As the say, the best defense is a good offense, and if you will not take BS from anyone then you've got what it takes to make the hard calls

478:

I assume by issuing orders you mean asking people to uphold policy. In this regard, admins have the same responsibility as other editors as everyone has to edit within policy and ensure others do so. As far as bans are concerned, where sock-puppeting and obviously disruptive behaviour is demonstrable

260:

It's a tricky question, and there's no easy answer. With two otherwise constructive editors clashing swords, it's preferable to counsel each so that neither is lost. It partly depends on the basis of the dispute. If it's content based, it can get messy. You can appeal for the two to avoid each other,

237:

I don't think there's anything wrong with the way the hook is phrased (... that the Seal of the Federal Bureau of Investigation represents the courage, valour, strength, cleanliness, truth, high moral standards and high level of motivation expected of FBI agents?), but the timing of the nomination is

121:

Finally, as an admin who resigned in good standing I have the option to ask a bureaucrat to give me the tools without having to go through another RfA. However, when I was given the tools 2 years ago I had made a little over 6,000 edits; by now, I have made around 30,000. As nearly 80% of my activity

3009:

oppose compared to some of the reasoning I've seen recently. In conclusion: most of the oppose votes I've read are rubbish, and I'm not going to argue with them in every RFA because it'd just get messy. Instead, I stamp a strong 'support' on this wonderful candidate, who shows all the love, dignity,

1220:

through the "lynching" involved. From edit counters being disabled, to not being part of Wikiprojects, to not have enough Portal space edits, there's far more pressing issues than an 100+ supported RFA with the odd oppose here and there - So why is it that nobody bats an eyelid the rest of the time?

1137:

It's the first time I've been involved with this process (despite having written over 500 new articles, over 150 DYKs, and a bit of featured stuff). What's it all about? We have a former admin, who has volunteered to go through the process, who is an expert editor, who has over 100 supports, and a

357:

is an essay). Some of the objections I've seen are that it wastes police time as the person is probably not serious, but the other side is the police would rather know about it in case it turned out to be serious. Deciding what is and is not an empty threat is not easy. Both threats of self-harm and

319:

Just as important as being aware of the abilities that come with the tools is knowing your own limitations. An exhaustive knowledge is desirable, but not essential. Having knowledge of how to use some rather than all of the tools is not a problem as long as you're sensible and don't mess around with

315:

to edit the MediaWiki namespace (where, amongst others, the black and whitelists are located), just as blocking, protecting pages and deleting. To make the question a bit broader, do you think that admins should have knowledge of the full scope of their capabilities, even if they do not plan to use

242:

article gets thousands of views everyday, so I'm guessing featuring the seal article on DYK wouldn't cause more than a 20% increase in traffic for the month. It's not a huge amount, but the psychological side of it (what could appear to some as deliberate provocation) cannot be avoided. I think it's

4809:

Hammersoft, I see where you're coming from but it's a big generalisation. I'm noted for being a surly old git on Knowledge, rude, uncivil and not writing any articles. However I've never come close to abusing the buttons - and with 10,000 odd admin actions without a moan it's hardly through want of

4404:

Possibly, but this oppose is not about incivility per se, although I do think that is a problem for this user. It is about whether we can trust the user. Given the gross mismatch between the candidate's vague answer to Q3 and the long list of recent conflicts the candidate has been involved in (not

3170:

Opposes, to me, are not a strong or convincing argument. If being in a pissy mood at times is enough to not have the bit, I think we'd have to fire a good deal of current admins. The larger question is, have any of this "pissy mood" moments affected the editors use (or misuse) of the tools? I think

298:

While I am vaguely aware of spam-blacklists, it is in the same way that most drivers are vaguely aware that their car runs on internal combustion. I don't understand the mechanics of the spam-list and so have no business messing about with them. I believe that if an edit is blocked as a result of a

230:

On DYK, there's a proposed hook about the Seal of the FBI along with a picture of the seal. The FBI wrote to Knowledge asking them to take it down. Knowledge refused. Now there is a proposed hook, which is on the main page. Some say that WP has the right to post the picture and will assert that

5520:

Former admin who resigned the tools uncontroversially. I actually think it's a good thing to see former admins going through RfA since today's RfA standards are much different to those of several years ago, as is the admin package and the community's expectations of admins. That alone is enough to

5376:

acceptable in administrators, as you well know, else Rodhullandemu's recent "you patroniziing twat" would have been unacceptable. Either you're suffering from a surfeit of childish optimism or what you actually meant to say was that "What incivility in an admin candidate is unacceptable", because

5215:

believe/feel you can be an admin again, trust yourself and ask a bureaucrat. To me, this feels like "well I might have screwed up but I just want to make sure.." .. yes, it's a great spirit, but to me if you're confirmed by the community, you're an admin unless desysopped. In short, if the process

4195:

While I hope you'll make note of some of the civility complaints raised in the opposes below, in my reckoning they are not severe or frequent enough for me to question your trustworthiness with the tools. That said: I have to question your judgment for volunteering to be an admin again, even after

310:

I am happy with the care you express when you would encounter a situation in this area (everyone has their own specialisms), although I think it is a pity that you're not considering to take the black and whitelists as part of the admin tasks you plan to participate in (as far as I can see, you've

253:

What should admins do, if anything, for problematic users that seem to regularly fight with others but at a somewhat low intensity. I came across such user recently but please do not drag out this specific user as I do not want to embarrass anyone. Instead, answer in the hypothetical. Would you

209:

If you've edited Knowledge for nearly four years and not felt even mildly stressed at one time or another you're either very lucky (do yourself a favour and go and buy a lottery ticket) or a saint. At such moments, it's important to remember that we're all here to build the encyclopaedia. With new

5425:

I am not in favor of duplicating RfAs, and would prefer ex-admins in good standing to just ask for the tools back rather than create another non-content page that will be archived and (rightly) never looked at again. However, if you're using this venue to encourage comments on your behavior as an

154:

Most of my time on Knowledge is spend dealing with content: adding information and expanding articles. I expect that as before most of my administrative actions would be blocking vandalism only accounts and disruptive IPs, with the occasional deletion or page protection as problems crop up on my

3775:

I'd be surprised if anyone who has 30,000 edits over four years hasn't had the odd tiff. Opposes rationales simply don't persuade me that Nev would not be a clear net benefit when the tools are returned. We have the unusual benefit of being able to review his past admin actions, and there is no

4879:

No comment on the suggestion that Nev1 is rude and uncivil (diffs above give credence to that) but claiming that Nev1 "doesn't write any articles" suggests you didn't take much time at all looking over this candidate before giving your !vote. Look on their user page, under "Mea Culpa". I don't

1219:

More importantly, why does it take a high-interest former administrator's RFA for people to question the process? There's so many silly reasons given when opposing RFAs, that (from a recent Signpost article) are resulting in a lack of new administrators, and experienced editors unwilling to go

417:

I've seen discussions which get heated until one party accuses another of breaching WP:CIVIL or making a personal attack where there is none. It's Knowledge's own version of Godwin's law. Whether a deliberate tactic to "win" an argument or a genuine belief that the other person was uncivil, it

4372:

It surprises me that so many well-respected editors would support a candidate like this; not because incivility is "bad" in some abstract sense, but because of the lack of judgment and collegiality that this shows in the candidate. It certainly puts his answer to Q3 into an interesting light.

5454:

To voluntarily go through a community process in spite of that shows that Nev understands that admins should be accountable to the community. Opinions may differ on how this core concept should work in practise, but to hold this fairly strict interpretation against someone seems strange. --

5196:

As far as policy is concerned, this RfA is not necessary. From my point of view, it would be dishonest not to offer the community the opportunity to have a say in whether I should be an admin considering that last time I stood there was a fraction of the evidence now available regarding my

2159:

Added: even considering comments above, I maintain my strong support. Mistakes happen. They shouldn't be a big deal. The fact that reconfirmation was sought voluntarily when under established precedent, Nev could have just asked for the mop and gotten it, makes this one a no brainer to me.

1511:- I applaud the integrity of running again given the substantial change in situation, but in this case my opinion has only improved further since the initial RfA. Nev1 is very much welcome to his admin tools back, he was a good candidate the first time and is an excellent one now. ~ 4993:. It seems that he should have learned his lesson and not get offended by my alleged trolling. Nev1 seemed rather quick to jump to Gun Powder Ma's defence. As an admin he might be quick to block the incivility of opposing editors, but turning a blind eye to incivility of friends. 376:, the obvious one is gone, so I trawled through some previous RfAs to see if there was an optional question I thought was relevant or interesting. I felt that a lot of them were candidate-specific, asking about a particular situation, but one that I found interesting was asked by 2929:

No reason to not give the mop back. No serious question of abuse of the tools. He can be uncivil from time to time with or without the mop. I would need to see signs of him being abusive to newbies or generally aggressive rather than an odd heated swear word to oppose this RfA.

5497:: This editor has been a previous admin, and can be generally trusted with the tools. But, although I don't mind admins getting pissed and using some harsher language, it seems to happen too often with this editor in the past few months. Enough to cause me to raise a brow. -- 4141:

Well you have never been rude to me, but I trust you will take to heart the opposes, even if you believe your indiscretions to have been minor. It is interesting how much damage can be done by a little "incivility", however defined - and anyone who thinks differently is a

969:

I appended it to my !vote above. Basically he accused me of something, another editor asked him to substantiate it, and he waffled rather than do so or withdraw. Which makes his answer to Q3 look less than comprehensive, at least to me. This, be clear, isn't about civility

183:

as one of the better FAs around by an expert in the field (although I hasten to add the sample size was only 22 out of nearly 3,000 FAs); to have confirmation that something I've worked on is of a good standard is great (although I need to go back and spruce up the prose).

188:

was also a reminder that what we're writing has the potential to generate interest in a subject. If someone is more interested in something because of an article I helped write, I'd be very happy. If you want to know more about the articles I contribute to, just check out

3922:. I don't recall interacting with you, but I take note of your substantial experience, clean block record, and obvious support here from so many other users—and I want to go on record as being happy that you came back to the community instead of simply asking a crat. -- 910:

Having read the links to the archived discussion, I agree that in the end Nev resolved the situation satisfactorily. Unfortunately that was far from being the worst behavior I have seen from him. Thanks, Chzz, for going to the trouble of digging out the resolution.

1204:

That's for a reason; it's to ensure those editors who only check in once a week have the chance to say their piece in case they're aware of any significant problem. Some Knowledge policy is "we've always done it this way" inertia, but that particular one's fairly

4345:

I wouldn't dream of opposing for one bad edit. Unfortunately there seems to be a patter of incivility and (far worse) lack of clue. Not admin material I am afraid. In the incident I remembered where I was involved, Nev1 made an unsubstantiated complaint about me

2508:

I simply cannot oppose. I've had a few bad run-ins with Nev1 in the past but I have to say that Nev (I can call you that, right?) is just an "ideal editor" so to speak. I'd have to say that he's here for the right reasons and really cannot think of anyone who is

5229:

So you feel this is unnecessary and think he's already an admin. As such, you feel the best action to take to convince him he's an admin is to try and make him fail his RfA, after which no bureaucrat will touch him. Hands up who thinks that's logical?

4959:

to show deference towards our civility policy. I don't have a problem with saying "shit", but when when I read the entire conversation I saw Nev1's comments as demonstrating a rejection of our civility policy and the idea of constructive criticism.

831:

If that is the 'worst' that can be found, I'm inclined to support...whilst I agree that the specific diff is not ideal, I respect the candidates apology and clarification. But I welcome discussion and input, from the candidate, and other parties.

4283:

Without wishing to badger, it seems that you are demanding perfection here. No candidate is picture perfect (I'm sure he regrets that), and I don't why you oppose a candidate that would be a net benefit with the tools back because of one fault.

214:

a recent example where I was explaining to an experienced editor why it can be useful to retain dead links. No one is expected to know everything, so it's important to be patient. Sometimes it's best to walk away from a situation and come back

4986:

For ignoring/ defending his friend's incivility while only admonishing editors of opposing viewpoints. He repremanded me, but not his friend Gun Powder Ma, because he was supporting Gun Powder Ma in a dispute against User:Teeninvestor.

5029:. There was a discussion about the article going on and your comments added nothing to it, they simply antagonised and distracted from the issue at hand. Contrary to your assertions, I have asked Gun Powder Ma to tone it down before. 4126:

Excellent choice for Administrator. Nev1 is keenly intelligent, does great research for his articles, is polite even under unfair criticism, and always willing to help people. I cannot think of a better person for the job.

1447:. We need more admins, this user already was and left with good standing, this RfA is totally useless and someone needs to just give him the tools already (although in terms of acts of good faith this is pretty up there). 2447:- The tools were relinquished in good standing, and used responsibly when they were held. Nothing has occurred between now and the time the tools were given up that give me concern in returning them. I gladly support. -- 862:

getting picture perfect candidates here. We all make mistakes. The candidate recognized the mistake and apologized - we don't need to opposed based on one recognized fault and demand perfection - we're just not perfect.

254:

just keep a shit list and block them for some other reason? Or counsel them? Or do nothing? Or something else? One admin told me (paraphrasing) not to feel bad because they had problems with that user being abrasive.

4840:

Pedro old boy, surly old gits . . . rude, uncivil and who do not write any articles or who are generally negative, are too common on Knowledge. That is NOT a good thing. Therefore I cannot support such a candidate. -

4938:, but I'd prefer not to add another one to the party. The point is moot, as you're well on your way to getting promoted again anyway. I will not support a candidate that has exhibited temper problems multiple times. 418:

demonstrates a flaw in the policy. It's subjective. All policies are subject to interpretation, but WP:CIVIL seems the most malleable. I think it's one of the most misused around and it would be better redirected to

4297:

I think it would be a travesty if returning administrators are opposed for having used the word "shit", when sitting administrators are routinely allowed to call other editors "twats" with not an eyebrow being

87:) – I've been a member of Knowledge since October 2006, have made around 30,000 edits, and contributed to several Good and Featured Articles. I'm also an active member of several Wikiprojects. I passed an RfA 4794:

Anybody can be in the world's pissiest mood and click "delete", "protect" and "block" without those functions being affected in anyway. The question is of your effect on other people, which isn't measurable.

3747:. I am here very confident that Nev1 knows what they are doing (even while I did not get the answer that I wanted, at least I did not get the answer of someone regurgitating the policies and guidelines). -- 4389:

It is well known MF doesn't have a problem with naughty words on his talk page (or indeed elsewhere). On the other hand, admins who manage to be unpleasant without using naughty words are possibly more of a

2420:

This fellow has done nothing the least bit deplorable as an administrator, and is one of those contributors who serve as a reminder that there are still very decent and caring people out there on Knowledge.

4354:, which I thought was weak. Here are a selection of Nev's other incidences of incivility; it almost seems to be his default mode. I'm sure there will be other incidents out there if people looked for them. 349:: I'll start by saying that I think such incidents should be reported. I've notice this crop up at ANI from time to time, and there doesn't appear to be a policy with how to deal with these situations ( 306:

for help, assuming I thought the link was worth including. Equally, if I came across a website that was being spammed and thought it imperative to put a stop to it, I'd probably pester the same people.

4017:

I had to read the opposition section twice to check if I was missing a note of sarcasm. I grant that there are vast cultural differences in civility norms, but to consider use of the word "bullshit"

2279:

It's refreshing for an admin to treat the bit with respect, rather than as an entitlement after a poll once upon a time. And as said above, from what I've seen you were an excellent admin anyway. --

5043:

I can testify that Nev1 is very much his own man, with his own view of things, like it should be for every editor and especially admin. And we aren't friends for exactly the reason Nev1 has given.

343:. If you came across a statement of intent to commit violence - either self-directed or against or other(s) would you contact law enforcement? Why or why not and if yes, under what circumstances? 4645:. It seems that he should have learned his lesson and not get offended by my alleged trolling. Nev1 seemed rather quick to jump to Gun Powder Ma's defence. I have a feeling that im going to and 243:

a good idea to play it safe and not feature the hook at all. I don't think it compromises rights, it would be a mature approach and demonstrate that Knowledge is mindful of its responsibilities.

4917:

with the temperament required of an admin. This was only 4 months ago. I've been an admin too, and sometimes it is like running a kindergarten, but you have to be above that kind of thing. -

1048:, this isn't about me or you, it is about the candidate and about whether we can trust him. I have said I can't and explained why. On that basis I think we're done here, wouldn't you say? -- 5394:, rudeness and incivility are not what I want to see in admins. I could forgive an occasional lapse of judgement, but there have been enough incidents that I think a pattern is evident. 3593:

He hasn't had the admin tools for a while, So I think subjecting himself to the hell that is en.wikipedia's RFA to see if he still has the communities trust is a responsible thing to do.--

155:

watchlist; that's how it was before and it seemed to work fine. For example while I have occasionally participated in AfDs I have no intention of closing one, and I haven't done so before.

2529:

ask that Nev1 either promise us or promise himself not to act in a fashion unbecoming of an admin like mentioned in John's oppose (oppose #1). Such diff is a bit less than 4 months ago.

2322:

I have a lot of respect for the fact that you chose the RfA route rather than just asking a 'crat for the bit back, as would have been your right. You should be given the bit right now!

118:. While I was usually cautious with the block button (this was a one off occurrence) the situation taught me that one must be conscientious at all times and not take blocking lightly. 1956:- I don't see why you need to go through a RFA, you could just ask a bureaucrat to give you back adminship. You did resign in good standing, and you are still in good standing today. 1396:

A superb editor who upholds the highest standards of Knowledge. Always helpful, gives wise advice, and despite all tribulations always seems to maintain a calm temperament. --

5186:

Once a user is an admin, they're an admin, unless recalled or involuntarily desysopped. I get his point, but I don't see why it's necessary he's here. I just don't get it.

3283:- Excellent contributor and a plus to the Admin corps if he gets the mop and bucket. Although I must say, I think my enjoyment of toffee apples has been forever ruined... 3712:

they were willing to undergo a full RfA when they did not have to. (Would have been a stronger support but for the valid civility concerns given in the “oppose” votes.)

4037:- civility is in the eye of the beholder, and Nev's been quite civil and constructive in the vast majority of cases. No concerns at all about his handling of the tools. 4780:

Personalities rarely change, so it's safe to say that this pigheadedness and incivility was present before. Have my administrative actions been affected by incivility?

311:

never edited there, but I agree, it is a choice, there are also areas where I hardly help). However, you say 'I am vaguely aware ...' .. the admin bit comes with the

203:

Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or have other users caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?

1535:– Given that this user could have just requested his adminship tools, but instead runs for adminship, this user shows that he is (still) trustworthy with the tools. 2305: 783:

MF removed an edit, with an edit-sumary of " Please stop taking the piss Peejay; "club" is singular. Period. Just look at the opening sentence of this article."

284:, what are they for, and which are the general policies and guidelines that they relate to. How should this functionality be used (also in conjunction with the 5341:

I think it is important for admins to maintain decorum as representatives of the site; I would not support a candidate who uses vulgar language in a dispute.

5550: 4639:

He has a tendency to ignore when his friends are being uncivil, only admonishing editors who oppose his and his friends views when they are being uncivil.

3019: 721: 5568: 2308: 821:; it'll be forgotten by tomorrow. I don't know the ins and outs of the situation, but I still think you're a good editor with plenty to offer Knowledge. 716: 5355:

Incivility is unacceptable in administrators. Wouldn't mind supporting after an extended period of editing in which no such concerns appear, though.

570: 472:

Would you see it as part of the admin role to issue orders, for example, banning a user from a page or topic? If so, what process would you employ?

141:

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Knowledge as an administrator. Please answer these questions to provide guidance for participants:

1931:- ownership and acceptance of errors is always good to see. Also a very experienced editor. Congrats and welcome back to adminship......oh dear... 1866:. A productive content editor, who I've always found to be calm & helpful. Will be even more of an asset to the project with the tools again. 529: 354: 4766:, pigheadedness is not a quality that I desire in an administrator, having an administrator with civility problems could pose a significant risk. 3549:

a good editor who has been a great asset to WP - and the fact that he has put himself up for Rfa again shows integrity, not "suspect judgement".

3023: 4021:

uncivil fails any reasonable test of credulity. I find Nev an admirable administrator, and commend him for re-submitting for community mandate.

3015: 4332: 2644: 2059: 1257:

Nev1 is a fantastic editor, and imo should never have resigned. Though I think he ought to have gone the painless way, so be it. Welcome back!

5444:

Withholding my support since RFAs by former admins in good standing who can request the bit back "just like that" are inherently disruptive.

3145: 3041: 2311: 659: 524: 88: 3859: 2662: 2612: 1138:

few silly opposes. Who is in charge? Why has it not been sorted before a few more silly people make silly comments. I used to think that

3103:

Passed first time and I see no reason to change the decision reached then. I agree with the sentiment expressed by user:Ironholds above.

4972: 4935: 3036: 2354: 2302: 429:

are egregious and unjustifiable. If I came across such comments as presented in the above diffs again I would not hesitate to block.

3178: 1609:

I don't see any concerns with this editor's previous handling of admin tools, so I don't see any reason to oppose giving them back.

1094:. He's clearly an editor who, when he loses an argument, stores things away ready for the day he can use them as "revenge". Well, 557: 4526:

It's about you, and me, and so much more. The great thing about this RFA is we both get to cast votes, and so does everyone else.

3449:

Doesn't concern me, as he/she was an administrator before. More importantly, this user realises and learns from his/her mistakes.

1493:. I see no reasons not to. And, for what it's worth, I commend you for choosing to run for adminship again to get the tools back! 5461: 4157: 3376: 3053:– per the opposes as Ironholds says above. One can but regret that the opposers have been exposed to such dreadful incivilities. 2331: 2286: 1894: 1681:

former administrator who passed the first time with flying colors (90/4/6); absolutely no reason to oppose handing back the mop--

711: 33: 17: 4990:

I was repremanded by him for trolling that User, but Gun Powder Ma has already had four blocks, for incivility and edit warring

4642:

I was repremanded by him for trolling that User, but Gun Powder Ma has already had four blocks, for incivility and edit warring

3221: 600: 4474:

This RFA is process for the sake of process, where none was necessary. The existence of this RFA indicates suspect judgment.

4394: 3984: 3328: 2821: 2776: 2132: 594: 4065:

Some of the below concerns me, but it seems they could be trusted and their very opening of this rfa says a lot about them.

3805:- calm, circumspect, his own man. Support on the condition that he does not neglect his editorial work on medieval castles! 1734:

Great editor, can't see any problems, checked deletion log from when was admin previously and those I checked looked fine.

316:

all of it (after all, some of the capabilities located in that namespace enable you to help keeping up our core policies)?

3455: 2299: 1418: 350: 122:

has been since I first passed an RfA it would not be honest to claim an extant mandate from two years ago. So have at it.

5297:

The attitude is no different to someone saying "I'm not interested". One person's version of civility is not universal.

92: 2844: 2534: 1378: 564: 5026: 609: 3579: 3265: 1885:

per his own nom. I don't think you needed another RfA; you're sensible enough to figure out the new stuff yourself :)

796:

Bjmullan wrote @ Nev1 "I see that you have a issue with Civility as well. Being nice costs nothing. Try it sometime."

4350:, in accusing me of "puerile heckling", then when called on it by Kww, rather than substantiate or withdraw, he said 2911:- a fantastic editor, might have some flaws, but we all do; all that matters is that the work is done and done well. 2807:

I'm a bit concerned about the civility issue, but you meet all my other criteria for stability and content work. --

1190:

He started an RFA. RFA's run 7 days. If he'd wanted a different process he could have chosen a different process.--

5409: 5381: 4518: 4492: 4305: 4218: 4196:

having experienced the "benefits" of the position before. But we are not above taking advantage of your masochism!

3216: 2433: 1768: 1553: 1012: 945: 626: 550: 84: 1095: 747: 3979: 3381: 1872: 1501: 652: 210:

users, I try to bear in mind that I was pretty clueless when I started and to help people get used to Knowledge.

5117:

My understanding is, if an admin voluntarily resigns, all s/he needs to do is request the tools back from them.

3899:. I have always been impressed by Nev1's wonderful content contributions, and so I support without reservation. 5326: 5302: 4585:

Cheerleaders? Hey, this isn't one of those RfAs from a 15 year old who has canvassed all his classmates! --

4424: 3854: 2728: 2666: 2658: 2616: 1722: 1454: 1414: 1401: 1312: 1181: 1147: 1103: 737: 285: 277: 180: 2947:

candidate has my admiration and respect as an editor. Will make an excellent admin, as demonstrated already.

1340:

per Aiken drum, with the caveat that I regard this RfA as unnecessary, and a testament to Nev1's good faith.

5048: 4967: 4922: 4114: 3810: 3677: 2891:- with my respect for putting yourself through an RFA to ensure you still have the community's confidence. 2877: 2840: 2723:

I've had one run-in with Nev1 on a piece. But overall I'm impressed with his presentation here. So support.

2578: 2530: 2411: 1944: 111: 3300:. I am yet to see any problems with any actions they took as an admin. That alone should speak for itself. 685: 5177:

If you don't know why Nev1 is here, please read his introductory statement; he explains it quite clearly.

5068: 4867: 4443: 4007: 3887: 3759:– Among other things, I checked some of his deletions from last year, and didn't see anything concerning. 3647: 3437: 2599: 2551: 2348: 2096: 1669: 5288: 1225: 706: 5530: 5480: 5405: 5378: 5248:

Love the badgering attempts, but if it's any consolation prize, John's oppose also pushed me to oppose.

4515: 4489: 4433:

I'd take Nev any day over a fake-polite politician who is only there to exploit others and ladder climb

4302: 4214: 3966: 3600: 3211: 3172: 3124: 2795: 1980: 1765: 1704: 1361: 1328: 1195: 1139: 1009: 942: 176: 114:

early on as an admin under the mistaken belief that the account was a sock puppet. Fortunately this was

5549:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the talk page of either

4998: 4654: 2422: 1623:

User stepped down in good standing previously, and edits since last RfA don't seem problematic at all.

2474:- No brainer. Maybe reelection is the system we need, more than recall or other bureaucratic methods. 701: 5458: 5346: 5142: 5105: 4800: 4771: 4723: 4706: 4696: 4679: 4152: 4097: 4001:. Also, I completely disagree that this RFA is disruptive since nobody is compelled to participate.-- 3927: 3371: 3271: 3104: 3091: 3073: 2952: 2861: 2479: 2392: 2283: 2237: 2092: 1964: 1899: 1867: 1589: 1496: 1297: 1265: 1164: 1142:

was sometimes a bit OTT. No longer. Get on with it whoever runs this process and re-appoint Nev1!--

645: 3997:. Was a good admin before and I'm sure will be again. I'm unconvinced by the opposes, basically per 5507: 5435: 5317: 5299: 5254: 5235: 5222: 5192: 5162: 5123: 5086: 4500:

So you enjoy process for the sake of process? I wouldn't have guessed that, but more power to you.

4420: 4201: 4022: 3907: 3871: 3849: 3846: 3695: 3615: 3554: 3482: 3420: 3305: 3240: 2969: 2757: 2724: 2611:

It's a sad day when dedicated volunteers are admonished for employing additional care and honesty.

2253: 2080: 2040:

since this RFA isn't really necessary. It's obvious the community wants Nev1 to regain the tools. ~

1915: 1719: 1717:- one of the most level-headed editors around here, and one of the few whose RFA I'd ever support. 1559: 1449: 1397: 1305: 1177: 1143: 1100: 498: 5535: 5515: 5485: 5465: 5448: 5439: 5413: 5398: 5384: 5367: 5350: 5333: 5306: 5292: 5256: 5239: 5224: 5206: 5181: 5164: 5149: 5125: 5112: 5088: 5071: 5052: 5038: 5020: 5002: 4994: 4978: 4947: 4926: 4899: 4874: 4850: 4826: 4804: 4789: 4775: 4754: 4727: 4713: 4700: 4683: 4658: 4650: 4628: 4607: 4594: 4580: 4551: 4535: 4521: 4509: 4495: 4483: 4450: 4428: 4414: 4399: 4382: 4363:

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User_talk:Malleus_Fatuorum&diff=prev&oldid=349474356

4358:

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User_talk:Malleus_Fatuorum&diff=prev&oldid=355400861

4340: 4308: 4292: 4278: 4253: 4239: 4222: 4205: 4187: 4175: 4162: 4136: 4118: 4101: 4084: 4057: 4045: 4029: 4012: 3989: 3970: 3953: 3931: 3914: 3891: 3874: 3865: 3837: 3814: 3797: 3785: 3767: 3751: 3739: 3721: 3699: 3681: 3667: 3651: 3632: 3619: 3602: 3585: 3558: 3541: 3522: 3503: 3486: 3469: 3441: 3424: 3400: 3386: 3358: 3350: 3332: 3309: 3292: 3275: 3244: 3223: 3198: 3187: 3149: 3128: 3111: 3095: 3078: 3062: 3045: 2993: 2973: 2956: 2939: 2921: 2903: 2883: 2865: 2848: 2826: 2799: 2782: 2748: 2740:

absolutely no reason not to. Don't get me wrong though, the link John posted was really not cool.

2732: 2705: 2688: 2670: 2652: 2620: 2606: 2582: 2555: 2538: 2521: 2500: 2483: 2466: 2439: 2415: 2399: 2377: 2360: 2314: 2290: 2274: 2257: 2241: 2224: 2216: 2191: 2169: 2154: 2137: 2121: 2100: 2084: 2067: 2032: 2024: 2001: 1984: 1970: 1948: 1923: 1906: 1877: 1858: 1840: 1823: 1802: 1785: 1771: 1759: 1743: 1726: 1709: 1690: 1673: 1656: 1639: 1615: 1604: 1596: 1575: 1527: 1503: 1485: 1473: 1460: 1439: 1422: 1405: 1388: 1365: 1349: 1332: 1319: 1284: 1272: 1229: 1214: 1199: 1185: 1171: 1151: 1107: 1057: 1015: 983: 948: 920: 897: 871: 852: 773: 502: 488: 452: 438: 131: 62: 5044: 4962: 4918: 4846: 4531: 4505: 4479: 4235: 4132: 4110: 4042: 3870:

Although I would suggest that Nev1 address the concerns expressed on the RfA, nobody's perfect. —

3806: 3735: 3499: 3345: 3322: 3288: 3165: 3141: 3032: 2990: 2935: 2871: 2817: 2766: 2657:

And unindented. I feel I've had quite enough experience at RfA to know when I'm allowed to vote (

2514: 2407: 2369: 1937: 1919: 1854: 1739: 1652: 622: 239: 4336: 4328: 4053:. Good contributor, lots of experience, see no reason to think candidate would abuse the tools. 2648: 2640: 2063: 2055: 1008:

Effectiveness and honesty aren't things that you know a great deal about though, are they John.

4810:

trying. Just because people are in a pissy mood does not mean they'll suddenly abuse the bits.

3947: 3793:- excellent content creation across a broad spectrum of articles, huge quantity of experience. 1413:. New RfA wasn't needed, but going for it shows the candidate's humility and strong ethics. -- 680: 5216:

isn't necessary, don't create more stress for yourself. Thanks for the reply & good luck.

5065: 4943: 4880:

suggest you change your mind, but you might want to modify your reasons for your decision. --

4859: 4624: 4590: 4435: 4184: 4171: 4070: 4002: 3883: 3643: 3519: 3463: 3433: 3207: 3195: 2919: 2694: 2591: 2547: 2337: 1997: 1932: 1798: 1686: 1665: 1601: 303: 58: 5280:. I'm amazed that so many people are in support, having seen the attitude issue demonstrated 3941: 5522: 5475: 5178: 5025:

No offence to Gun Powder Ma, but I don't consider him a friend as we don't know each other.

4934:

Civility issues per John and Richardcavell. Past precedent may show that admins are able to

4599:

Right, so we're now opposing for the fact that lots support Nev? How is that even relevant?

3962: 3832: 3663: 3624:

Very well said, really. I was considering those opposes a lot, but you're completely right.

3594: 3355: 3120: 3058: 2899: 2791: 2679:

rules, which are clear on this point: you need to be logged-in in order to !vote in an RfA.

2496: 2373: 2270: 2208: 2165: 2150: 1976: 1699: 1634: 1383: 1324: 1191: 5455: 5342: 5137: 5100: 5016: 4894: 4819: 4796: 4767: 4744: 4719: 4692: 4675: 4147: 4093: 3923: 3781: 3396: 3366: 3261: 3136:

An excellent contributor and I have no objections to this user to regain adminship again.

3087: 2948: 2857: 2684: 2475: 2461: 2385: 2280: 2233: 2114: 2029: 2009:- yeah, this renomination is probably unnecessary. Definitely should have the tools back. 1957: 1889: 1777: 1584: 1435: 1341: 1293: 1260: 1206: 1159: 493:

Not quite. I meant such things as telling an editor not to edit a certain page further.

400: 373: 4419:

Personally, I trust him implicitly. Look at the big picture rather than the odd blip. --

5500: 5431: 5395: 5358: 5284: 5249: 5231: 5217: 5202: 5187: 5157: 5118: 5081: 5034: 4785: 4601: 4575: 4546: 4410: 4378: 4286: 4274: 4197: 3901: 3794: 3760: 3717: 3691: 3673: 3611: 3550: 3478: 3410: 3301: 3237: 2965: 2699: 2249: 2181: 2076: 2017: 1547: 1467: 1221: 1053: 979: 916: 890: 865: 845: 835:

Note, if I have made errors in my reporting of this, please feel free to correct them.

544: 494: 484: 464: 448: 434: 377: 127: 78: 4368:

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User_talk:Nev1&diff=prev&oldid=349492589

1583:-- a user with the integrity to choose this route has my respect. Give 'em the tools. 281: 5562: 4842: 4527: 4501: 4475: 4391: 4249: 4231: 4128: 4038: 3748: 3731: 3495: 3340: 3318: 3284: 3137: 2983: 2931: 2809: 2676: 2129: 1850: 1836: 1735: 1648: 1611: 1482: 1156:

Well, it was Nev1's choice to go through with this. We should respect that decision.

404: 289: 5445: 4939: 4620: 4586: 4167: 3516: 3450: 3192: 3155: 2913: 1993: 1812: 1794: 1682: 762: 419: 332: 172: 54: 3206:

Looks good to me, and the language doesn't bother me, as I've seen admins use the

1914:

Given all the discussion about admin numbers falling, glad to see one returning.

816: 810: 803: 3823: 3659: 3537: 3054: 3010:

experience and foul-mouthed rants required to become an admin. Complaints about

2892: 2574: 2492: 2325: 2266: 2221: 2203: 2179:

I don't know why he wants to do it the hard way, but I see no reason to oppose.

2161: 2146: 1831:

Nev1 has already demonstrated his trustworthiness and suitability for the role.

1754: 1624: 1373: 4405:

always involving MF, who isn't standing), can we trust him to do a good job? --

4075: 358:

harming others are serious, and it would be best to err on the side of caution.

5012: 4882: 4813: 4143: 4054: 3777: 3625: 3570: 3392: 3254: 2741: 2680: 2449: 2108: 1512: 1431: 5543:

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

4649:

from him after he gets adminship, for me making this comment, but who cares.

3530:, per the above discussion, it's a no-brainer the mop should be handed back. 5283:. I also don't see the point in this RFA, in that it is wholly unnecessary. 5198: 5080:

If you want your tools, ask a crat (arbcom?); I don't know why you're here.

5030: 4781: 4763: 4740: 4570: 4541: 4406: 4374: 4270: 4230:, and glad to see this brought to the community, even though not required. 3713: 3232: 2693:

FWIW (if you haven't noticed on the talk page of the IP), the IP is used by

2010: 1539: 1281: 1049: 975: 912: 883: 838: 540: 480: 444: 430: 388: 190: 123: 74: 804:

Being nice costs nothing. Try it sometime. I hope you also have a nice day"

411:, would you plan to issue or threaten blocks in support of these policies? 742: 4646: 4314: 4245: 2790:

Net benefit, and responsible for suggesting this rfa in the first place.

2626: 2041: 1832: 1292:

Have seen nothing but positives from you, you should have never resigned.

880:

Yes, absolutely agree; and I only posted that 'coz this is a discussion.

4569:

per Town, and the fact you have too many "cheerleaders" on your team. --

779:

Novel concept, I know - but, re. the opposes... as I understand things;

4514:

This RfA isn't about me, and neither is it about your pet prejudices.

2832: 366:. What question did were you not asked that you would like to answer? 5553:

or the nominated user). No further edits should be made to this page.

4619:

Has civility issues, and defends/encourages his friends' incivility.

3531: 2569: 1845:

Tempted to oppose because this process is unnecessary, but going to

811:

it probably exacerbated things and I should have kept my mouth shut.

802:

The discussion continued on Nev1's talk - in which, wrt the comment

5093:

Thought about this and just disagree with the method, abstain !vote

3070:- of course. Has been a very great contributor and an active user. 625:. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review 292:)? What do you do when your edit is blocked by a blacklist entry? 2856:. Almost no issues at all. The RfA is hardly needed in this case. 637: 5027:

If you set out to provoke someone, don't be surprised if it works

3171:

not. Lacking evidence otherwise, this is an easy choice for me.

2601:

vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll

1849:

because it's a no-brainer that Nev1 should have the tools back.

799:

Nev replied, "Save your preaching for someone who gives a shit."

4313:

Agree. Admins aren't perfect. I've even seen them use "fuck". ~

641: 5011:? Would it be reasonable to ask you to remove one of them? -- 2513:

an admin right now that should get the tools more than him.--

1280:

Good candidate. I do not see any reason not to trust Nev1. --

4244:

Yeah, he's fine. No need to oppose over colorful language.

3776:

evidence that he has used them other than appropriately. --

3730:

per all of the above. An engaging and constructive editor.

4743:

above. Hot-headed editors need not apply for adminship.

3014:

foul-mouthed rant should, as always, go to my talk page.

1092:

John leaves puerile and useless threats when it suits him

29:

The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a

4067: 165:

What are your best contributions to Knowledge, and why?

148:

What administrative work do you intend to take part in?

5427: 5281: 5008: 4991: 4988: 4914: 4643: 4640: 4367: 4362: 4357: 4351: 4347: 4299: 4266: 3998: 3512: 3119:

Good contributor, learned from a mistake. No big deal.

1565: 1091: 1045: 792: 784: 588: 582: 576: 427: 425: 423: 300: 211: 185: 115: 108: 104: 100: 96: 1176:

I sure respect it. Isn't it about time for closure?--

2756:- Per the honest and respectable self-nom statement. 171:

I'm still proud of the work I've done as part of the

730: 694: 673: 5470:I don't think Spartaz is necessarily holding this 4213:if he was good enough then, he's good enough now. 4109:. No concerns whatsoever! Good luck with the mop! 2675:Re-indenting. Your feelings are irrelevant - read 5474:Nev1, hence the neutral !vote and not an oppose. 4488:As does, arguably, the existence of this oppose. 809:Most importantly, Nev1 explained and apologised; 443:Thank you. I have commented on the talk page. -- 5134:who deal with voluntarily-resigned admins. :-) 941:the worst behaviour that you've seen from him? 4265:Not happy (on several levels) with edits like 3235:with (once again) make a fine administrator. 823:People can't agree on everything all the time 653: 107:(admins only I'm afraid). I'm not perfect, I 8: 3672:Pleased to support Nev1 for adminsip again. 2893: 817:Sometimes things get heated, but in the end 788:Bjmullan complained to MF about the language 3515:. One mistake does not a bad admin make. -- 3948: 3882:An excellent record and a great attitude. 660: 646: 638: 53:Final (148/20/4); Closed as successful by 4183:Occasional incivility doesn't bother me. 3942: 974:, but about effectiveness and honesty. -- 806:Nev1 stated he thought it was sarcastic. 607:Edit summary usage for Nev1 can be found 3179: 2332:So let it be written. So let it be done. 621:Please keep discussion constructive and 5211:Honesty is always a good thing, but if 4936:get away with treating others like crap 4705:Care to provide any kind of rationale? 3231:without any reservations. I'm certain 3173: 2839:Deo Volente & Deo Juvente, Nev1. — 522: 407:? If successful in your reconfirmation 355:Knowledge:Responding to threats of harm 65:; Ended Tue, 17 Aug 2010 16:37:10 (UTC) 5097:Eh? It has nothing to do with arbcom. 3477:- Per above, great work on Knowledge. 1481:- Easy call, let's hand the mop back. 5426:editor, then so be it: Nice content, 3566:proven track record as a good admin. 2546:I think redemption is in order here. 399:. What is your opinion of our policy 387:Additional (optional) questions from 331:Additional (optional) questions from 7: 5372:On the contrary, incivility clearly 3003:my username being sexually offensive 819:we're here to build an encyclopaedia 5377:nothing else fits the known facts. 5130:Your understanding is flawed. It's 3252:- admins don't have to be perfect. 1975:Appreciate the "reconfirmation". -- 521: 409:(and it's looking good as I write!) 4540:Townlake, you have a fan. Haha. -- 3978:John's diff isn't too concerning. 2298:Do we even need to have an RfA? -- 463:Additional optional question from 24: 5569:Successful requests for adminship 3208:words you can't say on television 1793:- Of course - and welcome back.-- 91:and stood down from the tools in 5007:Do you really need to write the 3154: 3016:Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry 2831: 223:Question from Suomi Finland 2009 18:Knowledge:Requests for adminship 4749: 4746: 4301:A travesty but not a surprise. 4024: 3464: 3460: 3456: 3451: 3346: 3341: 2769: 2759: 2625:Indented !vote of IP address. ~ 2355: 2349: 2341: 2338: 1938: 1781: 1778: 1635: 1631: 1625: 1465:Echoing everything said above. 1210: 1207: 5064:due to incivility concerns. – 4762:per civility issues raised by 4739:per civility issues raised by 4269:. Sorry to spoil the party. -- 3845:. We need our admins back! -- 1965: 1958: 1585: 173:Greater Manchester Wikiproject 1: 5250: 5218: 5188: 5158: 5119: 5082: 4913:- I'm at a loss to reconcile 3538:(Formerly Known as FireSpike) 1591: 1300:) 11:45 am, Yesterday (UTC−5) 530:Requests for adminship/Nev1 2 353:failed to gain consensus and 351:Knowledge:Threats of violence 4321: 4318: 2633: 2630: 2145:already proven trustworthy. 2048: 2045: 2038:Strong support early closure 1355: 760:Edit stats posted to talk. - 5536:23:46, 16 August 2010 (UTC) 5516:18:29, 15 August 2010 (UTC) 5486:03:47, 12 August 2010 (UTC) 5466:22:17, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 5449:16:15, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 5440:14:51, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 5414:23:49, 16 August 2010 (UTC) 5399:21:34, 16 August 2010 (UTC) 5385:17:38, 16 August 2010 (UTC) 5368:08:23, 15 August 2010 (UTC) 5351:08:16, 15 August 2010 (UTC) 5334:22:10, 14 August 2010 (UTC) 5307:19:22, 15 August 2010 (UTC) 5293:20:41, 14 August 2010 (UTC) 5257:22:10, 14 August 2010 (UTC) 5240:19:36, 14 August 2010 (UTC) 5225:17:53, 14 August 2010 (UTC) 5207:17:41, 14 August 2010 (UTC) 5182:17:26, 14 August 2010 (UTC) 5165:17:03, 14 August 2010 (UTC) 5150:16:59, 14 August 2010 (UTC) 5126:16:46, 14 August 2010 (UTC) 5113:16:38, 14 August 2010 (UTC) 5089:16:33, 14 August 2010 (UTC) 5072:15:13, 14 August 2010 (UTC) 5053:00:53, 14 August 2010 (UTC) 5039:23:32, 13 August 2010 (UTC) 5021:22:59, 13 August 2010 (UTC) 5003:21:49, 13 August 2010 (UTC) 4979:02:17, 13 August 2010 (UTC) 4948:14:01, 12 August 2010 (UTC) 4927:08:43, 12 August 2010 (UTC) 4900:05:41, 12 August 2010 (UTC) 4875:03:52, 12 August 2010 (UTC) 4851:03:15, 12 August 2010 (UTC) 4827:20:36, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 4805:17:51, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 4790:17:45, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 4776:17:28, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 4755:16:50, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 4728:13:02, 13 August 2010 (UTC) 4714:00:25, 12 August 2010 (UTC) 4701:14:06, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 4684:13:38, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 4659:21:43, 13 August 2010 (UTC) 4629:09:38, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 4608:02:56, 12 August 2010 (UTC) 4595:10:46, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 4581:04:03, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 4552:02:23, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 4536:01:02, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 4522:00:58, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 4510:00:56, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 4496:00:51, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 4484:00:49, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 4451:03:52, 12 August 2010 (UTC) 4429:16:41, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 4415:15:14, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 4400:09:58, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 4383:02:46, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 4341:02:31, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 4309:00:42, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 4293:23:58, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 4279:22:34, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 4254:15:22, 17 August 2010 (UTC) 4240:14:24, 17 August 2010 (UTC) 4223:07:09, 17 August 2010 (UTC) 4206:04:54, 17 August 2010 (UTC) 4188:00:23, 17 August 2010 (UTC) 4176:22:40, 16 August 2010 (UTC) 4163:20:11, 16 August 2010 (UTC) 4137:14:56, 16 August 2010 (UTC) 4119:14:36, 16 August 2010 (UTC) 4102:05:06, 16 August 2010 (UTC) 4085:04:50, 16 August 2010 (UTC) 4058:02:29, 16 August 2010 (UTC) 4046:21:53, 15 August 2010 (UTC) 4030:14:42, 15 August 2010 (UTC) 4013:09:30, 15 August 2010 (UTC) 3990:02:54, 15 August 2010 (UTC) 3971:02:41, 15 August 2010 (UTC) 3961:and keep that shit coming. 3954:22:34, 14 August 2010 (UTC) 3932:17:23, 14 August 2010 (UTC) 3915:17:16, 14 August 2010 (UTC) 3892:16:29, 14 August 2010 (UTC) 3875:08:34, 14 August 2010 (UTC) 3866:05:19, 14 August 2010 (UTC) 3838:00:50, 14 August 2010 (UTC) 3815:00:46, 14 August 2010 (UTC) 3798:22:49, 13 August 2010 (UTC) 3786:20:40, 13 August 2010 (UTC) 3768:19:34, 13 August 2010 (UTC) 3752:19:24, 13 August 2010 (UTC) 3740:18:56, 13 August 2010 (UTC) 3722:18:22, 13 August 2010 (UTC) 3700:17:55, 13 August 2010 (UTC) 3682:17:03, 13 August 2010 (UTC) 3668:11:56, 13 August 2010 (UTC) 3652:11:34, 13 August 2010 (UTC) 3633:11:03, 13 August 2010 (UTC) 3620:05:31, 13 August 2010 (UTC) 3603:03:08, 13 August 2010 (UTC) 3586:23:54, 12 August 2010 (UTC) 3559:23:37, 12 August 2010 (UTC) 3542:22:57, 12 August 2010 (UTC) 3523:21:23, 12 August 2010 (UTC) 3504:20:40, 12 August 2010 (UTC) 3494:- looks good for a return. 3487:13:21, 13 August 2010 (UTC) 3470:15:43, 12 August 2010 (UTC) 3442:15:20, 12 August 2010 (UTC) 3425:15:16, 12 August 2010 (UTC) 3401:14:59, 12 August 2010 (UTC) 3387:13:09, 12 August 2010 (UTC) 3359:13:04, 12 August 2010 (UTC) 3351:12:58, 12 August 2010 (UTC) 3333:12:27, 12 August 2010 (UTC) 3310:12:06, 12 August 2010 (UTC) 3293:09:50, 12 August 2010 (UTC) 3276:06:53, 12 August 2010 (UTC) 3245:03:33, 12 August 2010 (UTC) 3224:03:23, 12 August 2010 (UTC) 3199:03:10, 12 August 2010 (UTC) 3188:01:36, 12 August 2010 (UTC) 3150:01:33, 12 August 2010 (UTC) 3129:00:50, 12 August 2010 (UTC) 3112:00:45, 12 August 2010 (UTC) 3096:18:38, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 3079:18:34, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 3063:17:38, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 3046:16:52, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 3024:16:25, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 2994:15:28, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 2974:14:55, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 2957:14:03, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 2940:13:47, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 2922:12:31, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 2904:11:47, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 2884:11:42, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 2866:11:25, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 2849:07:51, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 2827:05:47, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 2800:05:39, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 2783:04:53, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 2749:03:13, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 2733:01:55, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 2706:03:25, 12 August 2010 (UTC) 2689:03:41, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 2671:02:46, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 2653:02:32, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 2621:01:51, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 2607:00:41, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 2583:00:34, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 2556:00:30, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 2539:00:26, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 2522:00:21, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 2501:00:10, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 2484:00:09, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 2467:00:02, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 2440:23:55, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 2416:23:39, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 2400:23:12, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 2378:22:50, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 2361:22:36, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 2315:21:33, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 2291:21:23, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 2275:21:14, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 2258:21:12, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 2242:21:02, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 2225:21:00, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 2217:20:55, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 2192:20:47, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 2170:22:59, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 2155:20:43, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 2138:20:42, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 2122:20:24, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 2101:20:19, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 2085:20:12, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 2068:19:59, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 2033:19:42, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 2025:19:36, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 2002:19:35, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 1985:19:34, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 1971:19:30, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 1949:19:16, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 1924:19:15, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 1907:19:06, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 1878:18:50, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 1859:18:41, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 1841:18:40, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 1824:18:39, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 1803:18:38, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 1786:18:34, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 1772:18:29, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 1760:18:24, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 1744:18:22, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 1727:18:17, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 1710:18:10, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 1691:18:09, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 1674:18:03, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 1657:17:48, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 1640:17:47, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 1616:17:43, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 1605:17:37, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 1597:17:24, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 1576:17:22, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 1528:17:18, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 1504:17:17, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 1486:17:13, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 1474:17:11, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 1461:17:09, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 1440:17:06, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 1423:17:04, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 1406:17:00, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 1389:16:56, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 1366:16:55, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 1350:16:47, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 1333:16:46, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 1320:16:46, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 1285:16:43, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 1273:16:40, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 1230:21:01, 14 August 2010 (UTC) 1215:19:55, 12 August 2010 (UTC) 1200:19:53, 12 August 2010 (UTC) 1186:19:50, 12 August 2010 (UTC) 1172:19:32, 12 August 2010 (UTC) 1152:19:30, 12 August 2010 (UTC) 1108:08:11, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 1058:03:59, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 1016:03:26, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 984:03:17, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 949:03:11, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 921:03:06, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 898:02:20, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 872:01:57, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 853:01:41, 11 August 2010 (UTC) 774:18:39, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 525:Requests for adminship/Nev1 503:09:05, 15 August 2010 (UTC) 489:19:53, 14 August 2010 (UTC) 453:19:16, 15 August 2010 (UTC) 439:19:36, 14 August 2010 (UTC) 320:those you don't understand. 137:Questions for the candidate 132:16:30, 10 August 2010 (UTC) 63:16:38, 17 August 2010 (UTC) 5585: 4674:- I agree with the above. 5532:Penny for your thoughts? 4955:per John. Administrators 4718:It's clear from below. -- 1096:two can play at that game 372:: As John's asking about 5546:Please do not modify it. 5428:shame about the language 1943: 286:MediaWiki:Spam-whitelist 1753:- No reason to oppose. 38:Please do not modify it 3999:Fainites' comment here 3642:per all of the above. 2265:per all of the above. 2199:per NerdyScienceDude. 1130:Comment on the process 791:Nev1 wrote "Bullshit." 269:Question from Beetstra 5404:What Lankiveil said. 4857:Lots of FAs actually 2232:About bloody time :) 815:Nev1 also wrote that 177:Maiden Castle, Dorset 34:request for adminship 3980:Deacon of Pndapetzim 3939:- no problems here. 3822:, this one is fine. 2105:Obviously, as well. 1647:Trustworthy editor. 743:Global contributions 278:Local spam blacklist 1791:Very Strong Support 1415:Boing! said Zebedee 1394:Very Strong Support 707:Non-automated edits 627:their contributions 520:RfAs for this user: 282:Meta spam blacklist 5009:same comment twice 3678:Bellatrix Kerrigan 3403:Please do not spam 3031:No problems here. 2841:Mikhailov Kusserow 2531:Suomi Finland 2009 1757: 1090:Just for balance, 827:(my bold emphasis) 686:Edit summary usage 629:before commenting. 112:Endrick Shellycoat 39: 5366: 5094: 4825: 4397: 3987: 3766: 3540: 3502: 3274: 3186: 3169: 3044: 2778: 2773: 2695:User:Juliancolton 2581: 2135: 2120: 1876: 1819: 1755: 1638: 1572: 896: 851: 769: 756: 755: 410: 37: 5576: 5548: 5533: 5527: 5514: 5510: 5506: 5503: 5483: 5478: 5406:Timotheus Canens 5365: 5363: 5356: 5331: 5323: 5320: 5305: 5252: 5220: 5190: 5160: 5147: 5145: 5140: 5121: 5110: 5108: 5103: 5092: 5084: 4975: 4970: 4965: 4897: 4891: 4888: 4885: 4870: 4862: 4824: 4822: 4811: 4752: 4751: 4748: 4711: 4604: 4578: 4573: 4549: 4544: 4446: 4438: 4395: 4324: 4323: 4320: 4289: 4160: 4155: 4150: 4081: 4078: 4073: 4027: 4026: 4010: 4005: 3983: 3950: 3949:Spare your time? 3944: 3912: 3904: 3862: 3857: 3852: 3830: 3765: 3763: 3630: 3597: 3582: 3573: 3536: 3498: 3466: 3461: 3458: 3453: 3417: 3384: 3379: 3374: 3369: 3348: 3343: 3281:Definite Support 3270: 3268: 3257: 3184: 3181: 3175: 3163: 3158: 3109: 3040: 2992: 2986: 2916: 2901: 2897: 2880: 2874: 2835: 2812: 2777: 2771: 2767: 2761: 2746: 2702: 2636: 2635: 2632: 2602: 2594: 2573: 2519: 2464: 2458: 2455: 2452: 2436: 2430: 2426: 2396: 2389: 2357: 2351: 2343: 2340: 2267:Kevin Rutherford 2214: 2211: 2206: 2188: 2186: 2133: 2119: 2117: 2106: 2051: 2050: 2047: 2015: 1968: 1962: 1947: 1942: 1940: 1904: 1902: 1897: 1892: 1870: 1820: 1817: 1783: 1780: 1725: 1707: 1702: 1636: 1633: 1632: 1629: 1593: 1587: 1574: 1571: 1568: 1562: 1556: 1550: 1544: 1542: 1525: 1500: 1470: 1459: 1457: 1386: 1381: 1376: 1359: 1315: 1270: 1268: 1263: 1212: 1209: 1169: 1167: 1162: 1140:Malleus Fatuorum 1132: 1131: 1106: 895: 893: 887: 881: 868: 850: 848: 842: 836: 826: 812: 805: 770: 767: 702:Articles created 662: 655: 648: 639: 612: 604: 563: 538:Links for Nev1: 516:General comments 408: 5584: 5583: 5579: 5578: 5577: 5575: 5574: 5573: 5559: 5558: 5557: 5551:this nomination 5544: 5531: 5523: 5512: 5508: 5501: 5498: 5481: 5476: 5422: 5359: 5357: 5327: 5321: 5318: 5298: 5197:contributions. 5143: 5138: 5136: 5106: 5101: 5099: 4973: 4968: 4963: 4895: 4889: 4886: 4883: 4868: 4860: 4820: 4812: 4745: 4707: 4602: 4576: 4571: 4547: 4542: 4444: 4436: 4316: 4287: 4262: 4158: 4153: 4148: 4124:Strong Support' 4079: 4076: 4071: 4023: 4008: 4003: 3908: 3902: 3860: 3855: 3850: 3824: 3761: 3708:this candidate 3626: 3595: 3584: 3580: 3571: 3423: 3411: 3382: 3377: 3372: 3367: 3266: 3255: 3183: 3105: 3074:DARTH SIDIOUS 2 3039: 3005:. And that's a 2984: 2981: 2914: 2900: 2878: 2872: 2810: 2781: 2772: 2742: 2700: 2628: 2600: 2592: 2515: 2462: 2456: 2453: 2450: 2434: 2428: 2424: 2394: 2387: 2209: 2204: 2201: 2184: 2182: 2115: 2107: 2043: 2021: 2011: 1936: 1900: 1895: 1890: 1887: 1868:Espresso Addict 1816: 1813: 1718: 1705: 1700: 1566: 1560: 1554: 1548: 1545: 1540: 1536: 1513: 1494: 1468: 1455: 1448: 1384: 1379: 1374: 1313: 1266: 1261: 1259: 1251: 1165: 1160: 1158: 1129: 1128: 1099: 891: 885: 882: 866: 846: 840: 837: 766: 763: 757: 752: 726: 690: 669: 668:RfA/RfB toolbox 666: 636: 608: 556: 539: 535: 518: 139: 116:quickly righted 109:wrongly blocked 72: 50: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 5582: 5580: 5572: 5571: 5561: 5560: 5556: 5555: 5539: 5538: 5518: 5492: 5491: 5490: 5489: 5488: 5442: 5421: 5418: 5417: 5416: 5402: 5389: 5388: 5387: 5353: 5336: 5311: 5310: 5309: 5275: 5274: 5273: 5272: 5271: 5270: 5269: 5268: 5267: 5266: 5265: 5264: 5263: 5262: 5261: 5260: 5259: 5175: 5174: 5173: 5172: 5171: 5170: 5169: 5168: 5167: 5095: 5059: 5058: 5057: 5056: 5055: 5023: 4981: 4950: 4929: 4919:Richard Cavell 4908: 4907: 4906: 4905: 4904: 4903: 4902: 4869:new photo poll 4838:Strong Oppose: 4835: 4834: 4833: 4832: 4831: 4830: 4829: 4757: 4734: 4733: 4732: 4731: 4730: 4686: 4669: 4668: 4667: 4666: 4665: 4664: 4663: 4662: 4661: 4614: 4613: 4612: 4611: 4610: 4564: 4563: 4562: 4561: 4560: 4559: 4558: 4557: 4556: 4555: 4554: 4469: 4468: 4467: 4466: 4465: 4464: 4463: 4462: 4461: 4460: 4459: 4458: 4457: 4456: 4455: 4454: 4453: 4445:new photo poll 4421:Peter I. Vardy 4370: 4365: 4360: 4355: 4295: 4261: 4258: 4257: 4256: 4242: 4225: 4208: 4190: 4178: 4165: 4139: 4121: 4107:Strong Support 4104: 4087: 4060: 4048: 4032: 4015: 3992: 3973: 3956: 3934: 3917: 3897:Strong Support 3894: 3880:Strong support 3877: 3868: 3840: 3817: 3800: 3788: 3770: 3754: 3742: 3724: 3702: 3687:Strong Support 3684: 3670: 3654: 3637: 3636: 3635: 3605: 3588: 3578: 3561: 3547:Strong support 3544: 3525: 3511:, largely per 3506: 3489: 3472: 3444: 3427: 3419: 3404: 3389: 3361: 3353: 3335: 3312: 3295: 3278: 3247: 3226: 3201: 3190: 3177: 3152: 3131: 3114: 3098: 3081: 3065: 3048: 3035: 3026: 2996: 2976: 2962:Strong support 2959: 2942: 2924: 2906: 2886: 2868: 2851: 2829: 2802: 2785: 2768: 2764: 2751: 2735: 2725:MarmadukePercy 2718: 2717: 2716: 2715: 2714: 2713: 2712: 2711: 2710: 2709: 2708: 2663:69.121.245.182 2613:69.121.245.182 2588:Strong support 2585: 2558: 2541: 2524: 2503: 2486: 2469: 2442: 2418: 2402: 2380: 2363: 2324:(puts on best 2317: 2293: 2277: 2260: 2244: 2227: 2219: 2194: 2174: 2173: 2172: 2143:Strong support 2140: 2124: 2103: 2087: 2070: 2035: 2027: 2019: 2004: 1987: 1973: 1951: 1926: 1909: 1880: 1861: 1843: 1826: 1814: 1805: 1788: 1774: 1762: 1748: 1747: 1746: 1712: 1698:- looks good. 1693: 1676: 1659: 1642: 1621:Strong support 1618: 1607: 1599: 1578: 1533:Strong support 1530: 1506: 1488: 1476: 1463: 1445:Strong support 1442: 1425: 1411:Strong support 1408: 1398:Peter I. Vardy 1391: 1368: 1352: 1335: 1322: 1303: 1302: 1301: 1290:Strong Support 1275: 1255:Strong support 1250: 1247: 1245: 1243: 1242: 1241: 1240: 1239: 1238: 1237: 1236: 1235: 1234: 1233: 1232: 1178:Peter I. Vardy 1144:Peter I. Vardy 1134: 1133: 1125: 1124: 1123: 1122: 1121: 1120: 1119: 1118: 1117: 1116: 1115: 1114: 1113: 1112: 1111: 1110: 1073: 1072: 1071: 1070: 1069: 1068: 1067: 1066: 1065: 1064: 1063: 1062: 1061: 1060: 1029: 1028: 1027: 1026: 1025: 1024: 1023: 1022: 1021: 1020: 1019: 1018: 995: 994: 993: 992: 991: 990: 989: 988: 987: 986: 958: 957: 956: 955: 954: 953: 952: 951: 928: 927: 926: 925: 924: 923: 903: 902: 901: 900: 875: 874: 829: 828: 813: 807: 800: 797: 794: 789: 786: 777: 776: 764: 754: 753: 751: 750: 745: 740: 734: 732: 728: 727: 725: 724: 719: 714: 709: 704: 698: 696: 692: 691: 689: 688: 683: 677: 675: 671: 670: 667: 665: 664: 657: 650: 642: 635: 632: 618: 617: 616: 614: 605: 534: 533: 532: 527: 519: 517: 514: 512: 510: 509: 508: 507: 506: 505: 467: 460: 459: 458: 457: 456: 455: 384: 383: 382: 381: 361: 360: 359: 328: 327: 326: 325: 324: 323: 322: 321: 271: 265: 264: 263: 262: 247: 246: 245: 244: 225: 219: 218: 217: 216: 197: 196: 195: 194: 159: 158: 157: 156: 138: 135: 71: 68: 49: 44: 43: 42: 25: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 5581: 5570: 5567: 5566: 5564: 5554: 5552: 5547: 5541: 5540: 5537: 5534: 5528: 5526: 5519: 5517: 5511: 5504: 5496: 5493: 5487: 5484: 5479: 5473: 5469: 5468: 5467: 5463: 5460: 5457: 5452: 5451: 5450: 5447: 5443: 5441: 5437: 5433: 5429: 5424: 5423: 5419: 5415: 5411: 5407: 5403: 5400: 5397: 5393: 5390: 5386: 5383: 5380: 5375: 5371: 5370: 5369: 5364: 5362: 5354: 5352: 5348: 5344: 5340: 5337: 5335: 5332: 5330: 5324: 5315: 5312: 5308: 5304: 5301: 5296: 5295: 5294: 5290: 5286: 5282: 5279: 5276: 5258: 5255: 5253: 5247: 5246: 5245: 5244: 5243: 5242: 5241: 5237: 5233: 5228: 5227: 5226: 5223: 5221: 5214: 5210: 5209: 5208: 5204: 5200: 5195: 5194: 5193: 5191: 5185: 5184: 5183: 5180: 5176: 5166: 5163: 5161: 5155: 5154: 5153: 5152: 5151: 5148: 5146: 5141: 5133: 5129: 5128: 5127: 5124: 5122: 5116: 5115: 5114: 5111: 5109: 5104: 5096: 5091: 5090: 5087: 5085: 5079: 5075: 5074: 5073: 5070: 5067: 5063: 5060: 5054: 5050: 5046: 5045:Gun Powder Ma 5042: 5041: 5040: 5036: 5032: 5028: 5024: 5022: 5018: 5014: 5010: 5006: 5005: 5004: 5000: 4996: 4992: 4989: 4985: 4982: 4980: 4977: 4976: 4971: 4966: 4958: 4954: 4951: 4949: 4945: 4941: 4937: 4933: 4930: 4928: 4924: 4920: 4916: 4912: 4909: 4901: 4898: 4893: 4892: 4878: 4877: 4876: 4872: 4871: 4864: 4863: 4856: 4855: 4854: 4853: 4852: 4848: 4844: 4839: 4836: 4828: 4823: 4817: 4816: 4808: 4807: 4806: 4802: 4798: 4793: 4792: 4791: 4787: 4783: 4779: 4778: 4777: 4773: 4769: 4765: 4761: 4758: 4756: 4753: 4742: 4738: 4735: 4729: 4725: 4721: 4717: 4716: 4715: 4712: 4710: 4704: 4703: 4702: 4698: 4694: 4690: 4687: 4685: 4681: 4677: 4673: 4670: 4660: 4656: 4652: 4648: 4644: 4641: 4638: 4637: 4636: 4635: 4634: 4633: 4632: 4631: 4630: 4626: 4622: 4618: 4615: 4609: 4606: 4605: 4598: 4597: 4596: 4592: 4588: 4584: 4583: 4582: 4579: 4574: 4568: 4565: 4553: 4550: 4545: 4539: 4538: 4537: 4533: 4529: 4525: 4524: 4523: 4520: 4517: 4513: 4512: 4511: 4507: 4503: 4499: 4498: 4497: 4494: 4491: 4487: 4486: 4485: 4481: 4477: 4473: 4470: 4452: 4448: 4447: 4440: 4439: 4432: 4431: 4430: 4426: 4422: 4418: 4417: 4416: 4412: 4408: 4403: 4402: 4401: 4398: 4393: 4388: 4387: 4386: 4385: 4384: 4380: 4376: 4371: 4369: 4366: 4364: 4361: 4359: 4356: 4353: 4349: 4344: 4343: 4342: 4338: 4334: 4330: 4326: 4325: 4312: 4311: 4310: 4307: 4304: 4300: 4296: 4294: 4291: 4290: 4282: 4281: 4280: 4276: 4272: 4268: 4264: 4263: 4259: 4255: 4251: 4247: 4243: 4241: 4237: 4233: 4229: 4226: 4224: 4220: 4216: 4212: 4209: 4207: 4203: 4199: 4194: 4191: 4189: 4186: 4182: 4179: 4177: 4173: 4169: 4166: 4164: 4161: 4156: 4151: 4145: 4140: 4138: 4134: 4130: 4125: 4122: 4120: 4116: 4112: 4111:Laurinavicius 4108: 4105: 4103: 4099: 4095: 4091: 4088: 4086: 4083: 4082: 4074: 4069: 4064: 4061: 4059: 4056: 4052: 4049: 4047: 4044: 4040: 4036: 4033: 4031: 4028: 4020: 4016: 4014: 4011: 4006: 4000: 3996: 3993: 3991: 3986: 3981: 3977: 3974: 3972: 3968: 3964: 3960: 3957: 3955: 3952: 3951: 3945: 3938: 3935: 3933: 3929: 3925: 3921: 3918: 3916: 3913: 3911: 3906: 3905: 3898: 3895: 3893: 3889: 3885: 3881: 3878: 3876: 3873: 3869: 3867: 3863: 3858: 3853: 3848: 3844: 3841: 3839: 3836: 3835: 3831: 3829: 3828: 3821: 3818: 3816: 3812: 3808: 3807:Gun Powder Ma 3804: 3801: 3799: 3796: 3792: 3789: 3787: 3783: 3779: 3774: 3771: 3769: 3764: 3758: 3755: 3753: 3750: 3749:Dirk Beetstra 3746: 3743: 3741: 3737: 3733: 3729: 3725: 3723: 3719: 3715: 3711: 3707: 3703: 3701: 3697: 3693: 3688: 3685: 3683: 3679: 3675: 3671: 3669: 3665: 3661: 3658: 3655: 3653: 3649: 3645: 3641: 3638: 3634: 3631: 3629: 3623: 3622: 3621: 3617: 3613: 3609: 3606: 3604: 3601: 3598: 3592: 3589: 3587: 3583: 3581:Contributions 3576: 3575: 3574: 3565: 3562: 3560: 3556: 3552: 3548: 3545: 3543: 3539: 3535: 3534: 3529: 3526: 3524: 3521: 3518: 3514: 3510: 3507: 3505: 3501: 3497: 3493: 3490: 3488: 3484: 3480: 3476: 3473: 3471: 3467: 3459: 3454: 3448: 3445: 3443: 3439: 3435: 3431: 3428: 3426: 3422: 3418: 3416: 3415: 3408: 3405: 3402: 3398: 3394: 3390: 3388: 3385: 3380: 3375: 3370: 3365: 3362: 3360: 3357: 3354: 3352: 3349: 3344: 3339: 3336: 3334: 3330: 3327: 3324: 3320: 3316: 3313: 3311: 3307: 3303: 3299: 3296: 3294: 3290: 3286: 3282: 3279: 3277: 3273: 3269: 3264: 3263: 3259: 3258: 3251: 3248: 3246: 3243: 3242: 3239: 3234: 3230: 3227: 3225: 3222: 3220: 3219: 3215: 3214: 3209: 3205: 3202: 3200: 3197: 3194: 3191: 3189: 3182: 3176: 3167: 3166:edit conflict 3161: 3157: 3153: 3151: 3147: 3146:contributions 3143: 3139: 3135: 3132: 3130: 3126: 3122: 3118: 3115: 3113: 3110: 3108: 3102: 3099: 3097: 3093: 3089: 3085: 3082: 3080: 3077: 3076: 3075: 3069: 3066: 3064: 3060: 3056: 3052: 3049: 3047: 3043: 3042:editor review 3038: 3034: 3033:Access Denied 3030: 3027: 3025: 3021: 3017: 3013: 3008: 3004: 3000: 2997: 2995: 2991: 2988: 2987: 2980: 2977: 2975: 2971: 2967: 2963: 2960: 2958: 2954: 2950: 2946: 2943: 2941: 2937: 2933: 2928: 2925: 2923: 2920: 2918: 2917: 2910: 2907: 2905: 2902: 2898: 2896: 2890: 2887: 2885: 2882: 2881: 2875: 2869: 2867: 2863: 2859: 2855: 2852: 2850: 2846: 2842: 2838: 2834: 2830: 2828: 2825: 2823: 2819: 2814: 2813: 2806: 2803: 2801: 2797: 2793: 2789: 2786: 2784: 2779: 2774: 2763: 2762: 2755: 2752: 2750: 2747: 2745: 2739: 2736: 2734: 2730: 2726: 2722: 2719: 2707: 2704: 2703: 2696: 2692: 2691: 2690: 2686: 2682: 2678: 2674: 2673: 2672: 2668: 2664: 2660: 2656: 2655: 2654: 2650: 2646: 2642: 2638: 2637: 2624: 2623: 2622: 2618: 2614: 2610: 2609: 2608: 2604: 2603: 2596: 2595: 2589: 2586: 2584: 2580: 2576: 2572: 2571: 2566: 2562: 2559: 2557: 2553: 2549: 2545: 2542: 2540: 2536: 2532: 2528: 2525: 2523: 2520: 2518: 2517:White Shadows 2512: 2507: 2504: 2502: 2498: 2494: 2490: 2487: 2485: 2481: 2477: 2473: 2470: 2468: 2465: 2460: 2459: 2446: 2443: 2441: 2437: 2431: 2427: 2419: 2417: 2413: 2409: 2408:Truthkeeper88 2406: 2403: 2401: 2398: 2397: 2391: 2390: 2384: 2381: 2379: 2375: 2371: 2367: 2364: 2362: 2358: 2352: 2346: 2345: 2344: 2333: 2329: 2327: 2321: 2318: 2316: 2313: 2310: 2307: 2304: 2301: 2297: 2294: 2292: 2288: 2285: 2282: 2278: 2276: 2272: 2268: 2264: 2261: 2259: 2255: 2251: 2248: 2245: 2243: 2239: 2235: 2231: 2228: 2226: 2223: 2220: 2218: 2215: 2212: 2207: 2198: 2195: 2193: 2190: 2189: 2178: 2175: 2171: 2167: 2163: 2158: 2157: 2156: 2152: 2148: 2144: 2141: 2139: 2136: 2131: 2128: 2125: 2123: 2118: 2112: 2111: 2104: 2102: 2098: 2094: 2091: 2088: 2086: 2082: 2078: 2074: 2071: 2069: 2065: 2061: 2057: 2053: 2052: 2039: 2036: 2034: 2031: 2028: 2026: 2023: 2022: 2016: 2014: 2008: 2005: 2003: 1999: 1995: 1991: 1988: 1986: 1982: 1978: 1974: 1972: 1969: 1967: 1963: 1961: 1955: 1952: 1950: 1946: 1941: 1939:Paralympiakos 1934: 1930: 1927: 1925: 1921: 1917: 1913: 1910: 1908: 1905: 1903: 1898: 1893: 1884: 1881: 1879: 1874: 1869: 1865: 1862: 1860: 1856: 1852: 1848: 1844: 1842: 1838: 1834: 1830: 1827: 1825: 1822: 1821: 1810:. Why not? - 1809: 1806: 1804: 1800: 1796: 1792: 1789: 1787: 1784: 1775: 1773: 1770: 1767: 1763: 1761: 1758: 1752: 1749: 1745: 1741: 1737: 1733: 1730: 1729: 1728: 1724: 1721: 1716: 1713: 1711: 1708: 1703: 1697: 1694: 1692: 1688: 1684: 1680: 1677: 1675: 1671: 1667: 1663: 1660: 1658: 1654: 1650: 1646: 1643: 1641: 1637: 1630: 1628: 1622: 1619: 1617: 1614: 1613: 1608: 1606: 1603: 1600: 1598: 1595: 1594: 1588: 1582: 1579: 1577: 1573: 1569: 1563: 1557: 1551: 1543: 1534: 1531: 1529: 1526: 1524: 1520: 1516: 1510: 1507: 1505: 1502: 1499: 1498: 1492: 1489: 1487: 1484: 1480: 1477: 1475: 1472: 1471: 1464: 1462: 1458: 1453: 1452: 1446: 1443: 1441: 1437: 1433: 1429: 1426: 1424: 1420: 1416: 1412: 1409: 1407: 1403: 1399: 1395: 1392: 1390: 1387: 1382: 1377: 1372: 1369: 1367: 1363: 1358: 1353: 1351: 1348: 1347: 1344: 1339: 1336: 1334: 1330: 1326: 1323: 1321: 1318: 1316: 1309: 1308: 1304: 1299: 1295: 1291: 1288: 1287: 1286: 1283: 1279: 1276: 1274: 1271: 1269: 1264: 1256: 1253: 1252: 1248: 1246: 1231: 1227: 1223: 1218: 1217: 1216: 1213: 1203: 1202: 1201: 1197: 1193: 1189: 1188: 1187: 1183: 1179: 1175: 1174: 1173: 1170: 1168: 1163: 1155: 1154: 1153: 1149: 1145: 1141: 1136: 1135: 1127: 1126: 1109: 1105: 1102: 1097: 1093: 1089: 1088: 1087: 1086: 1085: 1084: 1083: 1082: 1081: 1080: 1079: 1078: 1077: 1076: 1075: 1074: 1059: 1055: 1051: 1047: 1046:said yourself 1043: 1042: 1041: 1040: 1039: 1038: 1037: 1036: 1035: 1034: 1033: 1032: 1031: 1030: 1017: 1014: 1011: 1007: 1006: 1005: 1004: 1003: 1002: 1001: 1000: 999: 998: 997: 996: 985: 981: 977: 973: 968: 967: 966: 965: 964: 963: 962: 961: 960: 959: 950: 947: 944: 940: 936: 935: 934: 933: 932: 931: 930: 929: 922: 918: 914: 909: 908: 907: 906: 905: 904: 899: 894: 889: 888: 879: 878: 877: 876: 873: 870: 869: 861: 858:Again, we're 857: 856: 855: 854: 849: 844: 843: 833: 824: 820: 814: 808: 801: 798: 795: 793: 790: 787: 785: 782: 781: 780: 775: 772: 771: 759: 758: 749: 746: 744: 741: 739: 736: 735: 733: 729: 723: 720: 718: 715: 713: 710: 708: 705: 703: 700: 699: 697: 693: 687: 684: 682: 679: 678: 676: 672: 663: 658: 656: 651: 649: 644: 643: 640: 633: 631: 630: 628: 624: 615: 611: 606: 602: 599: 596: 593: 590: 587: 584: 581: 578: 575: 572: 569: 566: 562: 559: 555: 552: 549: 546: 542: 537: 536: 531: 528: 526: 523: 515: 513: 504: 500: 496: 492: 491: 490: 486: 482: 477: 474: 473: 471: 468: 466: 462: 461: 454: 450: 446: 442: 441: 440: 436: 432: 428: 426: 424: 421: 416: 413: 412: 406: 402: 398: 395: 394: 393: 392: 390: 379: 375: 371: 368: 367: 365: 362: 356: 352: 348: 345: 344: 342: 339: 338: 337: 336: 334: 318: 317: 314: 309: 308: 305: 302: 297: 294: 293: 291: 287: 283: 279: 276:What are the 275: 272: 270: 267: 266: 259: 256: 255: 252: 249: 248: 241: 236: 233: 232: 229: 226: 224: 221: 220: 213: 208: 205: 204: 202: 199: 198: 192: 187: 182: 178: 174: 170: 167: 166: 164: 161: 160: 153: 150: 149: 147: 144: 143: 142: 136: 134: 133: 129: 125: 119: 117: 113: 110: 106: 102: 98: 94: 90: 86: 83: 80: 76: 69: 67: 66: 64: 60: 56: 48: 45: 41: 35: 32: 27: 26: 19: 5545: 5542: 5524: 5494: 5471: 5391: 5373: 5360: 5338: 5328: 5313: 5277: 5212: 5135: 5131: 5098: 5077: 5076: 5061: 4983: 4961: 4956: 4952: 4931: 4910: 4881: 4866: 4861:YellowMonkey 4858: 4837: 4814: 4759: 4736: 4708: 4688: 4671: 4616: 4600: 4566: 4471: 4442: 4437:YellowMonkey 4434: 4315: 4285: 4227: 4210: 4192: 4180: 4123: 4106: 4089: 4066: 4062: 4050: 4034: 4018: 3994: 3975: 3958: 3943:Fridae'§Doom 3940: 3936: 3919: 3909: 3900: 3896: 3879: 3842: 3833: 3826: 3825: 3819: 3802: 3790: 3772: 3756: 3744: 3727: 3709: 3705: 3686: 3656: 3644:Ranger Steve 3639: 3627: 3607: 3590: 3568: 3567: 3563: 3546: 3532: 3527: 3508: 3491: 3474: 3446: 3429: 3413: 3412: 3406: 3363: 3337: 3325: 3314: 3297: 3280: 3260: 3253: 3249: 3236: 3228: 3217: 3213:Coasterlover 3212: 3203: 3159: 3133: 3116: 3106: 3100: 3083: 3072: 3071: 3067: 3050: 3028: 3011: 3006: 3002: 2998: 2982: 2978: 2961: 2944: 2926: 2912: 2908: 2894: 2888: 2876: 2853: 2836: 2815: 2808: 2805:Weak Support 2804: 2787: 2758: 2753: 2743: 2737: 2720: 2698: 2627: 2598: 2593:YellowMonkey 2590: 2587: 2568: 2564: 2560: 2548:Doc Quintana 2543: 2527:Support, but 2526: 2516: 2510: 2505: 2488: 2471: 2448: 2444: 2423: 2404: 2393: 2386: 2382: 2365: 2336: 2335: 2323: 2319: 2295: 2262: 2246: 2229: 2200: 2196: 2180: 2176: 2142: 2126: 2109: 2089: 2072: 2042: 2037: 2018: 2012: 2006: 1989: 1966: 1959: 1953: 1928: 1911: 1886: 1882: 1863: 1846: 1828: 1811: 1807: 1790: 1750: 1731: 1714: 1695: 1678: 1666:Rocksanddirt 1661: 1644: 1626: 1620: 1610: 1602:Theleftorium 1590: 1580: 1538: 1532: 1522: 1518: 1514: 1508: 1495: 1490: 1478: 1466: 1450: 1444: 1427: 1410: 1393: 1370: 1356: 1345: 1342: 1337: 1310: 1306: 1289: 1277: 1258: 1254: 1244: 1205:sensible. – 1157: 971: 938: 884: 864: 859: 839: 834: 830: 822: 818: 778: 761: 620: 619: 597: 591: 585: 579: 573: 567: 560: 553: 547: 511: 475: 469: 414: 403:? How about 396: 386: 385: 369: 363: 346: 340: 330: 329: 312: 295: 273: 268: 257: 250: 234: 227: 222: 206: 200: 191:my user page 186:This comment 179:, which was 168: 162: 151: 145: 140: 120: 93:January 2010 81: 73: 52: 51: 46: 30: 28: 5525:HJ Mitchell 5477:Airplaneman 5132:bureaucrats 4019:prima facie 3963:Plutonium27 3596:Gordonrox24 3121:King Pickle 2792:Ottawa4ever 2425:Master& 2326:Yul Brynner 2234:Graham Colm 1977:Mkativerata 1764:Obviously. 1701:Airplaneman 1325:Dana boomer 1192:Cube lurker 748:User rights 738:CentralAuth 101:protections 5361:Sandstein 5343:ErikHaugen 5319:Literature 5156:modified. 4797:Hammersoft 4720:Hammersoft 4709:Francium12 4693:Hammersoft 4676:Off2riorob 4144:nincompoop 4094:Nikkimaria 3924:Tryptofish 3107:Francium12 3088:Harthacnut 2949:Daicaregos 2858:Alzarian16 2476:Shadowjams 2093:Keepscases 2030:Courcelles 1960:Techman224 1933:WP:CRYSTAL 1756:P. D. Cook 1586:Jimmy Pitt 731:Cross-wiki 722:AfD closes 634:Discussion 70:Nomination 31:successful 5509:Notify Me 5502:DeltaQuad 5432:DrKiernan 5396:Lankiveil 5285:Esteffect 5232:Ironholds 4764:User:John 4741:User:John 4603:Connormah 4577:(mailbox) 4548:(mailbox) 4288:Connormah 4198:Abecedare 4025:Skomorokh 3762:Paul Erik 3692:TomStar81 3690:on site. 3674:Acalamari 3612:Mattinbgn 3551:Richerman 3479:Ajraddatz 3414:Эlcobbola 3302:Quantpole 3241:Grondemar 3233:User:Nev1 2966:Ironholds 2701:Connormah 2565:fantastic 2250:Oldelpaso 2077:Modernist 1469:Connormah 1222:Esteffect 867:Connormah 717:AfD votes 712:BLP edits 583:block log 495:Groomtech 465:Groomtech 378:DarkFalls 105:deletions 5563:Category 5382:Fatuorum 4843:Ret.Prof 4647:Evil eye 4528:Townlake 4519:Fatuorum 4502:Townlake 4493:Fatuorum 4476:Townlake 4392:Fainites 4390:problem. 4306:Fatuorum 4232:Kablammo 4129:Mugginsx 4039:Ealdgyth 3732:Hchc2009 3496:Tony Fox 3342:Bejinhan 3329:contribs 3319:Casliber 3285:Skinny87 3210:before. 3138:Sjones23 3037:contribs 2985:SilkTork 2932:Polargeo 2873:Spaceman 2811:Kraftlos 2760:Wisdom89 2579:says two 2575:says you 2405:Support. 2383:Support. 2356:contribs 2130:Fainites 1916:Codf1977 1851:Jclemens 1769:Fatuorum 1736:Davewild 1649:Dabomb87 1612:MastCell 1483:Jusdafax 1013:Fatuorum 946:Fatuorum 937:So what 695:Analysis 674:Counters 551:contribs 401:WP:CIVIL 374:WP:CIVIL 290:XLinkBot 280:and the 85:contribs 5495:Neutral 5472:against 5446:Spartaz 5420:Neutral 5379:Malleus 5303:of Doom 4995:Дунгане 4940:Vodello 4651:Дунгане 4621:Epbr123 4587:Kudpung 4516:Malleus 4490:Malleus 4319:Science 4303:Malleus 4298:raised. 4228:Support 4211:Support 4193:Support 4185:AniMate 4181:Support 4168:Johnbod 4090:Support 4063:Support 4051:Support 4035:Support 4004:Beloved 3995:Support 3976:Support 3937:Support 3920:Support 3884:Anthony 3847:King of 3843:Support 3820:Support 3803:Support 3791:Support 3773:Support 3757:Support 3745:Support 3728:Support 3710:because 3706:support 3657:Support 3640:Support 3608:Support 3591:Support 3564:Support 3528:Support 3517:Deskana 3509:Support 3492:Support 3475:Support 3447:Support 3430:Support 3407:Support 3364:Support 3338:Support 3315:Support 3298:Support 3250:Support 3229:Support 3204:Support 3160:Support 3134:Support 3117:Support 3101:Support 3084:Support 3068:Support 3051:Support 3029:Support 2999:Support 2979:Support 2945:Support 2927:Support 2915:Harrias 2909:Support 2889:Support 2854:Support 2837:Support 2822:Contrib 2788:Support 2754:Support 2738:Support 2721:Support 2631:Science 2561:Support 2544:Support 2506:Support 2489:Support 2472:Support 2445:Support 2368:...... 2366:Support 2339:Phantom 2320:Support 2296:Support 2263:Support 2247:Support 2230:Support 2197:Support 2177:Support 2090:Support 2073:Support 2046:Science 2007:Support 1994:Dweller 1954:Support 1929:Support 1912:Support 1883:Support 1864:Support 1847:support 1829:Support 1808:Support 1795:Kudpung 1766:Malleus 1751:Support 1732:Support 1723:of Doom 1715:Support 1696:Support 1683:Hokeman 1679:Support 1662:support 1645:Support 1581:Support 1509:Support 1491:Support 1479:Support 1428:Support 1371:Support 1357:B.hotep 1338:Support 1278:Support 1249:Support 1104:of Doom 1044:As you 1010:Malleus 943:Malleus 558:deleted 333:Toddst1 313:ability 288:and/or 89:in 2008 5392:Oppose 5339:Oppose 5314:Oppose 5300:Parrot 5278:Oppose 5251:Tommy! 5219:Tommy! 5189:Tommy! 5179:Ucucha 5159:Tommy! 5120:Tommy! 5083:Tommy! 5078:Oppose 5066:Joshua 5062:Oppose 4984:Oppose 4953:Oppose 4932:Oppose 4911:Oppose 4760:Oppose 4747:Snotty 4737:Oppose 4689:Oppose 4672:Oppose 4617:Oppose 4567:Oppose 4472:Oppose 4396:scribs 4260:Oppose 4055:Jayjg 3959:Get in 3827:bd2412 3676:(from 3660:Nick-D 3520:(talk) 3500:(arf!) 3452:Minima 3434:Barret 3368:Derild 3356:Ucucha 3262:Voting 3256:Kayau 3055:Occuli 2895:Begoon 2677:WP:RFA 2563:Looks 2493:Tenmei 2429:Expert 2370:wiooiw 2328:voice) 2222:Secret 2187:jones 2162:Triona 2147:Triona 2134:scribs 2127:Hooray 1945:(talk) 1818:ASTILY 1720:Parrot 1627:Tyrol5 1497:Salvio 1101:Parrot 972:per se 768:ASTILY 681:XTools 405:WP:NPA 301:edited 215:later. 212:Here's 103:, and 97:blocks 5329:T@1k? 5139:Aiken 5102:Aiken 5069:Scott 5013:RexxS 4974:Space 4821:Chat 4815:Pedro 4768:JDONT 4317:Nerdy 4146:! :) 4072:Qwerp 4009:Freak 3903:ceran 3778:RexxS 3628:Swarm 3572:RP459 3393:Moni3 3347:talks 2879:Spiff 2744:Swarm 2681:Nsk92 2629:Nerdy 2395:rolls 2342:Steve 2334:" -- 2312:Whale 2309:Sperm 2116:Chat 2110:Pedro 2044:Nerdy 1901:comms 1891:fetch 1782:scent 1779:iride 1432:Nsk92 1294:JDONT 1262:Aiken 1211:scent 1208:iride 1161:Aiken 886:Chzz 841:Chzz 623:civil 565:count 420:WP:EQ 181:rated 61:) at 16:< 5436:talk 5410:talk 5347:talk 5322:geek 5289:talk 5236:talk 5203:talk 5199:Nev1 5049:talk 5035:talk 5031:Nev1 5017:talk 4999:talk 4969:From 4964:Them 4957:need 4944:talk 4923:talk 4915:this 4847:talk 4801:talk 4786:talk 4782:Nev1 4772:talk 4750:Wong 4724:talk 4697:talk 4680:talk 4655:talk 4625:talk 4591:talk 4572:A3RO 4543:A3RO 4532:talk 4506:talk 4480:talk 4425:talk 4411:talk 4407:John 4379:talk 4375:John 4352:this 4348:here 4322:Dude 4275:talk 4271:John 4267:this 4250:talk 4236:talk 4219:talk 4202:talk 4172:talk 4133:talk 4115:talk 4098:talk 4077:♫ ♪ 4043:Talk 3985:Talk 3967:talk 3928:talk 3910:thor 3888:talk 3872:Dark 3811:talk 3782:talk 3736:talk 3718:talk 3714:Bwrs 3696:Talk 3664:talk 3648:talk 3616:talk 3555:talk 3513:this 3483:Talk 3465:talk 3438:talk 3421:talk 3397:talk 3323:talk 3306:talk 3289:talk 3272:evil 3218:1994 3193:Step 3174:enna 3142:talk 3125:talk 3092:talk 3059:talk 3020:talk 3007:good 2970:talk 2953:talk 2936:talk 2862:talk 2845:talk 2818:Talk 2796:talk 2729:talk 2697:... 2685:talk 2667:talk 2659:hint 2634:Dude 2617:talk 2552:talk 2535:talk 2497:talk 2480:talk 2435:Talk 2412:talk 2388:Tide 2374:talk 2350:talk 2303:High 2271:talk 2254:talk 2238:talk 2166:talk 2151:talk 2097:talk 2081:talk 2049:Dude 2013:Reyk 1998:talk 1981:talk 1920:talk 1873:talk 1855:talk 1837:talk 1799:talk 1740:talk 1687:talk 1670:talk 1653:talk 1592:talk 1541:MC10 1436:talk 1419:talk 1402:talk 1375:Jmlk 1362:talk 1343:TFOW 1329:talk 1314:Talk 1298:talk 1282:Leyo 1226:talk 1196:talk 1182:talk 1148:talk 1054:talk 1050:John 980:talk 976:John 917:talk 913:John 610:here 595:rfar 577:logs 545:talk 541:Nev1 499:talk 485:talk 481:Nev1 449:talk 445:John 435:talk 431:Nev1 389:John 128:talk 124:Nev1 79:talk 75:Nev1 59:talk 47:Nev1 5464:-- 5213:you 4873:) 4449:) 4246:Tex 4215:MtD 4159:Dui 4154:Mac 4149:Ben 3795:Cam 3569:-- 3409:-- 3196:hen 3180:sis 2661:). 2605:) 2511:not 2330:: " 2306:Fin 2300:The 2289:-- 2210:per 2205:Pep 2183:Ron 2020:YO! 1833:Rje 1456:Mar 1451:Res 860:not 601:spi 571:AfD 470:10. 240:FBI 55:Avi 5565:: 5529:| 5438:) 5412:) 5374:is 5349:) 5325:| 5291:) 5238:) 5205:) 5051:) 5037:) 5019:) 5001:) 4946:) 4925:) 4887:am 4884:At 4849:) 4818:: 4803:) 4795:-- 4788:) 4774:) 4726:) 4699:) 4691:-- 4682:) 4657:) 4627:) 4593:) 4534:) 4508:) 4482:) 4427:) 4413:) 4381:) 4373:-- 4339:) 4335:• 4331:• 4277:) 4252:) 4238:) 4221:) 4204:) 4174:) 4135:) 4117:) 4100:) 4041:- 3988:) 3969:) 3946:| 3930:) 3890:) 3864:♠ 3813:) 3784:) 3738:) 3720:) 3704:I 3698:) 3680:) 3666:) 3650:) 3618:) 3599:| 3557:) 3485:) 3468:) 3440:) 3432:- 3399:) 3391:-- 3378:21 3373:49 3331:) 3317:. 3308:) 3291:) 3267:IS 3162:. 3148:) 3144:- 3127:) 3094:) 3086:-- 3061:) 3022:) 3012:my 2972:) 2955:) 2938:) 2864:) 2847:) 2820:| 2798:) 2775:/ 2731:) 2687:) 2669:) 2651:) 2647:• 2643:• 2619:) 2577:, 2567:. 2554:) 2537:) 2499:) 2491:-- 2482:) 2454:am 2451:At 2438:) 2414:) 2376:) 2359:\ 2273:) 2256:) 2240:) 2213:•• 2202:•• 2168:) 2153:) 2113:: 2099:) 2083:) 2075:- 2066:) 2062:• 2058:• 2000:) 1992:-- 1990:+1 1983:) 1935:. 1922:) 1857:) 1839:) 1801:) 1776:– 1742:) 1689:) 1672:) 1664:-- 1655:) 1561:GB 1438:) 1430:. 1421:) 1404:) 1364:• 1354:– 1331:) 1307:NW 1228:) 1198:) 1184:) 1150:) 1098:. 1056:) 982:) 939:is 919:) 911:-- 892:► 847:► 589:lu 501:) 487:) 476:A: 451:) 437:) 415:A: 304:it 296:A. 274:6. 258:A. 251:5. 235:A. 228:4. 207:A: 201:3. 169:A: 163:2. 152:A: 146:1. 130:) 99:, 36:. 5513:\ 5505:| 5499:/ 5482:✈ 5462:C 5459:F 5456:W 5434:( 5408:( 5401:. 5345:( 5287:( 5234:( 5201:( 5144:♫ 5107:♫ 5047:( 5033:( 5015:( 4997:( 4942:( 4921:( 4896:頭 4890:a 4865:( 4845:( 4799:( 4784:( 4770:( 4722:( 4695:( 4678:( 4653:( 4623:( 4589:( 4530:( 4504:( 4478:( 4441:( 4423:( 4409:( 4377:( 4337:✍ 4333:✐ 4329:✉ 4327:( 4273:( 4248:( 4234:( 4217:( 4200:( 4170:( 4131:( 4113:( 4096:( 4080:ツ 4068:~ 3982:( 3965:( 3926:( 3886:( 3861:♣ 3856:♦ 3851:♥ 3834:T 3809:( 3780:( 3734:( 3726:' 3716:( 3694:( 3662:( 3646:( 3614:( 3577:/ 3553:( 3533:T 3481:( 3462:( 3457:c 3436:( 3395:( 3383:☼ 3326:· 3321:( 3304:( 3287:( 3238:– 3185:@ 3168:) 3164:( 3140:( 3123:( 3090:( 3057:( 3018:( 2989:* 2968:( 2951:( 2934:( 2870:— 2860:( 2843:( 2824:) 2816:( 2794:( 2780:) 2770:T 2765:( 2727:( 2683:( 2665:( 2649:✍ 2645:✐ 2641:✉ 2639:( 2615:( 2597:( 2570:2 2550:( 2533:( 2495:( 2478:( 2463:頭 2457:a 2432:( 2410:( 2372:( 2353:| 2347:/ 2287:C 2284:F 2281:W 2269:( 2252:( 2236:( 2185:h 2164:( 2149:( 2095:( 2079:( 2064:✍ 2060:✐ 2056:✉ 2054:( 1996:( 1979:( 1918:( 1896:· 1888:— 1875:) 1871:( 1853:( 1835:( 1815:F 1797:( 1738:( 1706:✈ 1685:( 1668:( 1651:( 1570:) 1567:L 1564:• 1558:• 1555:C 1552:• 1549:T 1546:( 1537:— 1523:a 1521:c 1519:z 1517:a 1515:m 1434:( 1417:( 1400:( 1385:7 1380:1 1360:• 1346:R 1327:( 1317:) 1311:( 1296:( 1267:♫ 1224:( 1194:( 1180:( 1166:♫ 1146:( 1052:( 978:( 915:( 825:. 765:F 661:e 654:t 647:v 613:. 603:) 598:· 592:· 586:· 580:· 574:· 568:· 561:· 554:· 548:· 543:( 497:( 483:( 447:( 433:( 397:9 391:: 370:A 364:8 347:A 341:7 335:: 193:. 126:( 82:· 77:( 57:( 40:.

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

Knowledge

:Requests for adminship/Nev1 2 - Knowledge

Index