333:
edits: 99.23% Minor edits: 100% Average edits per day: 231.73 (for last 500 edit(s)) Article edit summary use (last 1000 edits): Major article edits: 99.23% Minor article edits: 100% Analysis of edits (out of all 5000 edits shown on this page and last 17 image uploads): Notable article edits (creation/expansion/major rewrites/sourcing): 0.2% (10) Significant article edits (copyedits/small rewrites/content/reference additions): 1.92% (96) Superficial article edits (grammar/spelling/wikify/links/tagging): 92.72% (4636) Superficial article edits marked as minor: 88.26% Unique image uploads (non-deleted/reverts/updates): 10 (checks last 5000) Breakdown of all edits: Unique pages edited: 4459 | Average edits per page: 1.12 | Edits on top: 17.54% Edits marked as major (non-minor/reverts): 12.68% (634 edit(s)) Edits marked as minor (non-reverts): 81.74% (4087 edit(s)) Marked reverts (reversions/text removal): 4.72% (236 edit(s)) Unmarked edits: 0.44% (22 edit(s)) Edits by
Knowledge namespace: Article: 100% (5000) | Article talk: 0% (0) User: 0% (0) | User talk: 0% (0) Knowledge: 0% (0) | Knowledge talk: 0% (0) Image: 0% (0) Template: 0% (0) Category: 0% (0) Portal: 0% (0) Help: 0% (0) MediaWiki: 0% (0) Other talk pages: 0% (0)
340:
edits: 100% Minor edits: 99.5% Average edits per day: 1.62 (for last 500 edit(s)) Article edit summary use (last 1000 edits): Major article edits: 100% Minor article edits: 99.5% Analysis of edits (out of all 5000 edits shown on this page and last 17 image uploads): Notable article edits (creation/expansion/major rewrites/sourcing): 1.96% (98) Significant article edits (copyedits/small rewrites/content/reference additions): 4.16% (208) Superficial article edits (grammar/spelling/wikify/links/tagging): 92.52% (4626) Superficial article edits marked as minor: 89.65% Breakdown of all edits: Unique pages edited: 4713 | Average edits per page: 1.06 | Edits on top: 6.8% Edits marked as major (non-minor/reverts): 15.06% (753 edit(s)) Edits marked as minor (non-reverts): 83.26% (4163 edit(s)) Marked reverts (reversions/text removal): 1.24% (62 edit(s)) Unmarked edits: 0.12% (6 edit(s)) Edits by
Knowledge namespace: Article: 100% (5000) | Article talk: 0% (0) User: 0% (0) | User talk: 0% (0) Knowledge: 0% (0) | Knowledge talk: 0% (0) Image: 0% (0) Template: 0% (0) Category: 0% (0) Portal: 0% (0) Help: 0% (0) MediaWiki: 0% (0) Other talk pages: 0% (0)
1448:
All Soo had to do was say, "don't worry its just an in-joke" when I asked and I'd have thought no more of it. Instead I spent a fair amount of time which I could have spent editing or making diagrams researching those comments. Overall the oppose is for the unhelpful "why should I tell you" attitude and the fact it cost me some fair amount of my time. Especially as it turned out the ‘in-joke’ was actually made at my expense, something I object to. Its not a strong oppose but I feel this user may still stand to benefit from some more time as an editor. Soo’s a very proficient editor and generally good with the ins and out of
Wikipeida which is very commendable, but I felt this constituted an underlying negative attitude towards other editors just trying to be helpful. Sorry Soo if I've taken it the wrong way and I do hope you know I was just trying to be helpful, its really nothing personal but that’s where I stand on it at the moment. --
106:) and find time to contribute to AfD whenever possible (albeit less so recently). I have recently begun using VandalProof and was surprised at how many edits are actually legitimate (Knowledge naysayers be gone!). I believe I am familiar with Knowledge policies, and take a special interest in keeping Knowledge as free as possible, particular with regard to images. Hopefully I can now be trusted with the special privileges of adminship. (PS This is my second nomination, my
654:, many good reasons to support. Nothing questionable in the last 8 months. While it would be nice to see more user talk edits, we are here to write an encyclopedia. Many people rack up user talk edits chatting, which Soo does not. Soo does good work, has plenty of experience and always uses edit summaries. While this isn't direct communication, admins are responsible to the community at large to show transparency in what they do. Soo has done this.—
287:) who inevitably became involved in the dispute too, and DreamGuy accused me of using him as a sockpuppet. I invited anyone to perform an IP check or otherwise investigate the situation properly, but instead the accusations continued by innuendo and suggestion. In the end I realised that there was no point continuing the argument. As a post-script, I notice that DreamGuy was concluded "likely" to be using a sockpuppet himself in this
278:) but it remained fairly civil. I couldn't make much progress with the article, so I added it to my watchlist and forgot about it. Some time later, an anonymous editor jumped in and made some fairly aggressive changes to the article. I felt that this heavily redacted version was better, since I think an accurate but incomplete article is better than a long and disputable one. By some process I can't really remember,
712:: Agentsoo has been here long enough to know what he is doing, I think he has shown he can be trusted. The "twat" thing doesn't bother me - exactly the same thing goes on at IRC, it is just that comments there are not so permanent. It is none of my business how Soo interacts with his mates, he certainly doesn't appear to abuse those he doesn't know and that is what is important here.
1594:, and a tough call. I'm quite impressed by this user's contributions, and singularly unimpressed with the seeming inability to communicate. As an admin, you will be called upon to be a communicator and a mediator ("mediation" is formal; mediating is daily), so I expect I'd support with the knowledge that this candidate can step in and referee.
163:
I'm about to start work on the
Featured Article Review, but I'd be particularly interested in using admin powers to handle issues with supposed fair use images and other copyright issues. I'm not a copyright fanatic but I think I understand the issues involved fairly well so it makes sense for me to
1561:: Seems an experienced, good editor. However, I am rather troubled by his use in response to the third question of the phrase "a charge on which he was later found guilty himself". To me, this indicayes a user who is prone to wikilawyering, in particular treating our processes as courts of law. --
1447:
To clarify at the behest of JoshuaZ. I felt that his responses to me personally and the general language used was unnecessary and unhelpful. An attitude that wouldn't serve him well as an administrator. I didn't realise until several days after initially reading the comments that it was an in-joke.
332:
Viewing contribution data for user
Agentsoo (over the 5000 edit(s) shown on this page) (FAQ) Time range: 310 approximate day(s) of edits on this page Most recent edit on: 1hr (UTC) -- 07, Aug, 2006 || Oldest edit on: 10hr (UTC) -- 1, September, 2005 Overall edit summary use (last 1000 edits): Major
1463:
while calling him a twat, which was intended as a joke and Jono interpreted as one, replying in kind. Next thing, WikipedianProlific was asking me to explain myself, when as far as I knew he wasn't involved at all. It turns out that Jono's original odd message was actually a repost of a message to
597:
I also note that
Agentsoo's contributions as an anon we're very good. The total number of edits is astounding. I'm going to run through my standard logic: 1) Do we think that Agentsoo will deliberately abuse the mop? No. 2) Do we think he will do something incompetent and highly damaging with the
339:
Viewing contribution data for user
Agentsoo (over the 5000 edit(s) shown on this page) (FAQ) Time range: 340 approximate day(s) of edits on this page Most recent edit on: 1hr (UTC) -- 07, Aug, 2006 || Oldest edit on: 19hr (UTC) -- 1, August, 2005 Overall edit summary use (last 1000 edits): Major
1464:
him from
WikipedianProlific, but at the time I didn't put two and two together. So just to clarify, it wasn't a joke at your expense, and I'm sorry I misinterpreted your intervention. I now understand your curiosity! Apologies for the misunderstanding, it's a limitation of the medium I suppose.
184:
to
Featured status is probably my proudest moment. The article was in a bad way when I started working on it, was comprehensively rewritten (with valued contributions from other editors) and then put forward for Featured-ness. The FAC debate was an arduous 31 days, but the article emerged much
205:
I have been involved in only one major dispute, nearly a year ago. I disagreed with another editor over two versions of a page, and he accused me of vandalism and sock-puppetry (a charge on which he was later found guilty himself.) It was resolved, largely, by
Mediation. I found the detailed
532:, I see no problems (as of yet), answers seem OK and I think we need more admins that deal with images/media problems, huge backlogs me thinks?. Couldn't see any major problems under oppose. Users talk edits are a bit low because of no vandal fighting, users talk page shows activity.--
282:
became involved in the dispute over the two versions, and we got into a revert war, which lasted about 10 reverts over a few days. I now regret that, but at the time I was inflamed by DreamGuy accusing me of 'vandalising' the article. At the time, I was 'training up' a new editor
359:
Username Agentsoo Total edits 13560 Distinct pages edited 11695 Average edits/page 1.159 First edit 20:22, June 18, 2004 (main) 11932 Talk 301 User 117 User talk 145 Image 44 Template 33 Template talk 12 Category 212 Category talk 5 Knowledge 681 Knowledge talk 71
1015:...I'm not sure article talkpage stats are all that important. Very frequently issues about articles are handled on user talk pages, the village pump, project pages, and peer reviews, etc. so I won't hold these lack of edits against them.
566:. More than ample edit count and time with project. Uses VandalProof and takes part in AfD's. The remaining question in my mind is civility. I believe the heated exchange that resulted in mediation is far enough in the past.
291:. So I admit that I probably didn't handle this as well as I could have done, but I think I learnt from the experience and hopefully my conduct in my various FAC debates indicates that I can be civil in disagreement.
1412:
WikipedianProlific was quizzing me about an in-joke between me and my friend JonONeill that didn't involve him at all. I don't see why I should have to explain it to him, or what it's got to do with being an admin.
206:
criticism of the FAC process quite stressful, but managed to remain civil and focussed my attention on improving the articles in question. Hopefully that will stand me in good stead for the stresses of adminship.
1218:
large body of edits, the oppose votes don't convince me, and I don't think that the user would abuse administrator privledges. However, you definately need to make more contact with other users in their talk
1424:
Thanks for the explanation. That's what it felt like to me-- a joke between friends and not an incivil exchange of insults. (I have two co-workers that go at eac other the same way.) Happy to support Cheers.
774:
I see nothing wrong, also, the joke is fine and I don't have an issue with that. Sometimes things don't read off the way they sound, but I think we all do things like that. It's perfectly excusable.
1459:
Okay, I think I can unpick what happened here. My friend Jono sent me an odd message, so I assumed it was a parody of the usual warnings that vandals get round here. I replied, referring him to
274:, and I marked it with the NPOV tag, which I now realise was the wrong template (I really meant 'tone', but I didn't know it existed at the time.) I had some dispute with the article's editor (
1380:(the link he posted first goes between these two, and you get the whole picture. Although I'm pretty sure this isn't something that was meant to be serious or that was taken seriously. -
82:) – I have been a chronic user of Knowledge since May 2005, accumulating over 12,000 edits (if that counts for anything). I have been the major contributor to two featured articles (
199:
Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or do you feel other users have caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?
91:
99:
610:
I'm not really fond of the "twat" comment, but unless I see that that kind of thing happens often, I'm sticking with this support. AgentSoo will benefit us greatly. --
1628:
1003:, don't think he will abuse or misuse the tools. But how can people vote "per nom" on a self-nom? Do you believe someone makes a good admin because he says he will? -
598:
mop? No. 3) Do we think that the project will benefit from Agentsoo having the Mop? Obviously yes. I therefore I have trouble seeing how someone could not support.
138:
Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Knowledge in this capacity. Please take the time to answer a few generic questions to provide guidance for voters:
288:
229:
In your previous RfA you mentioned that you had done work as an anon before getting an account and that as an anon you had written articles including starting
372:
Soo is a very dedicated editor. She works very well with others, and she's knowledgable on many aspects of Knowledge. I have worked with Soo regularly on
1646:
51:
376:, and she's great to work with. If I'd have known she was interested in adminship, I would have nominated her myself. Great user. Give her a mop! :)--
107:
103:
154:
1152:
1317:. Especially with so many mainspace edits, the nom should be communicating more with his fellow wikipedians. I will likely support on re-app.
298:
Could you explain what Francis-Tyers oppose vote below is about and please explain your version of events, with relevant difs if possible?
185:
improved. That said, I recognise that it's probably not the most significant article in an encyclopaedia, and recently I've been working on
250:
The IP is 213.122.72.220. There are less than savory edits by other anoons, and I want to spare others the confusion I experienced. Cheers.
700:. No recent issues, and I don't really care about talk edit counts. Been here long enough that I seriously doubt he'll abuse the tools.
435:
A great, experienced editor. I might like a bit more interaction on talk/user talk/Wikipedia talk pages, but she(?) deserves the mop. —
960:
1028:
741:. Looks like a good editor that has worked hard and knows WP. WP would benefit if they got the mop. No reasons to oppose IMHO.
833:
33:
17:
1607:
988:
none of the objections to this adminship are very convincing for me; I see no evidence that this user would abuse the m&b.
373:
95:
688:
as my criteria met and this is supposed to be no big deal. 12,000 edits and no incivility issues? I see no reason to oppose.
79:
1389:
Hmm, I'm puzzled as to how that could merit an oppose vote. I will ask WikipedianProlific to explain this in more detail.
1161:
750:
1509:
1452:
1359:
677:
581:
The two taken together look like an exchange between friends or at least acquaintances. If so, I've seen worse. I am
349:
146:
1243:
473:
174:
Of your articles or contributions to Knowledge, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
1366:
None of the difs in that section are Agentsoo's. Could you point more explicitly to what you are talking about?
1147:
1065:
150:
1542:
because of insufficient communication with others (talk pages), which I find crucial for an administrator. --
1449:
1425:
1404:
1356:
958:
586:
575:
567:
263:
In regard to question 3 above, could you give more detail about the incident with the sockpuppeting editor?
251:
1518:
938:
930:
901:
659:
482:
315:
762:- he is a very dedicated user and the civility problems cited by the opposers seem to be reasonably mild
1574:
1183:
181:
87:
1627:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the talk page of either
1613:
1586:
1577:
1565:
1546:
1534:
1521:
1513:
1490:
1468:
1454:
1442:
1428:
1417:
1407:
1393:
1384:
1370:
1361:
1352:
for the above reasons, and also because of a generally bad attitude unbefitting #an administrator. See
1344:
1330:
1321:
1301:
1289:
1274:
1248:
1223:
1210:
1198:
1186:
1165:
1138:
1126:
1109:
1086:
1068:
1052:
1044:
1032:
1007:
995:
980:
962:
951:
942:
933:
920:
908:
881:
869:
852:
838:
797:
785:
766:
754:
733:
716:
704:
692:
680:
662:
646:
624:
602:
589:
558:
538:
524:
503:
486:
461:
449:
421:
412:
397:
382:
327:
254:
127:
114:
1505:
1232:
895:
829:
551:
402:
Comment: Good god, I've been referring to him as a woman for the last six months! Why didn't anyone
164:
deal with that area. I'm also happy to help out on AfD if required, and am generally quite flexible.
1603:
1437:
1314:
1237:
1155:
1061:
817:
642:
513:
498:
763:
555:
547:
522:
73:
469:
Who cares if they interact with the community? I think this user would make an excellent admin.
62:
1562:
1264:
1220:
1081:
1024:
1020:
890:
780:
746:
655:
637:
534:
478:
470:
444:
394:
271:
1570:
1341:
1207:
1104:
729:
674:
612:
390:: Soo is not female.. I suspect he's going to get a good laugh when he reads this, however.
233:. Could you give us a list of the main articles that you started/contributed to as an anon?
1433:
Just to confirm that... yeah, an innocent joke. Certainly not grounds for a negative vote.
1531:
1500:
1318:
1298:
1271:
1041:
861:
825:
1524:
Impressive edit count but needs to engage in communication before considering adminship.
1599:
1583:
1434:
1120:
811:
634:
495:
284:
1640:
1543:
1465:
1460:
1414:
1327:
1284:
1174:
1049:
989:
848:
582:
518:
418:
407:
377:
345:
279:
124:
111:
69:
793:. Good editor, who I'm sure will be a useful admin. Civility concerns are minor. --
1487:
1390:
1367:
1076:
1016:
803:
775:
742:
599:
437:
391:
230:
219:
83:
889:. Looks like a dedicated and thoughtful editor. I don't agree that his actions on
724:, we always need more admins who can deal with fair use abuse with a heavy fist.
1135:
1095:
878:
794:
725:
701:
689:
671:
458:
275:
186:
145:
What sysop chores, if any, would you anticipate helping with? Please check out
1621:
The above adminship discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion.
1498:
per recent diffs above, mostly disregarding the Skull situation as too old. -
1381:
1295:
1268:
1004:
1195:
1115:
971:
893:
were out of line to the point of opposing adminship several months later. --
670:
Lots of good work, opposes don't show anything that bad any time recently. -
1060:
from what I have seen I believe he would make a dependable administrator.
1094:- has done good work on important projects, no basis to fear tool-abuse.
917:
713:
110:
was over a year ago so hopefully I've resolved the objections raised.)
1631:
or the nominated user). No further edits should be made to this page.
579:
has left a note referring to this comment on JonONeil's talk page.
1040:
per nom. Looks like Agentsoo2 would make a fine administrator. -
1582:
Per concerns on both sides. Seems to be a good editor though.
223:
As always, all additional questions are completely optional.
121:
Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:
189:, which I hope to bring to a similar standard eventually.
29:
The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a
1378:
1376:
1353:
1280:
578:
571:
241:
928:
Support! However, hoping to see more talk edits. --
417:Comment: You're right, I did get a good laugh :)
1403:, BOBET, for finding the missing piece. Cheers
1182:- no reason not to trust him with admin tools.
1530:: not quite ready yet. May support in future.
8:
585:for now and awaiting clarification. Cheers,
270:I was unhappy with the state of the article
511:A very dedicated user to this project. --
305:He was the mediator in the above dispute.
313:edits (seperated due to heavy AWB use).
94:). I also work on several WikiProjects (
1326:I guess I'm just not very sociable...
244:gives a fairly representative sample.
7:
1281:this incident from eight months ago
632:, a very solid user all around. —
240:I can't remember all of them, but
24:
1647:Successful requests for adminship
1486:per FrancisTyers and Themindset.
1267:do not befit an administrator. -
1375:I'm pretty sure he means these:
1313:. Less than 200 user talk edits
813:(raises champagne glass happily)
570:'s oppose appears to be related
18:Knowledge:Requests for adminship
374:Knowledge:WikiProject Dinosaurs
572:this entry on Soo's talk page,
1:
155:administrators' reading list
1614:02:32, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
1587:09:53, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
1547:13:35, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
1535:18:02, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
1522:22:36, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
1514:02:37, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
1249:21:19, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
1224:19:58, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
1211:19:55, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
1199:13:00, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
1187:04:19, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
1166:19:50, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
1139:00:37, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
1127:18:43, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
1110:18:05, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
1087:13:06, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
809:Excellent Support, Darling!
494:per nom - Soo is the best.
348:'s edit summary usage with
134:Questions for the candidate
1663:
1578:18:58, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
1566:18:46, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
1491:23:45, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
1469:08:57, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
1455:00:21, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
1443:23:25, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
1429:20:11, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
1418:17:45, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
1408:15:13, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
1394:14:20, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
1385:14:14, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
1371:13:54, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
1362:12:48, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
1345:06:45, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
1331:10:29, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
1322:05:29, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
1302:00:47, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
1290:00:40, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
1275:00:33, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
1069:23:31, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
1053:23:28, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
1045:21:35, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
1033:16:35, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
1008:16:19, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
996:03:22, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
981:00:40, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
963:23:13, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
943:22:50, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
921:21:17, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
909:17:41, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
882:15:55, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
870:14:17, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
853:05:06, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
839:03:26, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
798:03:12, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
786:23:28, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
767:23:17, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
755:22:57, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
734:22:52, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
717:22:42, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
705:22:30, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
693:21:21, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
681:20:41, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
663:19:20, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
647:18:58, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
625:18:52, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
603:18:15, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
590:14:14, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
559:10:25, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
539:10:17, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
525:09:59, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
504:08:38, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
487:07:31, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
462:01:37, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
450:00:17, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
422:10:29, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
413:07:39, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
398:04:48, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
383:00:12, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
328:02:36, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
255:13:47, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
218:Additional questions from
149:, and read the page about
147:Category:Knowledge backlog
128:23:56, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
115:23:45, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
970:- valuable contributor -
336:Next 5000 article edits:
1624:Please do not modify it.
1263:The editor's actions on
576:User:WikipedianProlific
568:User:WikipedianProlific
90:) and a featured list (
39:Please do not modify it
1286:Firsfron of Ronchester
1279:Are you talking about
409:Firsfron of Ronchester
379:Firsfron of Ronchester
1134:will be good admin --
926:OMG SOMEONE WITH 2FA!
483:(The people rejoice!)
182:Countdown (game show)
34:request for adminship
1283:? Just asking. :) --
1231:per Jersey Devil. -→
1450:WikipedianProlific
1357:WikipedianProlific
916:Looks okay to me.
1611:
1512:
1440:
1315:fails my criteria
1265:Skull (symbolism)
1206:Very impressed.--
891:Skull (symbolism)
877:- per nom 2.0 --
837:
753:
623:
501:
485:
441:
272:Skull (symbolism)
1654:
1626:
1597:
1504:
1438:
1287:
1246:
1240:
1235:
1184:Metamagician3000
1123:
1118:
1102:
1084:
1079:
992:
977:
956:
936:
907:
904:
898:
867:
864:
851:
823:
820:
783:
778:
745:
640:
621:
618:
615:
537:
521:
516:
499:
481:
476:
448:
439:
410:
380:
324:
321:
318:
41:
1662:
1661:
1657:
1656:
1655:
1653:
1652:
1651:
1637:
1636:
1635:
1629:this nomination
1622:
1426::) Dlohcierekim
1405::) Dlohcierekim
1285:
1244:
1238:
1234:Buchanan-Hermit
1233:
1164:
1121:
1116:
1096:
1082:
1077:
990:
973:
952:
934:
902:
896:
894:
865:
862:
847:
818:
781:
776:
638:
616:
613:
587::) Dlohcierekim
533:
514:
512:
474:
467:Strong Support.
436:
408:
378:
361:
341:
334:
322:
319:
316:
252::) Dlohcierekim
55:
37:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
1660:
1658:
1650:
1649:
1639:
1638:
1634:
1633:
1617:
1616:
1612:
1589:
1580:
1568:
1555:
1554:
1550:
1549:
1537:
1525:
1516:
1493:
1481:
1480:
1479:
1478:
1477:
1476:
1475:
1474:
1473:
1472:
1471:
1422:
1421:
1420:
1398:
1397:
1396:
1347:
1335:
1334:
1333:
1308:
1307:
1306:
1305:
1304:
1257:
1256:
1252:
1251:
1226:
1213:
1201:
1189:
1177:
1168:
1160:
1141:
1129:
1112:
1089:
1071:
1055:
1047:
1035:
1010:
998:
983:
965:
954:Baseball,Baby!
945:
923:
911:
884:
872:
855:
841:
800:
788:
769:
757:
739:Strong Support
736:
719:
707:
695:
683:
665:
649:
627:
605:
592:
564:Strong support
561:
541:
527:
506:
489:
464:
452:
430:
429:
428:
427:
426:
425:
424:
370:STRONG SUPPORT
366:
365:
358:
357:
356:
353:
350:mathbot's tool
338:
331:
307:
306:
293:
292:
289:checkuser case
285:User:JonONeill
258:
257:
245:
215:
214:
210:
209:
208:
207:
193:
192:
191:
190:
168:
167:
166:
165:
151:administrators
136:
135:
131:
130:
58:Final (48/9/4)
54:
49:
47:
45:
44:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1659:
1648:
1645:
1644:
1642:
1632:
1630:
1625:
1619:
1618:
1615:
1609:
1605:
1601:
1595:
1593:
1590:
1588:
1585:
1581:
1579:
1576:
1572:
1569:
1567:
1564:
1560:
1557:
1556:
1552:
1551:
1548:
1545:
1541:
1538:
1536:
1533:
1529:
1526:
1523:
1520:
1517:
1515:
1511:
1507:
1503:
1502:
1497:
1494:
1492:
1489:
1485:
1482:
1470:
1467:
1462:
1458:
1457:
1456:
1453:
1451:
1446:
1445:
1444:
1441:
1436:
1432:
1431:
1430:
1427:
1423:
1419:
1416:
1411:
1410:
1409:
1406:
1402:
1399:
1395:
1392:
1388:
1387:
1386:
1383:
1379:
1377:
1374:
1373:
1372:
1369:
1365:
1364:
1363:
1360:
1358:
1354:
1351:
1348:
1346:
1343:
1339:
1336:
1332:
1329:
1325:
1324:
1323:
1320:
1316:
1312:
1309:
1303:
1300:
1297:
1293:
1292:
1291:
1288:
1282:
1278:
1277:
1276:
1273:
1270:
1266:
1262:
1259:
1258:
1254:
1253:
1250:
1247:
1241:
1236:
1230:
1227:
1225:
1222:
1217:
1214:
1212:
1209:
1205:
1202:
1200:
1197:
1193:
1190:
1188:
1185:
1181:
1178:
1176:
1172:
1169:
1167:
1163:
1159:
1158:
1157:
1154:
1149:
1145:
1142:
1140:
1137:
1133:
1130:
1128:
1125:
1124:
1119:
1113:
1111:
1108:
1107:
1103:
1101:
1100:
1093:
1090:
1088:
1085:
1080:
1075:
1072:
1070:
1067:
1063:
1059:
1056:
1054:
1051:
1048:
1046:
1043:
1039:
1036:
1034:
1030:
1026:
1022:
1018:
1014:
1011:
1009:
1006:
1002:
999:
997:
994:
987:
984:
982:
979:
976:
969:
966:
964:
961:
959:
957:
955:
949:
946:
944:
941:
940:
937:
932:
927:
924:
922:
919:
915:
912:
910:
905:
899:
892:
888:
885:
883:
880:
876:
873:
871:
868:
859:
856:
854:
850:
845:
842:
840:
835:
831:
827:
822:
815:
814:
810:
806:
805:
801:
799:
796:
792:
789:
787:
784:
779:
773:
770:
768:
765:
761:
758:
756:
752:
748:
744:
740:
737:
735:
731:
727:
723:
720:
718:
715:
711:
708:
706:
703:
699:
696:
694:
691:
687:
684:
682:
679:
676:
673:
669:
666:
664:
661:
657:
653:
650:
648:
645:
644:
641:
636:
631:
628:
626:
620:
619:
609:
606:
604:
601:
596:
593:
591:
588:
584:
580:
577:
573:
569:
565:
562:
560:
557:
554:
553:
549:
545:
542:
540:
536:
531:
528:
526:
523:
520:
517:
510:
507:
505:
502:
497:
493:
490:
488:
484:
480:
477:
472:
468:
465:
463:
460:
456:
453:
451:
446:
442:
434:
431:
423:
420:
416:
415:
414:
411:
405:
401:
400:
399:
396:
393:
389:
386:
385:
384:
381:
375:
371:
368:
367:
363:
362:
354:
351:
347:
343:
342:
337:
330:
329:
326:
325:
312:
304:
301:
300:
299:
297:
290:
286:
281:
280:User:DreamGuy
277:
273:
269:
266:
265:
264:
262:
256:
253:
249:
246:
243:
239:
236:
235:
234:
232:
228:
224:
222:
221:
212:
211:
204:
201:
200:
198:
195:
194:
188:
183:
179:
176:
175:
173:
170:
169:
162:
159:
158:
156:
152:
148:
144:
141:
140:
139:
133:
132:
129:
126:
122:
119:
118:
117:
116:
113:
109:
105:
101:
97:
93:
89:
85:
81:
78:
75:
71:
67:
66:
64:
61:Ended 02:20,
59:
53:
50:
48:
43:
40:
35:
32:
27:
26:
19:
1623:
1620:
1591:
1563:David Mestel
1558:
1539:
1527:
1519:Tony Sidaway
1501:CrazyRussian
1499:
1495:
1483:
1400:
1349:
1340:Per above --
1337:
1310:
1296:FrancisTyers
1294:See talk. -
1269:FrancisTyers
1260:
1228:
1221:Jersey Devil
1215:
1203:
1191:
1179:
1170:
1151:
1150:
1143:
1131:
1114:
1105:
1098:
1097:
1091:
1073:
1057:
1037:
1012:
1000:
985:
974:
967:
953:
947:
929:
925:
913:
886:
874:
857:
846:per above. —
843:
812:
808:
802:
790:
771:
759:
738:
721:
709:
697:
685:
667:
656:WAvegetarian
651:
633:
629:
611:
607:
594:
563:
550:
543:
529:
508:
491:
466:
454:
432:
403:
387:
369:
335:
314:
310:
308:
302:
295:
294:
267:
260:
259:
247:
237:
231:Chasmosaurus
226:
225:
217:
216:
202:
196:
177:
171:
160:
142:
137:
120:
76:
68:
60:
57:
56:
46:
38:
30:
28:
1571:Merovingian
1496:Weak Oppose
1342:Masssiveego
1208:Holdenhurst
1017:The ikiroid
530:<-Seven!
355:Edit count:
276:User:Wetman
187:Mathematics
1532:Thumbelina
1319:Themindset
1042:Bootstoots
897:Aguerriero
860:per nom.--
622:(joturner)
548:Mailer Dia
406:me!? :/ --
309:Last 5000
123:I accept.
63:2006-08-14
31:successful
1596:RadioKirk
1584:Attic Owl
1194:per nom.
1029:Advise me
950:per nom.
764:abakharev
457:per nom.
108:first one
1641:Category
1544:dcabrilo
1219:pages.--
1175:Jeffklib
1162:(samtal)
1153:hurikein
1148:íslenska
1078:=Nichalp
914:Support.
858:Support.
849:Khoikhoi
834:contribs
830:messages
360:Portal 7
346:Agentsoo
213:Comments
180:Getting
153:and the
80:contribs
70:Agentsoo
52:Agentsoo
1592:Neutral
1559:Neutral
1553:Neutral
1488:Singopo
1391:JoshuaZ
1368:JoshuaZ
1229:Support
1216:Support
1204:Support
1192:Support
1180:Support
1171:Support
1144:Support
1132:Support
1092:Support
1083:«Talk»=
1074:Support
1058:Support
1038:Support
1013:Support
1001:Support
993:iggurat
986:Support
968:Support
948:Support
887:Support
875:Support
844:Support
791:Support
772:Support
760:Support
743:Nephron
722:Support
710:Support
698:Support
686:Support
668:Support
652:Support
635:Deckill
630:Support
608:Support
600:JoshuaZ
595:Support
544:Support
519:iva1979
509:Support
492:Support
459:Michael
455:Support
433:Support
388:Comment
364:Support
311:article
248:Comment
220:JoshuaZ
1540:Oppose
1528:Oppose
1484:Oppose
1461:WP:NPA
1439:(talk)
1401:Thanks
1350:Oppose
1338:Oppose
1311:Oppose
1261:Oppose
1255:Oppose
1136:rogerd
1099:bd2412
931:Миборо
879:Tawker
863:Kungfu
816:--Slgr
804:Bianca
795:Avenue
726:Stifle
702:BryanG
690:Ifnord
672:Goldom
660:(talk)
617:abjotu
583:WP:AGF
574:where
500:(talk)
479:rbil10
1510:email
1382:Bobet
1050:Steel
1005:Bobet
821:ndson
614:tariq
535:Andeh
471:RyanG
317:Voice
65:(UTC)
16:<
1575:Talk
1506:talk
1435:Jono
1196:Icey
1066:talk
1025:desk
1021:talk
939:ский
903:talk
866:Adam
826:page
777:Yank
730:talk
546:. -
496:Jono
445:talk
438:Mets
404:tell
392:Bobo
344:See
320:-of-
242:this
104:this
102:and
100:this
96:this
92:this
88:this
86:and
84:this
74:talk
1466:Soo
1415:Soo
1328:Soo
1156:#12
1122:ert
1117:Rob
1062:Doc
918:Deb
782:sox
714:Rje
675:‽‽‽
440:501
419:Soo
323:All
125:Soo
112:Soo
1643::
1573:-
1355:--
1245:?!
1173:.
1146:.
1064:♬
1031:)
972:Gl
832:-
828:-
807::
732:)
556:lo
303:A:
268:A:
238:A:
203:A:
197:3.
178:A:
172:2.
161:A:
157:.
143:1.
98:,
36:.
1610:)
1608:c
1606:|
1604:t
1602:|
1600:u
1598:(
1508:/
1299:·
1272:·
1242:/
1239:™
1106:T
1027:·
1023:·
1019:(
991:Z
978:n
975:e
935:в
906:)
900:(
836:)
824:(
819:@
751:C
749:|
747:T
728:(
678:⁂
658:•
643:r
639:e
552:b
515:S
475:e
447:)
443:(
395:.
352:.
296:3
283:(
261:2
227:1
77:·
72:(
42:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.