Knowledge:Requests for adminship/Cobi 2

2814:

Cobi's capabilities, and don't see why it should be a problem that I add my personal experience with Cobi to this RfA for consideration. One could argue that I don't have enough experience with Knowledge, but it's not my experience that's in question here, it's Cobi's. I'm probably the only one here who has met him in real life, and for a significant portion of the time I was with him, he was steadfastly working for Knowledge. His devotion and dedication are clear, and I believe that I can make that known from the unique perspective of someone who has been in close contact with Cobi. You ask if it's OK for friends of your's to vote for you from their own experience? Yes, I believe that it is OK. Now, Gurch, I've seen your comments to and about Cobi, and it does seem that you have a personal grudge against him, but please try to be objective for these types of votes. We're trying to determine Cobi's capabilities as an administrator. In all of your comments attacking Cobi, I can't see a single valid reason for reasonable objection. Most of your oppositions to Cobi personally seem to stem from objections to the concept of a bot correcting vandalism (which, in my opinion, aren't valid, but that should be clear to you if you examine it logically). The purpose of this vote is not to determine whether or not a bot should be allowed (that has already been approved by the BAG) or to evaluate said bot. The purpose is to evaluate Cobi's skills and abilities personally, and it seems to me that you have not been objective at all. You probably will be biased against me and my recommendations as well (because of my association with Cobi), but try to consider this logically and objectively.

1171:

request to have their access removed so that they could focus on writing articles. Knowledge is built and maintained almost entirely by volunteers, and those volunteers come in all sorts of interests, abilities, and attitudes. We should welcome as many volunteers into as many positions as we can (with the exception of supporting abusive users in their activities.) Cobi has shown an interest and ability to contribute to Knowledge in a way which doesn't involve writing articles. He's shown that he does it with a sense of humor and patience. I haven't seen any opposes due to mistrust, or an uncivil interaction, or anything like that. Cobi has made it very clear that he will wade into new areas very carefully, and he has the support of many users upon whom he may call for advice. This is a user who has much to contribute (even if he doesn't contribute it in the way that many other users do) and should be given as large an opportunity to do so as possible. Thanks for reading. :)

5481:. ClueBot is good, and it shows the candidate has a great deal of technical understanding, and I have no reason to question his good faith. However handling adminship tasks needs more. The work in mainspace with actually building articles is almost empty, so too with interacting with other users. Admins need to deal with other people, and should need experience there. They will need to deal with complaints over article content, whether it's at AFD, in angry e-mails, on talk pages, at CSD, and so on. If experience is seriously lacking in these areas, there almost certainly will be misjudgments when admin tools are given, and some of those can be quite serious. It is not that the candidate has done anything 5136:. There seems to be some support for CobiBot for administrator, but Cobi (not his bot) is the running for administrator. Since an administrator makes decisions about editors, I find it disturbing that the number of mainspace edits since the last RFA is small (someone said 7). It's as if the community said, "try some mainspace editing for experience". I find it worrisome that Cobi may not have any outside interests and is unable (or unwilling?) to generate a few edits in his/her area of interest or just won't listen to the community's guidance. I'd say to ask Cobi to come back in 2-3 months after editing or, if he/she passes, he/she should edit some before starting to use sysop powers. 1167:

no reason to think he was. Nor would either of us have any reason to think that such a link would result in more supports; it could easily have drawn in vandalism or whatever else. But a few little mistakes on the part of a few people compounded into a bunch of displeased people coming to this RFA to oppose Cobi for what they see as a lapse in judgement, and what Cobi admits was not a good thing. I urge the editors opposing Cobi's RFA on these grounds to think back on the little judgement errors they have made in the past. I know that when I make them, I just hope that everyone will see that it was an exception, not a rule. That is the case here.

5458:. I want to support this canidate, but at this time I am not confident in policy knowledge or readiness for the role of adminship. While I have no fear that Cobi would not abuse the tools, I am less sure he knows how to use them. I tried to get to this with my questions, and the answers were fine, but I am still not totally convinced. Frankly, with so little mainspace contributions, it is simply too hard to know. You do seem to be doing great work here, and I commend you for it, but also encourage write some articles and gain some policy knowledge. Cheers. 5035:, in this case). While I acknowledge that that may have been a single mistake in a weak moment, I find Cobi's first reply "No one forces you to read ClueBot's edit summaries" still inappropriate. Candidate should know that edit summaries are there to be read. I also have a problem with bot coders who don't acknowledge that they're responsible not just for fixing the bot, but also for fixing a bot's past actions. Now, this may not be possible in this case, but if the candidate had just acknowledged that and used 86:, which is approaching a quarter million contributions. Cobi may not be a prolific article writer, or spend much time working on policies in the Knowledge: namespace, but his technical work on the project is extremely valuable and useful. I look forward to seeing what improvements he will make if he is made an administrator. The pool of administrators and the project as a whole benefit from having people from a wide range of Knowledge specialities. Please join me in supporting Cobi on this RFA. Thanks. 5357:(an oxymoron?) . "Reluctant" because Cobi seems a well-meaning, good guy and I think we all appreciate what he's done around here. "Oppose" because he's just not ready as pointed out by multiple, thoughtful opposing comments above. And "strong" because of the whole CANVASS thing, a total non-starter and an abort-the-RfA action. Cobi, I look forward to supporting a follow-on RfA in 3 or more months if you work on the stuff others have identified as weaknesses. (Suggestion: try a few afternoons hitting the 4157:. Sure he runs a bot and everything, which is amazingly great, but he himself does not yet have enough experience to sastify me. Sub-2000 edits and only 185 to the Knowledge namespace demonstrates a lack of experience, especially in admin-like places. Plus, not enough work in the mainspace, it's the real reason Knowledge exists. One-third of your edits are to userspace. I'm sorry if you think that's editcountitis, but I think it's evidence of not enough work in the required places. The violation of 3488:. The canvassing issue stops me from going for strong support also. He was told by admins that it would be ok to do what he did, although I don't think he should have got the all clear to do so. Because he was told it would be ok to do so, I will be changing to weak support. He says it was 4AM, and I know only too well what it's like editing at 4AM. As for why I'm supporting, I think it seems quite obvious; a good Wikipedian who will not abuse the tools! 1265:

have not been shown otherwise, but something more than an assumption of good faith is necessary for a successful RfA. I also think that opposition based on few mainspace edits can be a proxy for what I've described above, and should not be summarily discounted. Of course, as I've stated in my opposition, I look forward to being shown cases of where Cobi has handled himself calmly in tense situations. In that case, I will support. -

4136:. Preferably, I would like to see more mainspace contributions, which I think is important for understanding how and why policies come into play. That, in turn, is important for admin tasks like closing AFDs. Though, what you do with checking open proxies is a positive. I don't know if this RFA will succeed, but should it not this time, do try again in a couple months. I may be in position to support you at that time. -- 5569:; sorry, but I have a few problems here. Most have been mentioned above, particularly the substantial portion of bot-activity vs. other. Thanks very much for keeping the place free of vandals, but I think that more experience is necessary along the lines of what Sjakkalle mentioned for an admin. Also, I am very much against seeing canvassing on these, for three reasons: one, because of the reasons laid out in 5573:. Two, because it is going against consensus in said guideline that would seem to discourage it. Three, it reflects very poorly on judgement. A nom for adminship is a chance to present your best face, but you had to go and do something that many people are always unhappy with, admin's 'approval' notwithstanding. While you are not prohibited from doing so, I see it as a definite negative factor. 1215:

UAA, and, possibly AN/ANI. You also get the 'Delete' button. I'd gauge that by CSD. How the user interacts with others? Talk: and User talk:. Yes, we're here to build an encyclopedia. Some people, are better at protecting the project, and, worse at writing the actual articles. ClueBot's reverted what.... a quarter million vandal edits? How much time saved, is that, for the article writers?

2701:. Having the balls to advertise with ClueBot is a masterstroke. That's the sort of innovative thinking we really should be looking for in an administrator. The fact he's eminently qualified doesn't hurt things either. I also don't think, even if advertising this RfA is such a great sin, it's worth Cobi having to wait another 3 months for an RfA that would pass then. 3295:- I have concerns about the low mainspace edit count, but as I stated in my neutral comments, I do not believe Cobi will abuse the tools. Apparently there have been admins with even less, and the dedication to building and maintaining ClueBot shows dedication in a way that is (after considerable thought) about the same as having a FA or multiple GAs. - 752:

blocking new users who do excessive amounts of vandalism (i.e., new user who has made less than 10 edits, the majority of which have been reverted by ClueBot in the last half-hour, and has all warnings and is listed at AIV). But before that would happen there would need to be a very big consensus for this, and from what I can tell, there isn't.

4819:- I cannot find examples of this user interacting with other users in somewhat contentious situations, which I expect all administrators to handle in a helpful and polite manner. While I have no reason to doubt that the user will act appropriately, I see no examples of this either. Willing to change my oppose if shown appropriate evidence. - 4109:

the concept of admin specialists, but I think you need far more balance in your work. Closing AfD's, user conflicts on pages are all part of what you will be called on to do. I have the utmost respect for your bot work and frankly am envious of your talents, but I think we just need a little more in overall experience. Sorry. -

3339:. Seriously -- this guy hasn't been promoted yet? He's only created the most effective tool preventing vandalism on wikipedia, which shows his devotion to the project and how unlikely he is to abuse the tools. Unless we don't care about keeping WP clean from vandalism anymore, I can't fathom him not being given the mop. 5337:- Sorry... I do not see enough experience in other places besides vandalism. I have a hard time finding any places where you helped mediate any situation that would allow us to judge your approach to any heated issues. The canvassing issue, well enough has been said on that. The bots are amazing and very much appreciated. 5392:. Admins should be sufficiently engaged in content writing to not be detached from reality in wikimatters. Thanks for your programming contributions and good luck with more of that. I hope the fact that you are not an admin won't discourage you from doing this good work which does not require adminship anyway. -- 670:. It is also probably not the same person from before as most IP addresses are dynamic and, in general, should not be blocked for extended periods of time. I would remove the report as invalid per being inactive and per not having received their last warning. I would also notify the reporter of the guidelines of 242:

computation behind the false positive and try to fix this from happening again. My approach as an administrator would be very similar, in that I would quickly find the problem, make a judgment on its correctness, and "fix" the problem, while making sure all involved parties have as little discontent as possible.

4644:. Meat-puppeting, bot-spamming, nearly as many edits to this RfA as articles in the mainspace. Adminship is no big deal, but it's also not a reward for doing something nice. The mis-guided canvassing is what ultimately leads me to oppose - great coder, but clearly lacking in practical knowledge of the 'pedia's 5186:

into coding, overseeing, and running the bot and the anti-vandal work done, it's a sufficient amount of experience. And it was never a "problem", he was going off the advice given by two admins before doing so, removed the link and apologized. I really wish you would re-word and/or retract your wording. --

5153:, sorry, too soon, and the mainspace contributions have not increased. Knowledge is at the stage now where admins must know how to write for the encyclopedia, interacting with other users and anons in the process, in order to understand how to manage it appropriately. The canvassing is also poor form. 5949:

I want to support, even with the issues of canvassing for a brief time with ClueBot. The thing that keeps me from supporting is highlighted in Gurch's oppose (the lack of mainspace contribs), and the thing that keeps me from opposing is that I do not doubt that Cobi will not abuse the tools if he had

4035:

I told Cobi that if he would get his mainspace contribs to 500 and his total to 2000, that I'd switch to support. He did so. Since they were all vandal reverts, I'm not wholly impressed, but I'm fulfilling my end of the bargain by switching to the support section. My oppose comments are struck below.

2813:

Gurch, look at this logically for just a second. The purpose of votes such as these is to assess the subject's abilities and determine his potential as an administrator. Regardless of whether or not I participate on Knowledge (which I don't often, due to other commitments), I can be a fair judge of

1264:

My oppose is based on the fact that, due to Cobi's very few mainspace edits, I can find no examples of his being involved in situations where tempers have flared. I expect all administrators to act in a civil and appropriate manner, and I am as yet unconvinced that Cobi will do the same. Of course, I

1218:

There's no reason to knock or discount those of us, that are more suited to making life easier, for those that are excellent article writers. Likewise, there's no reason to punish those that revert vandalism, by discounting their contribs, simply because of the manner in which they choose to help the

1214:

I know, being +sysopped gives you the 'rollback' button. How you'd expect to see a future admin using that, can usually be gauged by how they revert vandalism. I also know, from experience, that it gives you the block button. You can get a good idea, of how a potential admin would use that, from AIV,

751:

Not the delete tool, as ClueBot doesn't watch new pages, and that would be the only place where it could be applicable. Possibly for access to the rollback tool, as that would be much easier on the servers than the "manual" rollback ClueBot uses now. And, possibly for access to the block button for

638:

for vandalism after the final warning. Researching the user, you see that he has not vandalized after the most recent final warning, but has been given many other final warnings in the past and has just finished a two-month block for vandalism. You also see that the user has not made any edits in the

6113:

The two really are not analogous, Cobi. In the first, by using Twinkle you show us your own judgement of vandalism and the ilk as well as your choice to use twinkle in the first place. Both of these give us insight into what kind of editor you are. However, when the script is automated, we really do

5815:

Ugh. Similar sentiment to the above, in that I thought the RfA linking in the edit summaries was in rather bad taste. But taste is relative (clearly, since both you and at least one admin thought it would be neat) so it seems that this is not sufficient reason on its own for opposing the nomination.

3757:

As per nom and user cares deeply about Knowledge previous and also has created Cluebot one of the best and useful bot in wikipedia and the internet.RFA was on the wire cannot cannot understand why this has got so many opposes.Except for a lower edit count do not see any other concerns in his track

2639:

per useful bot work, and patient approach to controversies, as judged from Cobi's bot approval discussions. A bot that works, and is not too offensive, and is modified in response to feedback, is an asset to the encyclopedia. Due to the nature of his specialty, access to admin tools would be good to

1988:

Cobi, I believe in you and think you'd be a great admin (except maybe the canvassing thing, but hey ho). I know the damage your bot could cause, hance my original support rationale. Speak to Dlae. He caused this by challenging my support. I don't want any more disruption, I've been accused of enough

1435:

I went neutral on the last RfA due to a lack of article writing. I haven't seen anything that shows that Cobi has written or expanded an article, however, I trust him with the tools, and don't believe abuse would be forthcoming. Plus ClueBot is awesome, even though I complain about it beating me too

1232:

Even if we include the vandalism reverts, there's a total of 40 mainspace contribs since his last RFA when he was asked to do more work in the mainspace. I really couldn't care less about the work that ClueBot has done in saving time and find it irrelevant to this RFA. I'm sorry, but a candidate has

1170:

Also, regarding the editors opposing because of Cobi's low number of mainspace edits, I'm just trying to understand why that is. As others have pointed out, none of the administrator-only commands are really related to actual article-writing. In fact, we have lately seen a number of administrators

418:

No, spamming would be if I were to dump a message on several users' talk pages. Unless you are looking for edits by ClueBot, the edit summary is not something many people see. I realize, however, that I shouldn't have done it, and it won't happen again. The only reason I did it in the first place

363:

It is a tiny little notice in the bot's edit summary. It is not advertised anywhere else (besides my userpage). I think the canvass guideline is more related to posting somewhere where someone actually has to read it (user talk pages, central locations like the village pump, AN, ANI, etc). No one

5245:

should not have been done, because the edit summaries would appear on recent changes and any affected articles on people's watchlists, and this should have been obvious. More importantly, your limited amount of mainspace activity apart from simple vandalism reverts doesn't convince me that you have

4592:

experience working with articles is an absolute must. Nearly all of the 33 people opposing Cobi's previous RfA cited his extreme lack of mainspace contributions, and I'm not at all encouraged by his decision to accept this second nomination without attempting to address those peoples' concerns. As

4108:

I am sorry but I don't think there's much difference from before. Your full edit count report (not the one presently on the talk page) shows a disproportionate number of edits to your own userspace and to that of your bot. I do not think you need to be a "prolific" mainspace editor and I do support

3550:

I said I couldn't support, but at this rate it's close to the borderline, so I will. He clearly cares deeply about Knowledge, and his bots are among the most useful aspects of the project. Someone who takes that much time to code a bot (and it's no easy task, even for a really simple one like mine)

2899:

Crispy1989: in fact, your "lack of participation in Knowledge" should have every reason to affect our judgement of your opinion of him. As Useight said above, it's not a knock against either you or Cobi. But this is supposed to be seeking a community consensus, and you aren't at all a part of that

1949:

Pedro, if I wanted to, I could do a lot more damage with my bot than with admin access. Bots have the ability to edit hundreds of articles in just a few seconds. But, I don't have any wish to harm the encyclopedia. In fact, I want admin access only so I can help the encyclopedia and (among other

1166:

If I may make a few comments: I was one of the administrators whom Cobi mentioned the idea of putting a link to his RFA in ClueBot's edit summary. I thought he was joking and responded with "haha" and "That's a great idea. :)". Looking back, he had no reason to know I was joking, and I really had

5829:

votes which have only the edit summary links as their rationale should be counted as what they are: knee-jerk votes in reaction to a single mistake in social etiquette which did not hurt the project, and was quickly fixed once brought to light. They do not take into account, or even mention Cobi's

5545:

lack of mainspace edits is a problem, not only for lack of experience in understanding writing but it was pointed out that it would have made me (and some others maybe) support this time round. Not taking up suggestions worries me WRT ability to listen. Canvassing gave further cause for concern re

5506:

The bot does a great job in keeping this place cleaned up. But, the nominee just doesn't do much else. Mainspace editing teaches a lot to a potential admin. If the editor is just going to continue cleaning up vandalism, then the admin tools are unnecessary. If the editor wants to do more, then

5185:

That's a nice way of saying he will and has a reason to abuse the tools, which is a serious accusation. A "lack of" experience and a misguided mistake are not even close to reason to oppose an RfA because you think he will misuse the tools gained. Between the work between him and the work he's put

4575:

Gurch's summary of Cobi's edits is something I noticed. While I don't regularly judge a candidate by the distribution of his or her edits, I do expect an administrator to have some mainspace experience, and my impression of Cobi's experience is that it is lacking. I don't think that I can judge

688:

requesting semi-protection for an article with reason being IP vandalism. You look at the article's history and find out that one anonymous user has been removing a significant amount of text and one registered user has been reverting it as vandalism for several days. The only talk page discussion

81:

which was closed at 76/33/11 as "no consensus". It seems to have been a very close decision on the part of the bureaucrats, as evidenced by a delay from the "official" close to the time a decision was made. To his credit, and fortunately for us, Cobi didn't take this as a rejection and continued

4973:

XfD edits. How can I possibly know that Cobi can interact with the community when I barely have evidence that he even has before? This isn't some super-strong oppose because I don't think there's anything about Cobi that would stop me from believing he's an excellent Wikipedian, but this does not

712:

Depends on several unknowns. For example, if the IP is a shared IP among many other users (an ISP proxy), I would probably protect the page with semi-protection. If the IP was not shared by many other users, I would probably block the IP for 24 hours if there were appropriate warnings on the IP's

262:

It seems like everyone has a slightly different method of implementing this, but I will because I think there should be an easier way to desysop administrators if the community no longer wishes them to be an administrator without the long and drawn out process of ArbCom and because administrators

1642:

I would imagine, given the level of experience Will has, he can be expected to place his vote in the correct section for due consideration. Are we still tallying up the number of supports and opposes, scoff, here was me thinking this was a discussion not a straight vote, so does it matter if the

481:

Yes, I do think I have the knowledge. I have the technical knowledge because Knowledge is not the only MediaWiki wiki I use. I have the policy knowledge because I have read, although not necessarily edited, the policies and guidelines, and I understand them. I hope this answers your question.

6103:

is just a series of code, but do you expect someone to just disregard all of your reverts made using twinkle because it was just a series of code? How about MediaWiki/index.php? It is just a series of code, but do you expect someone to just disregard all of your edits because it was made by a

5923:

It depends on the action. In this case, the mistake is arguably harmless (it probably inflated both the supports and certainly the opposes/neutrals for this RfA). However, it calls into question whether or not maturity (or a lack thereof) came into play. A poor choice by an editor typically has

5199:

the editor will abuse the tools intentionally, though this belief arises solely from WP:AGF, as he doesn't have much of a record to judge. Based on his spamming related to this RfA, and general lack of experience, I have every reason to believe the editor will misuse the tools out of ignorance

4897:

I respect Cobi for the tremendous amount of work he has done on one of the most successful anti-vandalism bots around but I cannot support this rfa at this time. I believe that adminship should be no big deal and that you can be trusted with the tools but there is a minimum standard that admins

4414:

I also went through every single one of his mainspace contribs, which, unfortunately didn't take very long. I counted 22 that were not vandalism reverts, and aside from one edit on the 9th, he hasn't edited the mainspace since October. Additionally, using Kate's Tool, taking his total edits and

3397:

Considering his answer to Q1, lack of articles isn't a big issue. He obviously has a lot of experience thinking about vandalism, to design and improve such a well-regarded bot. The canvassing disturbs me, but if he actually asked two admins about it, I'd say it's unfair to hold him responsible.

1255:(which in hindsight, I probably should have posted up here under "Discussion" instead). Also, good on you Kmccoy for stepping up to say you were one of the admins Cobi had "cleared" the action with previously, and for helping us understand the confusion and series of events that led up to it! -- 4311:

I'm curious what it is about his answer to question 19 that you don't care for. You don't think someone who is not good at authoring content should be made an admin? Or you are concerned that he'll try to author content, despite saying he's not good at it? Should someone who is not good at

5440:

I am concerned about the lack of judgment shown by the canvassing in edit summaries—as well as the repeated 'people told me it was okay' excuses. Additionally, while your anti vandalism efforts are admirable, your wikipedia space edit count does not leave me confident that you are adequately

241:

The only "conflicts" that I have been involved with have been in relation to false positives reported about my bot. Such false positives are inevitable, but users can often get very indignant when this happens. This has not caused me stress. My approach has always been to gently explain the

5246:

the knowledge and experience yet to deal with more complex issues. More activity with articles and their talk pages would also lead to more interaction with other Wikipedians, something which I think is very important for an admin to be able to do. You should also get more experience with

4404:

be able to fully describe an adminship candidate's contributions in three sentences. If the candidate hadn't written a bot, this adminship request would have been snowball-closed within hours, with the usual "moral support" and "come back when you've actually done something" comments –

6051:, I can't really oppose based on the edit summary spamming, but it's certainly enough to move my vote from support to neutral. While, the choice could be nothing more than misplaced excitement, it shows a level of immaturity that makes me nervous when combined with the admin tools. 596:

I asked one in PM on IRC, half joking if I should do it, and he responded along the lines of "Great idea! You should do it. :)", so I asked another admin in PM on IRC and he said that I might gain a couple of opposes for being unorthodox, but he didn't have a problem with it

5170:

An almost total lack of experience in mainspace, combined with spamming problems when promoting this RfA, indicate that the candidate is not yet well-versed in community standards and practices. As Mailer Diablo often says, I'm afraid editor will "go sideways with the mop".

4850:

Weakly per Useight at 18:19, 11 December 2007, Gurch at 02:09, 12 December 2007 and Useight one and a third hours later, all above. The lack of both mainspace editing and Knowledge-space editing is alarming, and isn't sufficiently remedied by the fact you run a bot. Sorry,

1183:

It also shows a lack of improvement since last RFA. His first one ended October 11th, and lots of the opposers cited lack of mainspace work. After the RFA, Cobi send out messages to many of the commentors in the RFA stating that he would get more mainspace experience

4127:

Your bot is very helpful, but I'm one of those editors who does "not like to see an RfA "advertised" by the nominee on other people's talk pages or on IRC." Worse that it's appearing in your bot's edit summary and turning up on my watchlist. Please take a look at

3141:, as I have no reservations about the candidate's potential use of the tools. But, please, do take time to consider the effects of your actions with the tools, and - if possible - don't mop when tired, as you might end up canvassing accidentally. ^_^ Best wishes, 444:

late and because it didn't show up in mine. I have already promised that I won't do it again. I have seen signatures with links to different things and thought that this would be even less "in your face" than putting it in a signature. I hope this answers your

3468:

is the only thing stopping me from going for a strong support. Admins should know about things like that. However, this is a small blip in a good user whom I feel would be suited to the mop - keeping in mind that Cobi is only human, even if ClueBot isn't :P :-)

5005:

per above. I appreciate your anti-vandalism bot, but you don't have enough experience dealing with Wikipedians, and your violation of WP:CANVAS and answers to questions related to it makes me feel that you don't understand Knowledge policies and guidelines.

5305:

Thank you for taking the time to answer those questions. Unfortunately, I don't see any indication from your answers that you have given much thought to the content side of Knowledge. Your anti-vandalism contributions, as always, are much appreciated.

5098:. I can't support after the edit summaries of ClueBot contained this RfA, and the reply reading "No one forces you to read ClueBot's edit summaries". I also have a concern with your lack of experience communicating with other Wikipedians as per above. 2842:

Useight, as I said above, my lack of participation in Knowledge should have no reason to affect my judgment about Cobi's qualifications. If my integrity as a person is called into question, I'm sure I could provide completely satisfactory evidence.

4235:

Comment on the whole, another admin approved of it. I think the whole Durova/secret mail list fiasco should give everyone a bit of pause before you say, well an admin approved of the action! Common sense and reading guidelines/policies (in this case

4865:

I can't support someone who has made 22 content-building edits, many of which are borderline COI, as Gurch notes above. I'd be willing to throw almost any standard to the wind to demonstrate my appreciation of ClueBot, but this is asking too much.

5292:. Being an admin means that contributors will approach you with requests for intervention in editorial disputes and deletions, anyone promoted to administrator status should be able to handle such requests by themselves. Dealing with content is an 3775:

Though I trust you with the tools overall here are some major concerns I would like to point out. First, lack of XfD debates and a minimal amount of mainspace edits. But due to your high experience with vandal fighting, I will support somewhat.

5879:

A single action should not be taken as indicative of the user's overall ability. Your own opposition aside: it's fine that the action serves as a catalyst for further investigation into the nominee's past actions, but it should not be taken

2861:, but what I'm saying is that only having a couple edits doesn't throw a lot of weight behind your voicing of said capabilities. I'm not judging your character nor your integrity. I'm also not biased against bot operators nor their friends. 463:

I have noticed that you have more cluebot and talk page related edits than mainspace, do you feel that you have the knowledge gained by preforming mainspace edits (polices, manual of style, templates, and basic article creation procedure)?

3973:, really editcountitis is best treated rather than plastered over rfas. The standards for adminship remain the same: "do we trust them to not screw up and use the admin tools for constructive purposes?" The answer with Cobi is: "yes". 4662:

I did not meat-puppet. Crispy supported fully out of his own will. I did not ask or encourage him to support. Neither did I have any control over whether he supported or not. As for the bot-spamming, it won't happen again. --

285:

I am not exactly sure what you mean. If you mean will I block vandals and clear backlogs tirelessly? Yes. If you mean will I run a fully-automated bot on my account? No. If I didn't answer your question, please post for more

713:

talk page. If there were no warnings on the IP's talk page, I would add a warning. It would also depend on how much vandalism we are talking about. Once per day? Twice a day? Several times a day? I hope this answers your question.

364:

forces you to read ClueBot's edit summaries. I also ran it by two administrators before I did it, one who thought it was a great idea and the other didn't have a problem with it. If you think it is excessive, I'll remove it. :)

4607:

Actually, you raise an important issue... as I sit with this RfA, I think the whole thing needs to be scrapped, given the canvasing and the possibility (probability?) that it is bot supporters who are the majority of "supports".

868:

I thought I removed that ... I am not the type that changes his/her signature every other day. I added that back when I wasn't aware of all the rules. It has been removed now. Thanks for bringing my attention to this. :) --

4690:

While Sasha Callahan has offered an explanation above, I was wondering if Cobi or Crispy could comment on how Crispy found this RfA. Or, more to the point, did you, Cobi, link him here with no indication of how he should vote?

5856:

On the other hand, those opposing for that reason may also be implying that user doesn't rely on his own judgement but rather on the judgement calls of other admins and/or that he didn't take the time to learn the policies of

4312:

authoring content be prevented from contributing to the project in other ways? I say this with a bias, of course, because I am not good at authoring content either, yet I appreciate being able to contribute in my own ways.

4294:

Agreed, but i believe that the type of edits made along with the edit count prove to be a bit disappointing of a user who is running for adminship. Yes edit count is just a number, but sometimes it does reflect the editor.

4593:

for the canvassing, I will assume that it was an innocent lapse in judgement and not an attempt to overrun this rfa with participation by his bot's admirers. Whatever his intent, I hope this process has not been affected.

4536:

Well then you should've taken the advice of the second admin and avoid risking opposition based on the potential canvassing. What did you expect to gain from linking to this page in the summary? And why would you do it?

5637:

issue give me too much pause. However if you were to take the next three or four months to get involved in xfD and make a substantive number of mainspace edits, I would be delighted to !vote support in your next RfA.

589:

You've said both here and on your talk page that two admins "approved" of linking to this RFA in ClueBot's edit summaries. Can you either name the admins, or show what they said in the context in which they said it.

4161:

with Cluebot advertising your RFA (I was not led here by that, personally) is also evidence of lacking sufficient knowledge of policy. You've done a great job with Cluebot, but you and Cluebot are separate entities.

1950:

things) complement my bot in blocking vandals. As for the thing about me going rogue if this is unsuccessful, you can be assured I will not. Just look at my response to the last (unsuccessful) RfA I had. :) --

3159:

The canvassing bit is not a big deal for me. This user has made good, solid contribs, and certainly won't break the 'pedia. Hell, even if he did, he could probably fix it. I see nothing but good coming from this.

4509:

candidate has demonstrated a lack of judgment. You half joked off-wiki about linking your RFA in your bot's edit summary. Did you expect a serious answer, or one which echoed the context which you asked it in?

5069:

I also tried to get the edit summaries (rev comments, as the devs call them) fixed by talking to the developers. They said that it didn't warrant changing them and "nobody cares about rev comments" anyway. --

4743:

Per Gurch, I have to say I feel we have nothing to go on here contribution wise, the coding is great, but that's just a bot, plus the poor judgement associated with the bot's edit summary going into this RFA.

3426:

Jack, did you read my comments? I was one of the two. Please read my entry in the discussion section above. I don't understand why it matters if he names the admins or not. Do you think he's making it up?

4400:. The candidate has added maintenance tags to five articles and written a stub, and reverted vandalism a couple of hundred times. That is a complete description of the candidates mainspace contributions. I 2052:

Oh. Turns out Dlae has already run around being incivil and disruptive. Support re-instated. Shame I never looked at his user page, and blindly assumed that his contributions where valid and in good faith.

4464:

300 mainspace edits, 25 mainspace talk page edits, plus using a bot to advertise your RFA? Any one of the above is fishy. Together they paint a picture of something the community would most likely regret.

419:

was an admin that I ran it by thought it was a great idea and another that I ran it by didn't have a problem with it. It no longer has a link in its edit summary. See the above question for more details.

616:

I don't know. It was a lapse of judgment on my part. It was late (around 4 AM, my time) and I couldn't think straight. I am sorry that I did it, and I am sorry that I can't answer your question better.

2875:

Yeah, I know. It's true that my potential qualifications aren't immediately apparently due to my essentially nonexistent edit count. My comments about bias and such were mainly in response to Gurch.

2718:, good job on ClueBot. Putting a link to this RFA in ClueBot's (who is on virtually everyone's watchlist) edit summaries was probably not very smart, but not reason enough for me to oppose your RFA. -- 6134:

Actually, I will disregard Twinkle work if the editor is using it for a vast majority of their work. I like to see an editor do their own work; I've never used Twinkle or any other automated script.

1329: 5060:

Wow, that was a quick response, and a quick idea! I don't think a redlink would help, because it is just as distracting. But I will think about changing my vote to neutral, to acknowledge this. —

4787:

per answers to the latest optional questions, lack of contributions and spam. Although I love cluebot, I believe that this user can do a bit more to become great. Perhaps some time in the future.

5865:. But, then again, it could be that he seeks consensus before acting. It could be good or bad. I, however, opposed for a lack of experience, and only mentioned the edit summary usage in passing. 4277:

Actually, edit count proves noting... I've seen editors with 5,000+ edits, that still didn't understand 3RR, and some with 1,000 edits, that had great tips for me, on various obscure policies.

3661:

as before - I'm a tad put off by the misguided canvassing too, but I really think he has the best interests in the project in mind here, and he's a dedicated user who knows what he's doing. --

5226:

appreciated, but the concerns that caused the last RfA to fail haven't been addressed. Look forward to supporting after more contributions and better judgment about canvassing next time ;).

2031:

thinks that my rationale is insufficent as a support, hence support withdrawn. No lack of good faith on my part. I trust Cobi totally. Isuues can be taken up with the opposer to my support.

2245:

Cobi, that ad in the summaries was a really, really lame stunt. One that almost made me switch to neutral— please give us assurances that you won't show such a lapse of judgment again. —

4341:

W(hy)TF are you using sarcasm and rude acronyms to justify your opposition? Wouldn't the RfA process be better served by simply stating the facts instead of asking rhetorical questions? --

2804:

I can name dozens of people who know me very well, and have also never edited Knowledge before. So it's OK if they act as meatpuppets next time I'm put to a vote? Nice to know, thanks –

3107:, normally I would Oppose per your rather narrow edit count, but I consider you to be a special case because of your extensive technical knowledge. Therefore, enthusiastic support! =) 1566:

very unlikely to abuse the tools after all this time spent on Knowledge and an obvious sound understanding of policy inparticualr in the field of vandalism given his creation of a bot.

4187:

Irrelevant, in my opinion. Sure he wrote the code and all, which is very respectable, but being an admin isn't about writing code, it's about judgement and applying policy correctly.

777:

I have come across a lot of good articles and the featured articles are definitely among the best, but to chose one specific article? I can't as there are several excellent articles.

5286:

Pending answers to optional questions 15-17. Cobi has not made any comment regarding his stance/approach to anything that actually deals with the editorial side of an encyclopedia.

4673:

A response to that is "he had to find out somehow". But of course, he simply could be what I call a "wiki-observer", someone who watches discussions on WP without participating.

4990:

be a learning experience, whether successful or unsuccessful, and I'm just not seeing that here. I feel bad because he's a great guy, but I just don't know how he'll handle it. ~

141:, so I will be helping out in that regard with the ability to actually block the open proxies as opposed to simply noting that they are open proxies. Second, I plan on working at 3220:

I wasn't impressed with the linking to your RfA in ClueBot's edit summaries, but that's no reason to oppose you. I supported you last time and you have my support this time too.

5704:

I tend to agree, but wanted to see the answer to question 7 above before making up my mind. It appears that ClueBot has posted over 350 links to this RfA since 01:04 today. --

5902: 124:

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Knowledge as an administrator. It is recommended that you answer these optional questions to provide guidance for participants:

4931:

of the latter two which you stated you wanted to work in. Once again, I love your bot and work on it but your contribs do not demonstrate that you are ready for the tools. --

4204: 3589:

Oops! I think I was confusing this one with Walton One's. Thanks! (The comments in the struck vote are my feelings though, if this has to be decided upon words value...)

2205:

This is a weak support now, sadly. The cluebot canvassing was not really the best thing to do, and I hope you never do anything like it as an admin, if you pass. Thanks.

5374:

PS "Well meaning, good guy" is not damning with faint praise -- it's the single most important trait in an admin and you've cleared a major hurdle by displaying it. --

235:

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?

5874: 3806:. The ClueBot advertising wasn't the best call but not bad enough to convince me that Cobi wouldn't make a good admin. Now I wonder how frank you were about Q5... :) 1242: 5771:

I am sorry you dislike it. :( The only reason I did it was because another administrator thought it was a great idea. If you want me to, I will remove it. :) --

5079:

Thank you - you are really making an effort now. I would support you in a couple months, but right now I feel it's just too fresh. This is only a weak oppose now. —

3722:

Cobi may make mistakes, forgive him anyway. Cobi wont make them twice. V/good candidate, good skills - knows his limiatations and doesnt go beyond the boundaries.

2460:(change from Neutral at last RfA). This user seems trustworthy and works hard to revert vandalism, both by himself and with Cluebot. He's ready now for the mop. 4622:

That's assumption of bad faith on the part of all supporters, plain and simple. Saying "majority" instead of "each and every single one" merely adds hypocrisy. I

153:, but that doesn't really require the mop, except when a bot goes awry, in which case I would be able to block the offending bot. I also plan on helping out at 1890:

to him through his development of Cluebot. If this RfA is unsuccessful, he could always re-program the bot and set it for mass destruction of the encyclopedia.

1697:

getting 10,000+ edits before allowing yourself to be nominated. You have a great bot and I have seen from great work from you. Also, I trust the nominator :-)

5924:

short-lived consequences, a poor choice by an admin can have wide-ranging effects. I choose a neutral vote, because this alone simply isn't enough to oppose.

793:

I am not because if someone feels there is deficient coverage in a particular subject area, they can fix it themselves or organize a team to help them fix it.

6252: 6234: 3526:

as per Gracenotes and Stwalkerster. I'm sure Cobi has the common sense and knowledge of the project to make a good admin, and that he won't abuse the tools.

945: 4259:

Per all above. I feel that running a bot does not prove experience, and your edit count does not prove you have ha enough experience to be an admin. I also

2084:

Well, I was just about to type something different until I clicked the article again and saw this. Pedro, I am a valid contributor - you're just an idiot.

339: 5051:

After considering how I could possibly fix the mistake, I will gladly redlink the edit summary link, if you want. I didn't think of it at the time. --

1335: 4761:

per Gurch et al, I prefer to see more rounded experience (even if only slightly), and using edit summaries to link here was not well thought through.

3512:. . Cobi (talk | uw-test | uw-vand | contribs | block) . . (Reverted 1 edit by 66.167.45.248 (talk) to last revision by Trieste) . . show details . . 1251:

I completely agree with your first paragraph Kmccoy. For anyone thinking of opposing on those grounds along, please also see my comment(s) in #2 of the

4723:

should probably confirm this, as I am not 100% sure. Furthermore, throughout this RfA, any links to this page by me have been completely neutral. --

3946:

The fact that I have to actually compete with ClueBot (along with other bots) while in RC patrol proves that this user is an excellent vandal fighter.

1737:- The user needs the tools and will use them very effectively in an area of the project not many people are familiar with. Plus ClueBot is awesome. -- 4129: 2966:

as last time. Cobi lose his time fixing and improving his bots, that is why he does not have much edits. Thanks for yours incredible bots. Good luck.

5598:

becoming an admin cannot just step from his wonderful creation. They are two separate accounts. And this account isn't ready for adminship just yet.

4001:- if you were planning to somehow abuse Knowledge it seems you would already have had the means to do so. I trust you to use the tools responsibly. ( 5758:

Although unorthodox, it's really kinda cute in a twisted way if you think of ClueBot as a realistic little robot running around smacking vandals. --

2687: 1014: 1109: 972: 967: 962: 314:. I, of course, have my ClueBot accounts, which are strictly used for my (approved) bots. I do not have any alternate accounts other than that. 4171: 2477:

Good user who has done much for Knowledge, especially bot-related contributions. Ready for mop, although the bot summary was not too clever. :(

5789:

No harm, no foul. And BTW, I agree with your point on Question 8 (?) about that no one is forced to see it. ----Jump! Slash! Dash! Ouch! Super

5740:

Me too, actually. Then again, I have no beef against it; I honestly believe that is was a long time coming. ----Jump! Slash! Dash! Ouch! Super

5594:

is brilliant. I love it. It IS the most effective vandal fighter out there (apart from me of course ;-) ). No, I'm joking it is brilliant! But

731:

Not applicable to this RfA or my vote, but do you, in the forseeable future have any intention, desire, or plans at any time to run an RfA for

5830:

history of editing and interaction on the wiki, and are thus not representative of this nominee outside of the nine hour window in which the

4527:

I expected a joking one, but the response was serious as far as I can tell. And the second admin I asked, it wasn't in a joking manner. --

2270:. Keeping in mind how well Cluebot runs, I think he can say he knows what he's doing on the vandal front. ----Jump! Slash! Dash! Ouch! Super 1542: 957: 689:

regarding it is the registered user giving vandalism template warnings on the IP's talk page. What would you do as an administrator and why?

78: 5984:(leaning towards support) - I want to support but the issue with the lack of WP namespace and the Canvassing issue sway me too much. Sorry. 841: 582: 1051:

While Cobi's edit count is 1,600 (relatively low), query.php gives ClueBot's edit count, as of 12:03, 11 December 2007 (UTC), at 223,201.

5916: 5888: 4181: 3911: 77:) - Hello, I think it's time to once again ask that the community provide Cobi with administrator access. Two months ago, Cobi had an 4903: 4133: 3604: 3558: 3147: 2212: 2189: 263:

should be accountable for their actions. I am not exactly sure how I will implement it, yet, but I will list myself in that category.

1001: 5898: 5870: 4200: 4167: 1238: 137:

There are several areas where I have experience working in as a user and bot master. First, I am a verified open proxy checker at

4025: 3763: 2890: 2754: 30: 17: 6034:. Same as above. I actually supported Cobi's last RfA, but I think the edit summary spamming shows spectacularly poor judgment. 5621:

before next try. It's not so hard and I would be happy to help you. Your bot is my favorite. Thank you very much for that. -

1293: 4263:

dislike that you used an automated system to advertise (spam) your current RfA. I did not care for the answer to question 19.

1044: 5557: 4415:

subtracting Bot-related edits (only the one's listed by Kate, there may be more), he's only made just over 1100 total edits.

3791: 1746: 1038: 5200:(perhaps in rather grand fashion, given the work-rate of bots.) This is the meaning of my phrasing, and I stand behind it. 941: 890:

Will you consider some of the opposes below and be editing articles (not limited to reverting vandalism) in the future? --

193:

reverts a lot of vandalism every day and the other ClueBots do other work around Knowledge, such as clerking and archiving

4802: 2927: 2429: 1409: 1305: 535: 508: 398: 335: 5656: 3961: 3919: 3868: 3710: 2356: 2335: 1323: 1311: 1008: 2127:

Pedro, is your support withdrawn or not? As it stands now, you're in the Support column until you edit it differently.

5894: 5866: 5527:

Your lack of mainspace contributions combined with canvassing in edit summaries makes me think that you're not ready.

5410: 4653: 4196: 4163: 3759: 3076:

There is no evidence whatsoever that Cobi will abuse the tools. The issue with the bot is not an indication of abuse.

2727: 2564: 1530: 1299: 1234: 1693:- I opposed last time but I have seen an improvement. It's a good thing that you're rejecting the "norm" on RfA's by 2450:

s this candidate for adminship, as he is confident that this user won't do anything stupid with the tools (added on

2010:(ec)I'm sorry, but it reads like you believe that Cobi will use bots to abuse the block / protect / delete buttons? 3241:- I'm not impressed with the ClueBot linking, but that's a minor lapse that can and should be overlooked. Regards, 2942:

for familiarity with technical processes, policies, and common sense in general. As an admin, however, do realize:

1317: 1070: 994: 917: 74: 5633:- As much as I would like to give a support !vote, the low number of mainspace edits, lack of xfD experience, and 440:

Somewhat. At the time I didn't realize it would show up in the watch list of several users, because it was very,

5911: 5793: 5744: 2274: 1490: 1449: 186: 3687: 1200:

contributions to the mainspace that weren't vandalism reverts. This is not evidence of learning from past RFAs.

6039: 5950:

the use of them. Unfortunately, I just can not support at this time. I really do hope this RfA is successful. -

5121: 4681: 4562: 4545: 4518: 2924: 1403: 835: 576: 5682:

I don't hate it enough to actually oppose the RfA, but I certainly don't feel comfortable supporting, either.

5261:, I think you would be a better administrator if you do address the concerns that everyone has raised here. -- 3551:

surely isn't going to abuse their rights. If you are promoted, please tread carefully. Thanks, and good luck!

4363:

Er, yes, that was sort of the point - to highlight the inappropriate-ness of the tone by reflecting it back.

5653: 4649: 4278: 4177:

You say that as if you think the ClueBot group is sentient, ultimately it's owned and controlled by Cobi. --

3908: 3094: 2989: 2313: 1815: 4915:

and a handful of vandalism reverts. In addition, you have no contribs at other admin-related areas such as

3846:

make mistakes, I think it's useful to see how well they handle them - and Cobi passes with flying colors.

2672:. The botspam thing honestly doesn't bother me since Cobi talked with a couple different admins about it. – 2027:

No I don't believe he would, hence my support here and the exact rationale in his first RfA, copied above.

1959:

Administrators are bound to act on community requests. Apparently my support rationale was insufficent for

1886:

That doesn't mean he hasn't got a master plan, or an ulterior motive. Maybe he thinks an admin position is

6022: 5989: 4092: 3726: 3600: 3563: 3476: 3227: 3193: 3178: 2970: 2601:

removed any motivation I might have had to get MartinBot back up and running in any reasonable time span.

2217: 2194: 1527: 1466: 1233:

to show improvement between RFAs. He was asked by the community to do more mainspace and he didn't do it.

2505: 1967:

tells me that there must be a valid reason Dlae challenged my support. Accordingly my support is struck.

1863:

Heck, if this guy was here to harm Knowledge he wouldn't spend hours writing bots that help out would he?

6198: 5858: 5296:

part of an administrator's responsibilities, relevant experience is a prerequisite for even applying. ˉˉ

4627: 4494: 4380:

Fine, here's a better reason. Excluding vandal reverts, the candidate has made 20 mainspace edits. Yes.

4355: 4245: 4237: 4226: 4218: 4058: 3683: 3210: 3058:

Cobi came, ClueBot came, other ClueBot's came, what's next? I think it is time for Cobi to get sysop. —

2387: 1802: 1606: 1550: 218: 6233:

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

4053:

Cobi has some oppose due to lack of mainspace editing. I've asked that Cobi help me with an article.

3723: 3596: 3553: 3190: 2900:(acting/editing) community, then this should be pointed out, as was done right underneath your vote. -- 2207: 2184: 1814:- anyone that's created ClueBot obviously knows how to fight vandalism and be sensible with the tools. 5485:, what he has done is valuable, but he has not gained a sufficient level of experience in wide areas. 4437: 2352: 5908: 5790: 5741: 5011: 4978: 4824: 4577: 4554:

Note, I've added this as a follow up to my original question, but left it here to preserve context.

4020: 4015: 3630: 3592: 3165: 2981: 2886: 2878: 2848: 2819: 2750: 2742: 2681: 2645: 2271: 2132: 1673: 1633: 1478: 1437: 1270: 905: 891: 6017:. Ugh... I was just about to support until I saw the spamming in ClueBot's edit summaries... Sorry. 2640:

have. Any misbehavior will surely be observed and complained about by hundreds of watchful editors.

2583: 6035: 5709: 5643: 5493: 5325: 5254:

before you get the mop, especially as you say that you plan on working in those areas as an admin.

5141: 5114: 4674: 4555: 4538: 4511: 4486: 4296: 4264: 3777: 3741: 3344: 3326: 3112: 3046: 2606: 2588: 1287: 831: 572: 465: 457: 402: 381: 351: 6219: 6202: 6175: 6157: 6143: 6129: 6108: 6095: 6076: 6059: 6043: 6026: 6009: 5993: 5974: 5932: 5851: 5838: 5820: 5798: 5784: 5775: 5762: 5749: 5735: 5713: 5699: 5659: 5647: 5625: 5609: 5582: 5561: 5537: 5522: 5498: 5473: 5450: 5432: 5414: 5396: 5382: 5369: 5349: 5329: 5310: 5300: 5276: 5230: 5209: 5190: 5180: 5162: 5145: 5125: 5083: 5074: 5064: 5055: 5046: 5015: 4997: 4981: 4946: 4888: 4859: 4845: 4828: 4811: 4779: 4762: 4753: 4727: 4706: 4685: 4667: 4657: 4617: 4602: 4580: 4566: 4549: 4531: 4522: 4501: 4474: 4456: 4424: 4409: 4371: 4358: 4345: 4335: 4319: 4304: 4289: 4272: 4249: 4230: 4147: 4122: 4096: 4079: 4062: 4045: 4027: 4006: 3993: 3965: 3941: 3924: 3899: 3878: 3855: 3834: 3817: 3798: 3767: 3745: 3729: 3714: 3690: 3674: 3651: 3637: 3608: 3584: 3569: 3541: 3518: 3499: 3480: 3450: 3434: 3421: 3405: 3389: 3366: 3348: 3331: 3317: 3306: 3284: 3256: 3233: 3215: 3196: 3181: 3169: 3151: 3133: 3116: 3099: 3080: 3071: 3050: 3033: 3016: 2993: 2972: 2958: 2934: 2908:(whoops - meant to say "if" the first time around; added it in , at 05:09, 12 December 2007 (UTC)) 2904: 2870: 2852: 2837: 2823: 2808: 2799: 2782: 2758: 2731: 2710: 2693: 2664: 2649: 2631: 2610: 2593: 2574: 2550: 2539: 2525: 2513: 2488: 2469: 2451: 2433: 2408: 2391: 2374: 2360: 2339: 2318: 2296: 2279: 2258: 2249: 2240: 2223: 2200: 2177: 2157: 2136: 2122: 2101: 2069: 2047: 2022: 2005: 1983: 1954: 1941: 1928: 1907: 1881: 1853: 1838: 1806: 1787: 1760: 1729: 1710: 1677: 1663: 1652: 1637: 1623: 1609: 1600: 1584: 1532: 1518: 1495: 1472: 1454: 1427: 1411: 1396: 1370: 1355: 1344: 1274: 1259: 1227: 1209: 1178: 1157: 1140: 1121: 1100: 1057: 921: 894: 873: 807: 743: 704: 654: 610:

What did you expect to gain from linking to this page in the summaries? And why would you do it?

544: 473: 410: 355: 277: 110: 93: 6122: 6072: 5885: 5835: 5817: 5605: 5551: 5466: 5427: 5406: 5080: 5061: 5043: 4884: 4871: 4699: 4368: 4342: 4300: 4268: 4075: 3987: 3914: 3851: 3784: 3402: 3272: 3129: 3089: 2901: 2625: 2546: 2348: 2327: 2305: 2292: 1753: 1256: 1066: 697: 647: 469: 406: 1361: 823:

covering them. Also, as I have said elsewhere, I am not particularly good at writing articles.

6171: 6139: 6018: 6002: 5985: 5862: 5634: 5578: 5570: 5508: 5446: 5307: 5297: 5239: 5227: 4797: 4420: 4158: 4088: 4041: 3830: 3810: 3668: 3647: 3470: 3465: 3249: 3222: 3142: 2967: 2866: 2833: 2544:

Without a Doubt... you're the guy that made Cluebot... that bot is very useful and amazing :)

2535: 2483: 2465: 2424: 1780: 1770: 1706: 1461: 1205: 1152: 1116: 804: 530: 503: 428: 392: 329: 272: 206: 6001:

I was going to support but the ClueBot Canvassing issue has made me question your judgment --

4385: 2788: 853: 6193: 6090: 5970: 5957: 5692: 5489:. With some experience in these areas, I can see myself supporting some time in the future. 5158: 5104: 4841: 4775: 4623: 4613: 4470: 4316: 4241: 4222: 4054: 3937: 3873: 3707: 3494: 3445: 3431: 3416: 3302: 3206: 3009: 2383: 2331: 1850: 1799: 1546: 1393: 1175: 343: 202: 90: 3177:

ClueBot is useful and Cobi appears to be also. Canvassing issue appears to be a non-issue.

6150: 5688: 5379: 5366: 5269: 5205: 5176: 5007: 4991: 4975: 4944: 4820: 4749: 4720: 4406: 4332: 4116: 3895: 3580: 3161: 2947: 2882: 2844: 2815: 2805: 2775: 2764:

Note, User has made only two contributions to this project, both regarding RfA's for Cobi

2746: 2723: 2673: 2641: 2569: 2150: 2128: 2115: 2062: 2040: 1998: 1976: 1921: 1874: 1669: 1629: 1568: 1266: 222: 214: 198: 6148:

Yes, but you did attempt to use it, until you found out that it doesn't work in IE. <

2765: 5726: 5705: 5652:

No evidence that this user has a practical understanding of our core content policies.

5639: 5622: 5490: 5358: 5339: 5321: 5251: 5137: 5032: 4924: 4876: 4142: 3736: 3527: 3354: 3340: 3108: 3077: 3042: 2739:. Great guy, would never abuse anything, and would definitely be a dedicated helper. 2706: 2602: 2500: 2369: 2092: 1898: 1724: 1648: 1282: 1091: 1083:

Shout out to Cluebot. Holla, baby, yeah! It's all love round here, you know how we do.

988: 913: 685: 347: 342:

in hundreds of mainspace edit summaries conflict with either the word or spirit of the

297: 162: 68: 5320:, per concerns concerning mainspace and here: Optional question 19, from Iamunknown - 5288:

Reverting vandalism is all well and good, but that task can be handled with a bot and

1912:

Hadn't thought of that. Too dangerous to alow coders to be admins. Support withdrawn.

6246: 6215: 6117: 6068: 5849: 5759: 5618: 5600: 5547: 5461: 5424: 5402: 5289: 5247: 5187: 4928: 4920: 4916: 4912: 4906: 4880: 4867: 4694: 4389: 4287: 4178: 4071: 3981: 3975: 3847: 3399: 3382: 3266: 3125: 3065: 3029: 2620: 2404: 2288: 2174: 2020: 1964: 1939: 1769:

Cobi has my trust and I believe he has gain the required experience to be a sysop. --

1738: 1597: 1514: 1509: 1425: 1225: 740: 736: 692: 671: 667: 663: 642: 635: 210: 158: 154: 150: 142: 3124:

reservations from my opppose on previous RfA have been addressed. Happy to support.

2618:

For hard work fighting vandalism and a clear dedication to project work. Good luck!

787:

Are you bothered by deficient coverage in any particular subject area on Knowledge?

6167: 6135: 6100: 5591: 5574: 5442: 4788: 4416: 4037: 3886:

A bit on the inexperienced side, but would seem to make a decent and useful admin.

3842:- I like the bot, I think the advertising bit was a mistake. Since we know admins 3826: 3807: 3663: 3643: 3374:

Having supported in this user's previous RfA, I support per the same reason stated

3314: 3242: 2943: 2862: 2829: 2522: 2478: 2461: 2440: 2417: 1698: 1659: 1619: 1201: 1053: 820: 816: 760: 732: 521: 494: 388: 325: 307: 194: 190: 182: 146: 138: 83: 4905:

on Knowledge; and out of those 307 edits, once you get rid of the mass reverts of

4221:. Edit summaries describe the edit, and the edit had nothing to do with this RFA. 662:

People who have not vandalized after their last warning should not be reported to

5036: 5021: 3041:

Article writing does not necessarily indicate how useful one can be as an admin.

6085: 6053: 5965: 5952: 5926: 5881: 5528: 5154: 4853: 4837: 4771: 4716: 4712: 4631: 4609: 4466: 4313: 3947: 3933: 3863: 3703: 3513: 3428: 3297: 3002: 2793: 2658: 1847: 1554: 1390: 1365: 1350: 1339: 1172: 557: 553: 103: 87: 54: 5825:

Actually, after re-reading some of the votes, let me clarify my thoughts. Any

5683: 5393: 5376: 5363: 5262: 5201: 5172: 4932: 4745: 4599: 4110: 4002: 3887: 3576: 2769: 2719: 2559: 2246: 2237: 2144: 2109: 2056: 2034: 1992: 1970: 1915: 1868: 1128: 6227:

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

6084:

Leaning to oppose. ClueBots are great, but they are just a series of codes.--

3758:

to justify so many opposes for a person who has only contributed positively.

6105: 5781: 5772: 5719: 5595: 5099: 5071: 5052: 5042:

inventiveness to make up for the mistake, that would have swayed my vote. —

5027:

own interest, without any regard for what's good for Knowledge, and without

4724: 4664: 4576:

what type of actions Cobi would make as an admin, and so do not support. --

4528: 4351: 4137: 4014:

per the actions of ClueBot and the fact that Cobi will not misuse the tools

3734:

I'm sure Cobi appreciates the support, but you already expressed it at #62.

3533: 3489: 3440: 3439:

Ah right, thanks for clearing that up. I'll be changing to weak support :).

3411: 3410:

I would actually be supporting the same as you if he could name the admins!

2702: 2255: 2085: 2028: 1960: 1951: 1891: 1719: 1644: 1084: 984: 937: 909: 870: 603:

Follow up question (originally in my response to your response to my oppose)

311: 107: 64: 4352:

W(hy)TF are you using sarcasm and rude acronyms to justify your opposition?

3627:

Most admin actions (AIV UAA CSD) have nothing to do with mainspace edits.

1628:

Will, can you please clarify...is this a supportive or oppositional tally?

666:

in the first place. Furthermore, only active vandals should be reported to

3698:- Canvassing - bad. Few mainspace contributions - bad. But I'm supporting 6211: 5844: 4282: 3025: 2400: 2015: 1934: 1420: 1220: 1151:

See the talk page. Most were vandalism reversions. :-/ Sigh, Knowledge.

1126:

We did? It says on the RfA talk page that xe had 1,137 mainspace edits.

902:

Yes, I will. I am not very good at authoring content, but I will try.

2980:

Let's finally give Cobi what he deserves - a mop right up the bracket!

856:, do you feel its appropriate to link to its article in your signature 253: 4132:. Also, I took a look at your editing contributions, as summarized by 6237:

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

5423:. I am not confident, yet, that I know how Cobi would use the tools. 3059: 2857:

I'm not questioning your ability to determine Cobi's capabilities in

271:

If you become an admin will you perform bot-like tasks? (i.e. Curps)

2828:

Only two edits, both to Cobi's RFAs? Definite meatpuppet. Not good.

1349:

And I opposed that RfA. Time and experience have changed my mind.

181:

I would have to say that my best contribution to Knowledge has been

3932:

Outside the adverts, definitely one to be trusted with the keys. --

1069:. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review 4645: 5028: 4397: 2254:

It won't happen again. I realize that I messed up. Sorry. --

803:

Is there an article you've always wanted to write or improve? ˉˉ

401:) constitues spaming, if so why did you do it, if not, why not? 57: 2955: 639:

last six hours. What would you do as an administrator and why?

149:

also reports a lot of vandals there. I am also a member of the

2236:; all he missed was a bit of experience, which he now has. — 739:

or any other task that requires the use of the delete tool? --

6210:- too many negatives to support, but am unwilling to oppose. 3907:

Dedicated to cleaning up vandalism, will know will do well. —

1657:

Indeed, it's a joke-oppose. Gotta lighten up RfA somwhere :)

560:) human knowledge. Or did you want a more realistic view? ;) 100:

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:

5195:"Abuse" carries the connotation of intentionality. I don't 4240:) pertaining to what you plan on doing should be consulted. 2946:, and a technical solution doesn't exist for every problem. 2558:- definitely. (And ClueBot is truly amazing, by the way.) 6104:

series of code? Thanks for your reconsideration. :) --

5675:

dislike ClueBot mentioning your RfA in its edit summaries.

2582:

great ClueBot operator. Hopefully this RfA is successful.

1196:

are three of the posts). Since then, he has added exactly

771:

What is the best article on Knowledge you've come across?

552:

A completely vandalism-free, troll-free reference of all (

5884:

as evidence that the user is unsuitable for adminship. --

3642:

Most admin tools also have nothing to do with coding. :)

2791:

along with Cobi and I'm sure he knows Cobi very well. (:

815:

Not really as most of the topics I am interested in have

29:

The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a

3355: 2416:, little more to add than what's been said already. < 2304:, candidate looks like he will be an excellent admin. -- 175:

What are your best contributions to Knowledge, and why?

5680: 5678: 5676: 4909: 4217:- I think it is improper to add a link to here from an 3375: 1593: 1193: 1189: 1185: 1032: 1026: 1020: 860: 857: 520:

What do you want Knowledge to be three years from now?

437: 5361:

link, tagging and fixing articles as they turn up). --

5020:

In the bot spam incident, the candidate acted only in

3204:. Will be fine, despite the edit count. Good luck. 2141:

It was reinstated on the 11th at 21:29 per the above.

1797:- For being nominated by a Human this time .. :P ...-- 3575:

Sorry, but no one may !vote twice (See Support #19.)

3088:

I supported last time and I see no reason to change.

2347:- seen them around, and every time it's been good. — 1605:

Cobi will be incredibly helpful as an administrator.

4986:

I supported last time, but gosh - 20 mainspace? RfA

4439: 1989:over the last few days, when acting in good faith. 145:, as I have had experience reporting vandals there. 4898:should have. One big problem is that you have only 4836:- very useful bot, however still lacks experience. 3090: 1526:Excellent contributor, unlikely to misuse the mop. 5401:Sorry, I cannot support this candidate per above. 4969:WP talk edits, and unless I'm missing something, 2983: 254:Category:Knowledge administrators open for recall 5256:If this RfA doesn't succeed, and even if it does 5946:Changed to support after further consideration. 3623:Amazing coder who is unlikely to abuse tools. * 387:Do you feel that advertising your RfA by using 131:What admin work do you intend to take part in? 5907:Hear hear! ----Jump! Slash! Dash! Ouch! Super 4974:necessarily translate into being an admin. -- 4191:work, not Cluebot's, does not yet demonstrate 2792: 2657: 1643:tally doesn't match the number of comments ? 102:I humbly accept this excellent nomination by 8: 4392:article promoting ClueNet, one was linking 3205: 1702: 1699: 296:Have you used, or do you currently use any 4331:plan. Seriously, WTF were you thinking? – 3383: 3095: 1281:For the record, we do have precident with 4130:Knowledge:Guide to requests for adminship 5279:, modified 17:25, 14 December 2007 (UTC) 4281:, and, a very poor gauge of experience. 4070:. Seems to have a use for the tools. -- 1459:Yet you've beaten it over 400 times? :) 1065:Please keep discussion constructive and 4087:You seem deserving for the admin title. 955: 82:his hard work, especially with his bot 1846:- I would trust him with the tools. -- 4436:Per Gurch and Useight's Public Sock. 7: 5259:Regardless of how this RfA turns out 427:: Do you feel that it then violated 53:(98/47/11); Scheduled to end 05:09, 6253:Unsuccessful requests for adminship 2498: 2173:Will make good use of the tools. -- 953: 4715:asked him on IRC to participate. 4195:that he meets those requirements. 1963:who is a member of the community. 24: 5718:That's how I was led here, haha. 4484:not enough mainspace experience. 2794: 2659: 1507:Unlikely to abuse admin tools. -- 882:Optional question from Iamunknown 6166:use it, and that's what I said. 2106:Oh yes, you're not wrong there. 18:Knowledge:Requests for adminship 6151: 6054: 5927: 5727: 5340: 4874:) 03:14, 13 December 2007 (UTC) 4803: 4798: 4790: 4447: 4445: 4443: 4441: 4152:(switch to ultra-weak support) 2928: 2688: 2682: 2674: 2506: 2501: 2370: 2093: 1899: 1718:again. Last time was a crock. 1491: 1485: 1482: 1479: 1450: 1444: 1441: 1438: 1132: 1130: 1092: 536: 531: 523: 509: 504: 496: 6067:This makes me really sad. :( — 5843:Very well put, Peruvianllama! 4933: 4327:Spamming with your bot. Yeah, 4033:Weakest support there ever was 3976: 3514: 3379: 3250: 3243: 1366: 1351: 1340: 1106:Concerns about mainspace edits 944:. For the edit count, see the 1: 6220:21:46, 17 December 2007 (UTC) 6203:04:45, 17 December 2007 (UTC) 6176:00:39, 16 December 2007 (UTC) 6158:23:39, 15 December 2007 (UTC) 6144:17:15, 15 December 2007 (UTC) 6130:16:08, 15 December 2007 (UTC) 6109:02:37, 15 December 2007 (UTC) 6096:23:03, 14 December 2007 (UTC) 6077:20:44, 14 December 2007 (UTC) 6060:09:36, 14 December 2007 (UTC) 6044:18:58, 13 December 2007 (UTC) 6027:15:05, 13 December 2007 (UTC) 6010:09:11, 12 December 2007 (UTC) 5994:05:59, 12 December 2007 (UTC) 5975:03:50, 13 December 2007 (UTC) 5961:03:55, 12 December 2007 (UTC) 5933:09:36, 14 December 2007 (UTC) 5917:15:43, 12 December 2007 (UTC) 5903:21:25, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 5889:21:18, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 5875:21:09, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 5852:21:06, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 5839:20:53, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 5821:20:33, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 5799:20:16, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 5785:18:15, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 5780:It has been removed. :) -- 5776:18:06, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 5763:18:07, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 5750:17:24, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 5736:17:11, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 5720: 5714:16:36, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 5700:16:27, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 5660:01:35, 18 December 2007 (UTC) 5648:22:21, 17 December 2007 (UTC) 5626:13:59, 17 December 2007 (UTC) 5610:11:27, 17 December 2007 (UTC) 5583:18:40, 16 December 2007 (UTC) 5562:13:03, 16 December 2007 (UTC) 5538:23:28, 15 December 2007 (UTC) 5523:22:56, 15 December 2007 (UTC) 5499:10:01, 15 December 2007 (UTC) 5474:06:15, 15 December 2007 (UTC) 5451:05:16, 15 December 2007 (UTC) 5441:experienced in policy areas. 5433:03:35, 15 December 2007 (UTC) 5415:00:37, 15 December 2007 (UTC) 5397:20:54, 14 December 2007 (UTC) 5383:18:49, 14 December 2007 (UTC) 5370:18:47, 14 December 2007 (UTC) 5350:18:21, 14 December 2007 (UTC) 5330:17:44, 14 December 2007 (UTC) 5311:19:10, 15 December 2007 (UTC) 5301:16:17, 14 December 2007 (UTC) 5277:15:51, 14 December 2007 (UTC) 5231:15:02, 14 December 2007 (UTC) 5210:15:06, 14 December 2007 (UTC) 5191:14:55, 14 December 2007 (UTC) 5181:14:49, 14 December 2007 (UTC) 5163:07:22, 14 December 2007 (UTC) 5146:02:59, 14 December 2007 (UTC) 5126:01:10, 14 December 2007 (UTC) 5109:23:59, 13 December 2007 (UTC) 5084:03:35, 14 December 2007 (UTC) 5075:21:44, 13 December 2007 (UTC) 5065:20:24, 13 December 2007 (UTC) 5056:20:15, 13 December 2007 (UTC) 5047:20:09, 13 December 2007 (UTC) 5016:15:15, 13 December 2007 (UTC) 4998:12:29, 13 December 2007 (UTC) 4982:09:15, 13 December 2007 (UTC) 4947:05:19, 13 December 2007 (UTC) 4889:06:36, 13 December 2007 (UTC) 4860:22:49, 12 December 2007 (UTC) 4846:17:51, 12 December 2007 (UTC) 4829:16:08, 12 December 2007 (UTC) 4812:15:57, 12 December 2007 (UTC) 4780:12:28, 12 December 2007 (UTC) 4763:10:54, 12 December 2007 (UTC) 4754:11:02, 12 December 2007 (UTC) 4728:05:03, 13 December 2007 (UTC) 4707:04:17, 13 December 2007 (UTC) 4686:16:43, 12 December 2007 (UTC) 4668:06:25, 12 December 2007 (UTC) 4658:06:19, 12 December 2007 (UTC) 4618:05:40, 12 December 2007 (UTC) 4603:05:35, 12 December 2007 (UTC) 4581:02:25, 12 December 2007 (UTC) 4567:05:34, 12 December 2007 (UTC) 4550:00:52, 12 December 2007 (UTC) 4532:00:48, 12 December 2007 (UTC) 4523:00:45, 12 December 2007 (UTC) 4502:00:42, 12 December 2007 (UTC) 4475:00:23, 12 December 2007 (UTC) 4457:20:44, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 4425:03:29, 12 December 2007 (UTC) 4410:02:09, 12 December 2007 (UTC) 4372:22:58, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 4359:21:32, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 4346:20:59, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 4336:20:21, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 4320:06:40, 14 December 2007 (UTC) 4305:23:38, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 4290:20:38, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 4273:20:03, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 4250:20:55, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 4231:19:27, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 4205:18:33, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 4182:18:22, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 4172:18:19, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 4148:18:17, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 4123:11:54, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 4097:03:31, 18 December 2007 (UTC) 4080:22:38, 17 December 2007 (UTC) 4063:22:31, 17 December 2007 (UTC) 4046:22:29, 17 December 2007 (UTC) 4028:21:07, 17 December 2007 (UTC) 4007:21:05, 17 December 2007 (UTC) 3994:19:49, 17 December 2007 (UTC) 3982: 3966:16:10, 17 December 2007 (UTC) 3949: 3942:04:37, 17 December 2007 (UTC) 3925:03:52, 17 December 2007 (UTC) 3900:03:23, 17 December 2007 (UTC) 3879:01:29, 17 December 2007 (UTC) 3856:22:46, 16 December 2007 (UTC) 3835:09:22, 16 December 2007 (UTC) 3818:21:57, 15 December 2007 (UTC) 3799:17:21, 15 December 2007 (UTC) 3768:17:13, 15 December 2007 (UTC) 3746:18:19, 15 December 2007 (UTC) 3730:17:00, 15 December 2007 (UTC) 3715:15:58, 15 December 2007 (UTC) 3691:05:04, 15 December 2007 (UTC) 3675:04:14, 15 December 2007 (UTC) 3652:06:54, 15 December 2007 (UTC) 3638:03:12, 15 December 2007 (UTC) 3609:20:51, 14 December 2007 (UTC) 3585:16:12, 14 December 2007 (UTC) 3570:15:36, 14 December 2007 (UTC) 3542:15:22, 14 December 2007 (UTC) 3519:06:53, 14 December 2007 (UTC) 3500:01:07, 14 December 2007 (UTC) 3481:00:18, 14 December 2007 (UTC) 3451:01:07, 14 December 2007 (UTC) 3435:00:14, 14 December 2007 (UTC) 3422:00:03, 14 December 2007 (UTC) 3406:21:08, 13 December 2007 (UTC) 3390:19:56, 13 December 2007 (UTC) 3384: 3367:06:21, 13 December 2007 (UTC) 3349:05:42, 13 December 2007 (UTC) 3332:05:40, 13 December 2007 (UTC) 3318:05:15, 13 December 2007 (UTC) 3307:03:54, 13 December 2007 (UTC) 3285:03:39, 13 December 2007 (UTC) 3257:02:42, 13 December 2007 (UTC) 3234:02:21, 13 December 2007 (UTC) 3216:00:56, 13 December 2007 (UTC) 3197:18:34, 12 December 2007 (UTC) 3182:18:29, 12 December 2007 (UTC) 3170:17:19, 12 December 2007 (UTC) 3152:15:34, 12 December 2007 (UTC) 3134:12:26, 12 December 2007 (UTC) 3117:10:04, 12 December 2007 (UTC) 3100:04:51, 12 December 2007 (UTC) 3081:03:08, 12 December 2007 (UTC) 3072:02:57, 12 December 2007 (UTC) 3051:02:39, 12 December 2007 (UTC) 3034:02:35, 12 December 2007 (UTC) 3017:02:32, 12 December 2007 (UTC) 2994:02:25, 12 December 2007 (UTC) 2973:01:38, 12 December 2007 (UTC) 2959:23:44, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 2935:23:30, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 2905:03:43, 12 December 2007 (UTC) 2871:03:11, 12 December 2007 (UTC) 2853:03:01, 12 December 2007 (UTC) 2838:02:54, 12 December 2007 (UTC) 2824:03:00, 12 December 2007 (UTC) 2809:02:20, 12 December 2007 (UTC) 2800:00:45, 12 December 2007 (UTC) 2783:23:13, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 2759:23:09, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 2732:22:52, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 2711:22:52, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 2694:22:26, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 2665:22:18, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 2650:22:04, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 2632:21:53, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 2611:21:22, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 2594:20:59, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 2575:20:57, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 2551:20:20, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 2540:20:17, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 2526:19:57, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 2514:19:22, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 2489:18:28, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 2470:18:26, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 2452:18:08, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 2434:17:59, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 2409:17:27, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 2392:17:20, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 2382:. Fully qualified candidate. 2375:17:15, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 2361:16:02, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 2340:15:54, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 2319:14:38, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 2297:14:14, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 2280:13:44, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 2259:23:26, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 2250:23:15, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 2241:13:43, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 2224:16:30, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 2201:13:42, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 2178:13:33, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 2158:17:06, 17 December 2007 (UTC) 2137:14:26, 17 December 2007 (UTC) 2123:22:02, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 2102:21:34, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 2086: 2070:21:29, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 2048:21:05, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 2023:20:58, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 2014:Something's not right there. 2006:20:53, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 1984:20:47, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 1955:20:49, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 1942:20:40, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 1929:20:24, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 1908:17:26, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 1892: 1882:13:19, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 1854:12:52, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 1839:11:54, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 1807:11:53, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 1788:09:09, 12 December 2007 (UTC) 1777:11:49, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 1761:11:42, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 1730:11:00, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 1711:10:31, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 1678:16:58, 17 December 2007 (UTC) 1664:16:39, 17 December 2007 (UTC) 1653:16:22, 17 December 2007 (UTC) 1638:14:39, 17 December 2007 (UTC) 1624:10:21, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 1610:07:43, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 1601:07:29, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 1585:07:17, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 1533:06:04, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 1519:05:56, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 1496:07:47, 15 December 2007 (UTC) 1473:02:17, 13 December 2007 (UTC) 1455:05:44, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 1428:05:42, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 1412:05:42, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 1397:05:32, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 1371:07:57, 14 December 2007 (UTC) 1356:07:01, 14 December 2007 (UTC) 1345:06:58, 14 December 2007 (UTC) 1275:18:59, 13 December 2007 (UTC) 1260:18:37, 13 December 2007 (UTC) 1243:20:43, 13 December 2007 (UTC) 1228:17:48, 13 December 2007 (UTC) 1210:17:30, 13 December 2007 (UTC) 1179:11:30, 13 December 2007 (UTC) 1158:22:04, 12 December 2007 (UTC) 1141:18:13, 12 December 2007 (UTC) 1122:11:46, 12 December 2007 (UTC) 1101:17:04, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 1085: 1058:12:03, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 973:Requests for adminship/Cobi 4 968:Requests for adminship/Cobi 3 963:Requests for adminship/Cobi 2 922:05:34, 14 December 2007 (UTC) 895:05:12, 14 December 2007 (UTC) 874:03:29, 14 December 2007 (UTC) 808:09:03, 13 December 2007 (UTC) 744:21:49, 12 December 2007 (UTC) 705:03:40, 12 December 2007 (UTC) 655:03:40, 12 December 2007 (UTC) 545:00:05, 12 December 2007 (UTC) 474:23:55, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 411:20:08, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 356:16:20, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 278:15:00, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 111:05:34, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 94:05:09, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 4937: 4384:. Five of those were to the 3988: 3327: 2368:- continued from last time. 1401:Just as I did last time. -- 1252: 1110:administrator promoted with 759:Optional questions 15-17 by 5893:I agree. Excellent point. 4911:you only have 9 reports to 4279:Edit count is just a number 4117: 3955: 3534: 3531: 1707: 1617:, too many vandal reverts. 958:Requests for adminship/Cobi 940:'s edit summary usage with 852:Considering you co-founded 120:Questions for the candidate 6269: 4388:article, four were to the 3621:Strongest Support Possible 1071:Special:Contributions/Cobi 425:Continuation of question 8 252:Will you list yourself in 5617:- I suggest you do a few 5113:user switched to support 3896: 3891: 3888: 6230:Please do not modify it. 3825:Looks like a good user. 1933:Pedro, are you serious? 1779:- Changed to neutral. -- 310:and usurped the account 217:), and tagging inactive 39:Please do not modify it. 5355:Reluctant strong oppose 4957:Just as before, almost 3504:01:48:02 (last) (hist) 2787:Crispy is the admin of 1668:Just checking. Thanks. 830:Optional Question from 626:questions from SorryGuy 571:Optional question from 493:Optional Question from 456:Optional Question from 438:Didn't we just do this? 380:Optional Question from 201:), talk page archival ( 5507:please show us more. 3760:Pharaoh of the Wizards 2944:Wikipedians are humans 723:question from Charitwo 684:You find a request at 6114:not get to see this. 5895:Useight's Public Sock 5867:Useight's Public Sock 4770:per Gurch and Aude -- 4197:Useight's Public Sock 4164:Useight's Public Sock 1235:Useight's Public Sock 1112:seven mainspace edits 634:An IP is reported to 31:request for adminship 5546:judgement. cheers, 3293:changed from neutral 2326:as I did last time. 367:It has been removed. 4089:-BlueAmethyst .:*:. 3353:As per before... -- 2930:Dihydrogen Monoxide 2012:Then you quote AGF? 1419:Same as last time! 1405:Anonymous Dissident 952:RfAs for this user: 300:to edit Knowledge? 6191:Sitting on Neutral 5725: 5654:Christopher Parham 5615:Regretably, Oppose 4454: 3958: 3631:Thedjatclubrock :) 3325:excellent editor. 3214: 2091: 1897: 1408: 1108:: FYI - We had an 1090: 1073:before commenting. 340:advertise your RfA 298:alternate accounts 151:Bot Approval Group 40: 6128: 6075: 5723: 5521: 5496: 5472: 5128: 5108: 4808: 4705: 4650:Action Jackson IV 4478: 4438: 4146: 4051:Support with idea 3948: 3611: 3595:comment added by 3540: 3498: 3479: 3449: 3420: 3150: 3015: 2909: 2894: 2881:comment added by 2781: 2761: 2745:comment added by 2692: 2512: 2156: 2121: 2089: 2068: 2046: 2004: 1982: 1948: 1927: 1895: 1880: 1795:Human Nom support 1528:Master of Puppets 1402: 1088: 924: 908:comment added by 821:featured articles 703: 653: 541: 514: 286:clarification. :) 38: 6260: 6232: 6153: 6127: 6125: 6115: 6093: 6088: 6071: 6056: 6006: 5929: 5847: 5733: 5731: 5721: 5698: 5695: 5608: 5603: 5534: 5520: 5518: 5513: 5494: 5471: 5469: 5459: 5430: 5411:Report a mistake 5381: 5368: 5359:"Random article" 5346: 5274: 5267: 5222:the bot work is 5220:Reluctant oppose 5112: 5107: 5102: 5041: 5039: 5031:(which would be 5026: 5024: 4995: 4942: 4939: 4895:Reluctant Oppose 4856: 4809: 4804: 4799: 4794: 4704: 4702: 4692: 4497: 4489: 4477: 4453: 4452: 4451: 4450: 4449: 4394:his own userpage 4366: 4285: 4140: 4119: 3990: 3984: 3978: 3957: 3954: 3922: 3917: 3897: 3893: 3890: 3876: 3871: 3866: 3815: 3796: 3789: 3782: 3744: 3684:Connel MacKenzie 3671: 3666: 3634: 3590: 3566: 3561: 3556: 3539: 3536: 3530: 3516: 3497: 3492: 3475: 3473: 3448: 3443: 3419: 3414: 3387: 3386: 3381: 3364: 3329: 3283: 3280: 3277: 3269: 3254: 3247: 3232: 3230: 3225: 3189:Quality editor. 3146: 3097: 3092: 3068: 3062: 3007: 2985: 2957: 2953: 2950: 2932: 2907: 2876: 2798: 2796: 2780: 2778: 2767: 2740: 2690: 2684: 2680: 2678: 2663: 2661: 2628: 2623: 2591: 2586: 2567: 2511: 2508: 2503: 2496: 2443: 2372: 2316: 2220: 2215: 2210: 2197: 2192: 2187: 2155: 2153: 2142: 2120: 2118: 2107: 2099: 2097: 2087: 2067: 2065: 2054: 2045: 2043: 2032: 2018: 2003: 2001: 1990: 1981: 1979: 1968: 1946: 1937: 1926: 1924: 1913: 1905: 1903: 1893: 1879: 1877: 1866: 1861:Per last time - 1835: 1833: 1831: 1829: 1827: 1805: 1784: 1774: 1758: 1751: 1743: 1708: 1704: 1701: 1583: 1580: 1577: 1573: 1517: 1512: 1493: 1487: 1484: 1481: 1477:500 actually ;) 1471: 1469: 1464: 1452: 1446: 1443: 1440: 1423: 1406: 1368: 1353: 1342: 1333: 1223: 1139: 1136: 1134: 1098: 1096: 1086: 1048: 1007: 982:Links for Cobi: 931:General comments 903: 702: 700: 690: 652: 650: 640: 542: 537: 532: 527: 515: 510: 505: 500: 6268: 6267: 6263: 6262: 6261: 6259: 6258: 6257: 6243: 6242: 6241: 6235:this nomination 6228: 6123: 6116: 6091: 6086: 6004: 5973: 5960: 5845: 5732: 5729: 5693: 5686: 5668: 5601: 5599: 5530: 5514: 5509: 5467: 5460: 5428: 5375: 5362: 5270: 5263: 5155:John Vandenberg 5124: 5103: 5037: 5022: 4993: 4854: 4700: 4693: 4684: 4565: 4548: 4521: 4495: 4487: 4364: 4283: 4121: 4105: 3964: 3920: 3915: 3874: 3869: 3864: 3811: 3792: 3785: 3778: 3735: 3669: 3664: 3628: 3564: 3559: 3554: 3493: 3471: 3444: 3415: 3363: 3359: 3305: 3278: 3273: 3267: 3265: 3228: 3223: 3221: 3070: 3066: 3060: 2992: 2951: 2948: 2776: 2768: 2626: 2621: 2589: 2584: 2565: 2547:The Helpful One 2441: 2359: 2314: 2218: 2213: 2208: 2195: 2190: 2185: 2151: 2143: 2116: 2108: 2098: 2095: 2063: 2055: 2041: 2033: 2016: 1999: 1991: 1977: 1969: 1935: 1922: 1914: 1904: 1901: 1875: 1867: 1825: 1823: 1821: 1819: 1817: 1798: 1782: 1772: 1754: 1747: 1739: 1578: 1575: 1569: 1567: 1545:. Good luck. I 1510: 1508: 1467: 1462: 1460: 1421: 1404: 1383: 1336:Joshbuddy's RfA 1285: 1253:Neutral section 1221: 1127: 1097: 1094: 1080: 1000: 983: 979: 977: 933: 735:to assist with 698: 691: 648: 641: 122: 50: 35:did not succeed 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 6266: 6264: 6256: 6255: 6245: 6244: 6240: 6239: 6223: 6222: 6205: 6188: 6187: 6186: 6185: 6184: 6183: 6182: 6181: 6180: 6179: 6178: 6155: 6079: 6062: 6046: 6029: 6012: 5996: 5979: 5978: 5977: 5969: 5956: 5943: 5942: 5941: 5940: 5939: 5938: 5937: 5936: 5935: 5921: 5920: 5919: 5859:WP:EDITSUMMARY 5813: 5812: 5811: 5810: 5809: 5808: 5807: 5806: 5805: 5804: 5803: 5802: 5801: 5756: 5755: 5754: 5753: 5752: 5728: 5667: 5664: 5663: 5662: 5650: 5628: 5612: 5585: 5564: 5540: 5525: 5501: 5476: 5453: 5435: 5417: 5399: 5387: 5386: 5385: 5352: 5332: 5315: 5314: 5313: 5280: 5233: 5216: 5215: 5214: 5213: 5212: 5165: 5148: 5131: 5130: 5129: 5120: 5117:Sasha Callahan 5092: 5091: 5090: 5089: 5088: 5087: 5086: 5018: 5000: 4984: 4952: 4951: 4950: 4891: 4848: 4831: 4814: 4782: 4765: 4756: 4738: 4737: 4736: 4735: 4734: 4733: 4732: 4731: 4730: 4680: 4677:Sasha Callahan 4639: 4638: 4637: 4636: 4635: 4583: 4573: 4572: 4571: 4570: 4569: 4561: 4558:Sasha Callahan 4552: 4544: 4541:Sasha Callahan 4517: 4514:Sasha Callahan 4504: 4479: 4459: 4431: 4430: 4429: 4428: 4427: 4378: 4377: 4376: 4375: 4374: 4324: 4323: 4322: 4309: 4308: 4307: 4254: 4253: 4252: 4238:WP:EDITSUMMARY 4212: 4211: 4210: 4209: 4208: 4150: 4125: 4115: 4104: 4101: 4100: 4099: 4082: 4065: 4048: 4030: 4009: 3996: 3968: 3960: 3944: 3927: 3902: 3881: 3858: 3837: 3820: 3801: 3770: 3755:Strong Support 3752: 3751: 3750: 3749: 3748: 3693: 3677: 3656: 3655: 3654: 3618: 3617: 3616: 3615: 3614: 3613: 3612: 3521: 3502: 3483: 3459: 3458: 3457: 3456: 3455: 3454: 3453: 3392: 3369: 3361: 3357: 3351: 3337:Strong support 3334: 3323:Strong support 3320: 3309: 3301: 3287: 3264:Great editor. 3259: 3236: 3218: 3199: 3184: 3172: 3154: 3136: 3119: 3102: 3083: 3074: 3064: 3053: 3036: 3019: 2996: 2988: 2984:DEVS EX MACINA 2975: 2961: 2937: 2922: 2921: 2920: 2919: 2918: 2917: 2916: 2915: 2914: 2913: 2912: 2911: 2910: 2897: 2896: 2895: 2826: 2737:Strong Support 2734: 2713: 2696: 2667: 2655:Strong support 2652: 2634: 2613: 2596: 2580:Strong support 2577: 2553: 2542: 2528: 2516: 2491: 2472: 2455: 2436: 2411: 2394: 2377: 2363: 2351: 2342: 2321: 2299: 2282: 2265: 2264: 2263: 2262: 2261: 2228: 2227: 2226: 2180: 2168: 2167: 2166: 2165: 2164: 2163: 2162: 2161: 2160: 2094: 2082: 2081: 2080: 2079: 2078: 2077: 2076: 2075: 2074: 2073: 2072: 2050: 2008: 1957: 1900: 1856: 1841: 1809: 1792: 1791: 1790: 1732: 1713: 1688: 1687: 1686: 1685: 1684: 1683: 1682: 1681: 1680: 1612: 1603: 1587: 1561: 1560: 1559: 1521: 1502: 1501: 1500: 1499: 1498: 1430: 1414: 1399: 1389:as nominator. 1382: 1379: 1378: 1377: 1376: 1375: 1374: 1373: 1364:in that RfA. 1279: 1278: 1277: 1262: 1249: 1248: 1247: 1246: 1245: 1216: 1168: 1163: 1162: 1161: 1160: 1146: 1145: 1144: 1143: 1103: 1093: 1079: 1076: 1062: 1061: 1060: 1049: 978: 976: 975: 970: 965: 960: 954: 951: 950: 949: 942:mathbot's tool 932: 929: 928: 927: 926: 925: 879: 878: 877: 876: 832:Sasha Callahan 827: 826: 825: 824: 797: 796: 795: 794: 781: 780: 779: 778: 756: 755: 754: 753: 717: 716: 715: 714: 678: 677: 676: 675: 620: 619: 618: 617: 605: 600: 599: 598: 587: 573:Sasha Callahan 564: 563: 562: 561: 518: 486: 485: 484: 483: 461: 449: 448: 447: 446: 422: 421: 420: 385: 373: 372: 371: 370: 369: 368: 346:guideline? -- 318: 317: 316: 315: 290: 289: 288: 287: 266: 265: 264: 246: 245: 244: 243: 229: 228: 227: 226: 185:and the other 169: 168: 167: 166: 121: 118: 116: 114: 113: 49: 44: 43: 42: 25: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 6265: 6254: 6251: 6250: 6248: 6238: 6236: 6231: 6225: 6224: 6221: 6217: 6213: 6209: 6206: 6204: 6201: 6200: 6197: 6196: 6192: 6189: 6177: 6173: 6169: 6165: 6161: 6160: 6159: 6154: 6149: 6147: 6146: 6145: 6141: 6137: 6133: 6132: 6131: 6126: 6121: 6120: 6112: 6111: 6110: 6107: 6102: 6099: 6098: 6097: 6094: 6089: 6083: 6080: 6078: 6074: 6070: 6066: 6063: 6061: 6058: 6057: 6050: 6047: 6045: 6042: 6041: 6037: 6033: 6030: 6028: 6024: 6020: 6016: 6013: 6011: 6008: 6007: 6000: 5997: 5995: 5991: 5987: 5983: 5980: 5976: 5972: 5968: 5967: 5962: 5959: 5955: 5954: 5947: 5944: 5934: 5931: 5930: 5922: 5918: 5915: 5914: 5910: 5906: 5905: 5904: 5900: 5896: 5892: 5891: 5890: 5887: 5886:PeruvianLlama 5883: 5878: 5877: 5876: 5872: 5868: 5864: 5860: 5855: 5854: 5853: 5850: 5848: 5842: 5841: 5840: 5837: 5836:PeruvianLlama 5833: 5828: 5824: 5823: 5822: 5819: 5818:PeruvianLlama 5814: 5800: 5797: 5796: 5792: 5788: 5787: 5786: 5783: 5779: 5778: 5777: 5774: 5770: 5769: 5768: 5767: 5766: 5765: 5764: 5761: 5757: 5751: 5748: 5747: 5743: 5739: 5738: 5737: 5734: 5722: 5717: 5716: 5715: 5711: 5707: 5703: 5702: 5701: 5696: 5690: 5685: 5681: 5679: 5677: 5674: 5670: 5669: 5665: 5661: 5658: 5655: 5651: 5649: 5645: 5641: 5636: 5632: 5629: 5627: 5624: 5620: 5616: 5613: 5611: 5607: 5604: 5597: 5593: 5589: 5586: 5584: 5580: 5576: 5572: 5568: 5565: 5563: 5559: 5556: 5553: 5549: 5544: 5541: 5539: 5536: 5533: 5526: 5524: 5519: 5517: 5512: 5505: 5502: 5500: 5497: 5492: 5488: 5484: 5480: 5477: 5475: 5470: 5465: 5464: 5457: 5454: 5452: 5448: 5444: 5439: 5436: 5434: 5431: 5426: 5422: 5418: 5416: 5412: 5408: 5404: 5400: 5398: 5395: 5391: 5388: 5384: 5380: 5378: 5373: 5372: 5371: 5367: 5365: 5360: 5356: 5353: 5351: 5348: 5347: 5345: 5344: 5336: 5333: 5331: 5327: 5323: 5319: 5316: 5312: 5309: 5304: 5303: 5302: 5299: 5295: 5291: 5287: 5284: 5281: 5278: 5275: 5273: 5268: 5266: 5260: 5257: 5253: 5249: 5244: 5241: 5237: 5234: 5232: 5229: 5225: 5221: 5217: 5211: 5207: 5203: 5198: 5194: 5193: 5192: 5189: 5184: 5183: 5182: 5178: 5174: 5169: 5168:Strong oppose 5166: 5164: 5160: 5156: 5152: 5151:Strong oppose 5149: 5147: 5143: 5139: 5135: 5132: 5127: 5123: 5119: 5118: 5110: 5106: 5101: 5097: 5093: 5085: 5082: 5078: 5077: 5076: 5073: 5068: 5067: 5066: 5063: 5059: 5058: 5057: 5054: 5050: 5049: 5048: 5045: 5034: 5030: 5019: 5017: 5013: 5009: 5004: 5001: 4999: 4996: 4989: 4985: 4983: 4980: 4977: 4972: 4968: 4964: 4960: 4956: 4953: 4949: 4948: 4945: 4943: 4941: 4940: 4930: 4926: 4922: 4918: 4914: 4910: 4908: 4907:User:AlptaBot 4904: 4901: 4900:307 mainspace 4896: 4892: 4890: 4886: 4882: 4878: 4875: 4873: 4869: 4863: 4862: 4861: 4858: 4857: 4849: 4847: 4843: 4839: 4835: 4832: 4830: 4826: 4822: 4818: 4815: 4813: 4810: 4807: 4800: 4796: 4795: 4793: 4786: 4783: 4781: 4777: 4773: 4769: 4766: 4764: 4760: 4757: 4755: 4751: 4747: 4742: 4739: 4729: 4726: 4722: 4718: 4714: 4710: 4709: 4708: 4703: 4698: 4697: 4689: 4688: 4687: 4683: 4679: 4678: 4672: 4671: 4669: 4666: 4661: 4660: 4659: 4655: 4651: 4647: 4643: 4640: 4633: 4629: 4625: 4621: 4620: 4619: 4615: 4611: 4606: 4605: 4604: 4601: 4598: 4597: 4591: 4587: 4586:Strong oppose 4584: 4582: 4579: 4574: 4568: 4564: 4560: 4559: 4553: 4551: 4547: 4543: 4542: 4535: 4534: 4533: 4530: 4526: 4525: 4524: 4520: 4516: 4515: 4508: 4505: 4503: 4499: 4498: 4491: 4490: 4483: 4482:Strong oppose 4480: 4476: 4472: 4468: 4463: 4462:Strong oppose 4460: 4458: 4455: 4435: 4432: 4426: 4422: 4418: 4413: 4412: 4411: 4408: 4403: 4399: 4395: 4391: 4390:shell account 4387: 4383: 4379: 4373: 4370: 4369:PeruvianLlama 4362: 4361: 4360: 4357: 4353: 4349: 4348: 4347: 4344: 4343:PeruvianLlama 4340: 4339: 4338: 4337: 4334: 4330: 4325: 4321: 4318: 4315: 4310: 4306: 4302: 4298: 4293: 4292: 4291: 4288: 4286: 4280: 4276: 4275: 4274: 4270: 4266: 4262: 4258: 4255: 4251: 4247: 4243: 4239: 4234: 4233: 4232: 4228: 4224: 4220: 4216: 4213: 4207: 4206: 4202: 4198: 4194: 4190: 4185: 4184: 4183: 4180: 4176: 4175: 4174: 4173: 4169: 4165: 4160: 4156: 4151: 4149: 4144: 4139: 4135: 4131: 4126: 4124: 4120: 4114: 4113: 4107: 4106: 4102: 4098: 4094: 4090: 4086: 4083: 4081: 4077: 4073: 4069: 4066: 4064: 4060: 4056: 4052: 4049: 4047: 4043: 4039: 4034: 4031: 4029: 4026: 4024: 4023: 4019: 4018: 4013: 4010: 4008: 4004: 4000: 3997: 3995: 3992: 3991: 3985: 3980: 3979: 3972: 3969: 3967: 3963: 3959: 3952: 3945: 3943: 3939: 3935: 3931: 3928: 3926: 3923: 3918: 3913: 3910: 3906: 3903: 3901: 3898: 3894: 3885: 3882: 3880: 3877: 3872: 3867: 3862: 3859: 3857: 3853: 3849: 3845: 3841: 3838: 3836: 3832: 3828: 3824: 3821: 3819: 3816: 3814: 3809: 3805: 3802: 3800: 3797: 3795: 3790: 3788: 3783: 3781: 3774: 3771: 3769: 3765: 3761: 3756: 3753: 3747: 3743: 3740: 3739: 3733: 3732: 3731: 3728: 3725: 3721: 3718: 3717: 3716: 3712: 3709: 3705: 3701: 3697: 3694: 3692: 3689: 3685: 3681: 3678: 3676: 3673: 3672: 3667: 3660: 3657: 3653: 3649: 3645: 3641: 3640: 3639: 3636: 3633: 3632: 3626: 3622: 3619: 3610: 3606: 3602: 3598: 3594: 3588: 3587: 3586: 3582: 3578: 3574: 3573: 3572: 3571: 3568: 3567: 3562: 3557: 3549: 3545: 3544: 3543: 3537: 3529: 3525: 3522: 3520: 3517: 3511: 3507: 3503: 3501: 3496: 3491: 3487: 3484: 3482: 3478: 3474: 3467: 3463: 3460: 3452: 3447: 3442: 3438: 3437: 3436: 3433: 3430: 3425: 3424: 3423: 3418: 3413: 3409: 3408: 3407: 3404: 3401: 3396: 3393: 3391: 3388: 3377: 3373: 3370: 3368: 3365: 3352: 3350: 3346: 3342: 3338: 3335: 3333: 3330: 3324: 3321: 3319: 3316: 3313: 3310: 3308: 3304: 3300: 3299: 3294: 3291: 3288: 3286: 3282: 3281: 3276: 3270: 3263: 3260: 3258: 3255: 3253: 3248: 3246: 3240: 3237: 3235: 3231: 3226: 3219: 3217: 3212: 3208: 3203: 3200: 3198: 3195: 3192: 3188: 3185: 3183: 3180: 3176: 3173: 3171: 3168: 3167: 3163: 3158: 3155: 3153: 3149: 3144: 3140: 3137: 3135: 3131: 3127: 3123: 3120: 3118: 3114: 3110: 3106: 3103: 3101: 3098: 3093: 3087: 3084: 3082: 3079: 3075: 3073: 3069: 3063: 3057: 3054: 3052: 3048: 3044: 3040: 3037: 3035: 3031: 3027: 3023: 3020: 3018: 3013: 3012: 3006: 3005: 3000: 2997: 2995: 2991: 2987: 2986: 2979: 2976: 2974: 2971: 2969: 2965: 2962: 2960: 2954: 2945: 2941: 2938: 2936: 2933: 2931: 2926: 2923: 2906: 2903: 2902:PeruvianLlama 2898: 2892: 2888: 2884: 2880: 2874: 2873: 2872: 2868: 2864: 2860: 2856: 2855: 2854: 2850: 2846: 2841: 2840: 2839: 2835: 2831: 2827: 2825: 2821: 2817: 2812: 2811: 2810: 2807: 2803: 2802: 2801: 2797: 2790: 2786: 2785: 2784: 2779: 2773: 2772: 2766: 2763: 2762: 2760: 2756: 2752: 2748: 2744: 2738: 2735: 2733: 2729: 2728:contributions 2725: 2721: 2717: 2714: 2712: 2708: 2704: 2700: 2697: 2695: 2691: 2685: 2679: 2677: 2671: 2668: 2666: 2662: 2656: 2653: 2651: 2647: 2643: 2638: 2635: 2633: 2630: 2629: 2624: 2617: 2614: 2612: 2609: 2608: 2604: 2600: 2597: 2595: 2592: 2587: 2581: 2578: 2576: 2573: 2572: 2568: 2563: 2562: 2557: 2554: 2552: 2549: 2548: 2543: 2541: 2538: 2537: 2532: 2529: 2527: 2524: 2520: 2517: 2515: 2510: 2509: 2504: 2495: 2492: 2490: 2486: 2485: 2480: 2476: 2473: 2471: 2467: 2463: 2459: 2456: 2453: 2449: 2446: 2445: 2444: 2437: 2435: 2431: 2428: 2427: 2422: 2420: 2415: 2412: 2410: 2406: 2402: 2398: 2395: 2393: 2389: 2385: 2381: 2378: 2376: 2373: 2367: 2364: 2362: 2358: 2354: 2350: 2346: 2343: 2341: 2337: 2333: 2329: 2325: 2322: 2320: 2317: 2312: 2309: 2308: 2307:Spike Wilbury 2303: 2300: 2298: 2294: 2290: 2286: 2283: 2281: 2278: 2277: 2273: 2269: 2266: 2260: 2257: 2253: 2252: 2251: 2248: 2244: 2243: 2242: 2239: 2235: 2233: 2229: 2225: 2222: 2221: 2216: 2211: 2204: 2203: 2202: 2199: 2198: 2193: 2188: 2181: 2179: 2176: 2172: 2169: 2159: 2154: 2148: 2147: 2140: 2139: 2138: 2134: 2130: 2126: 2125: 2124: 2119: 2113: 2112: 2105: 2104: 2103: 2100: 2088: 2083: 2071: 2066: 2060: 2059: 2051: 2049: 2044: 2038: 2037: 2030: 2026: 2025: 2024: 2021: 2019: 2013: 2009: 2007: 2002: 1996: 1995: 1987: 1986: 1985: 1980: 1974: 1973: 1966: 1962: 1958: 1956: 1953: 1945: 1944: 1943: 1940: 1938: 1932: 1931: 1930: 1925: 1919: 1918: 1911: 1910: 1909: 1906: 1894: 1889: 1885: 1884: 1883: 1878: 1872: 1871: 1864: 1860: 1857: 1855: 1852: 1849: 1845: 1842: 1840: 1837: 1836: 1813: 1810: 1808: 1804: 1801: 1796: 1793: 1789: 1786: 1785: 1778: 1776: 1775: 1768: 1764: 1763: 1762: 1759: 1757: 1752: 1750: 1744: 1742: 1736: 1733: 1731: 1728: 1727: 1723: 1722: 1717: 1714: 1712: 1709: 1705: 1696: 1692: 1689: 1679: 1675: 1671: 1667: 1666: 1665: 1662: 1661: 1656: 1655: 1654: 1650: 1646: 1641: 1640: 1639: 1635: 1631: 1627: 1626: 1625: 1622: 1621: 1616: 1613: 1611: 1608: 1604: 1602: 1599: 1595: 1591: 1588: 1586: 1582: 1581: 1572: 1565: 1562: 1558: 1556: 1552: 1548: 1544: 1540: 1536: 1535: 1534: 1531: 1529: 1525: 1522: 1520: 1516: 1513: 1506: 1503: 1497: 1494: 1488: 1476: 1475: 1474: 1470: 1465: 1458: 1457: 1456: 1453: 1447: 1434: 1431: 1429: 1426: 1424: 1418: 1415: 1413: 1410: 1407: 1400: 1398: 1395: 1392: 1388: 1385: 1384: 1380: 1372: 1369: 1363: 1359: 1358: 1357: 1354: 1348: 1347: 1346: 1343: 1337: 1331: 1328: 1325: 1322: 1319: 1316: 1313: 1310: 1307: 1304: 1301: 1298: 1295: 1292: 1289: 1284: 1280: 1276: 1272: 1268: 1263: 1261: 1258: 1257:PeruvianLlama 1254: 1250: 1244: 1240: 1236: 1231: 1230: 1229: 1226: 1224: 1217: 1213: 1212: 1211: 1207: 1203: 1199: 1195: 1191: 1187: 1182: 1181: 1180: 1177: 1174: 1169: 1165: 1164: 1159: 1156: 1155: 1150: 1149: 1148: 1147: 1142: 1138: 1137: 1125: 1124: 1123: 1120: 1119: 1114: 1113: 1107: 1104: 1102: 1099: 1087: 1082: 1081: 1077: 1075: 1074: 1072: 1068: 1059: 1056: 1055: 1050: 1046: 1043: 1040: 1037: 1034: 1031: 1028: 1025: 1022: 1019: 1016: 1013: 1010: 1006: 1003: 999: 996: 993: 990: 986: 981: 980: 974: 971: 969: 966: 964: 961: 959: 956: 947: 943: 939: 935: 934: 930: 923: 919: 915: 911: 907: 901: 898: 897: 896: 893: 889: 886: 885: 884: 883: 875: 872: 867: 864: 863: 861: 858: 855: 851: 848: 847: 846: 845: 843: 840: 837: 833: 822: 818: 817:good articles 814: 811: 810: 809: 806: 802: 799: 798: 792: 789: 788: 786: 783: 782: 776: 773: 772: 770: 767: 766: 765: 764: 762: 750: 747: 746: 745: 742: 738: 734: 730: 727: 726: 725: 724: 722: 711: 708: 707: 706: 701: 696: 695: 687: 683: 680: 679: 673: 669: 665: 661: 658: 657: 656: 651: 646: 645: 637: 633: 630: 629: 628: 627: 625: 615: 612: 611: 609: 606: 604: 601: 595: 592: 591: 588: 586: 584: 581: 578: 574: 569: 566: 565: 559: 555: 551: 548: 547: 546: 543: 540: 533: 529: 528: 526: 519: 517: 516: 513: 506: 502: 501: 499: 491: 488: 487: 480: 477: 476: 475: 471: 467: 462: 460: 459: 458:User:Tiptoety 454: 451: 450: 443: 439: 436: 433: 432: 430: 426: 423: 417: 414: 413: 412: 408: 404: 400: 397: 394: 390: 386: 384: 383: 382:User:Tiptoety 378: 375: 374: 366: 365: 362: 359: 358: 357: 353: 349: 345: 341: 337: 334: 331: 327: 323: 320: 319: 313: 309: 305: 302: 301: 299: 295: 292: 291: 284: 281: 280: 279: 276: 275: 270: 267: 261: 258: 257: 255: 251: 248: 247: 240: 237: 236: 234: 231: 230: 224: 220: 216: 212: 208: 204: 200: 196: 192: 188: 184: 180: 177: 176: 174: 171: 170: 164: 160: 156: 152: 148: 144: 140: 136: 133: 132: 130: 127: 126: 125: 119: 117: 112: 109: 105: 101: 98: 97: 96: 95: 92: 89: 85: 80: 76: 73: 70: 66: 62: 61: 59: 56: 48: 45: 41: 36: 32: 27: 26: 19: 6229: 6226: 6207: 6199: 6194: 6190: 6163: 6162:True, but I 6118: 6081: 6064: 6052: 6048: 6038: 6031: 6019:IronGargoyle 6014: 6003: 5998: 5986:PookeyMaster 5981: 5964: 5951: 5948: 5945: 5925: 5912: 5831: 5826: 5794: 5745: 5672: 5630: 5614: 5587: 5566: 5554: 5542: 5531: 5515: 5510: 5503: 5486: 5482: 5478: 5462: 5455: 5437: 5420: 5389: 5354: 5342: 5341: 5338: 5334: 5317: 5293: 5285: 5282: 5271: 5264: 5258: 5255: 5242: 5235: 5223: 5219: 5196: 5167: 5150: 5133: 5116: 5095: 5094: 5002: 4987: 4979:(Kicking222) 4970: 4966: 4965:talk edits, 4962: 4961:experience. 4958: 4954: 4935: 4934: 4899: 4894: 4893: 4864: 4852: 4833: 4816: 4805: 4791: 4789: 4784: 4767: 4758: 4740: 4695: 4676: 4641: 4595: 4594: 4589: 4585: 4557: 4540: 4513: 4506: 4496:bananabucket 4493: 4485: 4481: 4461: 4433: 4401: 4393: 4381: 4328: 4326: 4260: 4256: 4219:edit summary 4214: 4192: 4188: 4186: 4154: 4153: 4134:wannabe kate 4111: 4084: 4067: 4050: 4032: 4021: 4016: 4011: 3998: 3986: 3974: 3970: 3950: 3929: 3904: 3883: 3860: 3843: 3839: 3822: 3812: 3804:Firm support 3803: 3793: 3786: 3779: 3773:Weak Support 3772: 3754: 3737: 3719: 3699: 3695: 3679: 3662: 3658: 3635: 3629: 3624: 3620: 3597:Redrocketboy 3552: 3547: 3546: 3523: 3509: 3505: 3486:Weak Support 3485: 3472:Stwalkerster 3462:Weak Support 3461: 3394: 3371: 3336: 3322: 3311: 3296: 3292: 3289: 3274: 3271: 3261: 3251: 3244: 3238: 3201: 3186: 3179:Orderinchaos 3174: 3164: 3156: 3138: 3121: 3104: 3085: 3055: 3038: 3021: 3010: 3003: 2998: 2982: 2977: 2968:Carlosguitar 2963: 2939: 2929: 2858: 2770: 2736: 2715: 2698: 2675: 2669: 2654: 2636: 2619: 2615: 2605: 2598: 2579: 2570: 2560: 2555: 2545: 2536:Phoenix-wiki 2534: 2530: 2518: 2499: 2493: 2482: 2474: 2457: 2447: 2439: 2438: 2425: 2418: 2413: 2396: 2379: 2365: 2344: 2323: 2310: 2306: 2301: 2284: 2275: 2267: 2234:Weak support 2231: 2230: 2206: 2183: 2170: 2145: 2110: 2057: 2035: 2011: 1993: 1971: 1916: 1887: 1869: 1862: 1858: 1843: 1816: 1811: 1794: 1781: 1771: 1766: 1765: 1755: 1748: 1740: 1734: 1725: 1720: 1715: 1694: 1690: 1658: 1618: 1614: 1589: 1574: 1570: 1563: 1538: 1537: 1523: 1504: 1433:Weak support 1432: 1416: 1386: 1326: 1320: 1314: 1308: 1302: 1296: 1290: 1197: 1153: 1129: 1117: 1111: 1105: 1064: 1063: 1052: 1041: 1035: 1029: 1023: 1017: 1011: 1004: 997: 991: 899: 887: 881: 880: 865: 849: 838: 829: 828: 812: 800: 790: 784: 774: 768: 758: 757: 748: 728: 720: 719: 718: 709: 693: 681: 659: 643: 631: 623: 622: 621: 613: 607: 602: 593: 579: 570: 567: 549: 538: 524: 522: 511: 497: 495: 492: 489: 478: 455: 452: 441: 434: 424: 415: 395: 379: 376: 360: 332: 321: 308:User:Winbots 303: 293: 282: 273: 268: 259: 249: 238: 232: 219:WikiProjects 183:User:ClueBot 178: 172: 134: 128: 123: 115: 99: 84:User:ClueBot 71: 63: 52: 51: 46: 34: 28: 6195:OhanaUnited 5909:Mario Sonic 5882:prima facie 5834:occured. -- 5791:Mario Sonic 5742:Mario Sonic 5456:Weak oppose 4834:Weak oppose 4817:Weak Oppose 4785:Weak Oppose 4632:December 12 4624:dorftrottel 4356:John Reaves 4242:Aboutmovies 4223:Aboutmovies 4055:Archtransit 3704:User:Krator 3591:—Preceding 3207:Malinaccier 2877:—Preceding 2741:—Preceding 2384:Newyorkbrad 2272:Mario Sonic 2232:Unequivocal 1607:John Reaves 1555:December 11 1547:dorftrottel 1306:protections 904:—Preceding 324:Does using 306:I was once 209:removal at 104:User:Kmccoy 55:18 December 6152:DREAMAFTER 5863:WP:CANVASS 5671:I really, 5635:WP:CANVASS 5571:WP:CANVASS 5240:canvassing 5008:TomTheHand 4963:Twenty-six 4821:FrankTobia 4711:I believe 4578:Iamunknown 4402:should not 4159:WP:CANVASS 3466:WP:CANVASS 3224:*Cremepuff 2883:Crispy1989 2845:Crispy1989 2816:Crispy1989 2747:Crispy1989 2676:Crazytales 2642:EdJohnston 2585:NHRHS2010 2182:For sure. 2129:Kingturtle 1670:Kingturtle 1630:Kingturtle 1463:*Cremepuff 1318:page moves 1267:FrankTobia 1078:Discussion 892:Iamunknown 554:verifiable 429:WP:CANVASS 6036:Cool Hand 5706:Kralizec! 5640:Kralizec! 5623:Jehochman 5596:User:Cobi 5491:Sjakkalle 5343:Gtstricky 5322:Modernist 5294:essential 5138:Congolese 5081:Sebastian 5062:Sebastian 5044:Sebastian 4877:Withdrawn 4630:I 08:23, 3400:Rigadoun 3341:Ashdog137 3109:Lankiveil 3078:Acalamari 3043:Spellcast 2859:real life 2531:Certainly 2371:Nihiltres 2029:User:Dlae 1961:User:Dlae 1594:last time 1553:I 07:11, 1543:last time 1480:Knowledge 1439:Knowledge 1436:much. :) 1362:User:Teke 1312:deletions 1283:Joshbuddy 1219:project. 1027:block log 946:talk page 445:question. 348:Kralizec! 344:WP:CANVAS 312:User:Cobi 6247:Category 6119:SorryGuy 6069:DerHexer 5832:faux pas 5760:Charitwo 5558:contribs 5548:Casliber 5495:(Check!) 5463:SorryGuy 5425:Dekimasu 5403:JetLover 5188:Charitwo 4967:eighteen 4881:JayHenry 4868:JayHenry 4696:SorryGuy 4488:Blnguyen 4297:Tiptoety 4265:Tiptoety 4261:strongly 4179:Charitwo 4072:Carnildo 3962:Contribs 3848:Rklawton 3680:Support. 3605:contribs 3593:unsigned 3508:matched 3385:TomasBat 3148:Evidence 3126:Ronnotel 2891:contribs 2879:unsigned 2755:contribs 2743:unsigned 2494:Support! 2293:Edgar181 2175:Charitwo 1851:(Mschel) 1294:contribs 995:contribs 918:contribs 906:unsigned 842:contribs 741:Charitwo 721:Optional 694:SorryGuy 644:SorryGuy 624:Optional 583:contribs 466:Tiptoety 403:Tiptoety 399:contribs 336:contribs 187:ClueBots 75:contribs 6208:Neutral 6168:Useight 6136:Useight 6101:Twinkle 6087:Vintei 6082:Neutral 6065:Neutral 6049:Neutral 6032:Neutral 6015:Neutral 5999:Neutral 5982:Neutral 5666:Neutral 5592:ClueBot 5575:Epthorn 5443:Maralia 5419:Sorry, 5252:WP:RFPP 5224:greatly 5033:WP:GRFA 4925:WP:RFPP 4792:Marlith 4417:Useight 4386:ClueNet 4085:Support 4068:Support 4038:Useight 4012:Support 3999:Support 3971:Support 3930:Support 3905:Support 3884:Support 3861:Support 3840:Support 3827:Stupid2 3823:Support 3720:Support 3696:Support 3665:krimpet 3659:Support 3644:Useight 3548:Support 3524:Support 3395:Support 3372:Support 3315:John254 3312:Support 3290:Support 3262:Support 3239:Support 3202:Support 3187:Support 3175:Support 3157:Support 3139:Support 3122:Support 3105:Support 3091:Captain 3086:Support 3056:Support 3039:Support 3022:Support 2999:Support 2978:Support 2964:Support 2940:Support 2863:Useight 2830:Useight 2789:ClueNet 2716:Support 2699:Support 2670:Support 2637:Support 2616:Support 2556:Support 2523:RockMFR 2519:Support 2479:GDonato 2475:Support 2462:Bearian 2458:Support 2448:support 2442:Snowolf 2414:Support 2397:Support 2380:Support 2366:Support 2345:Support 2324:Support 2302:Support 2285:Support 2268:Support 2171:Support 1859:Support 1844:Support 1812:Support 1767:Support 1735:Support 1716:Support 1691:Support 1590:Support 1564:Support 1524:Support 1515:iva1979 1505:Support 1417:Support 1387:Support 1381:Support 1202:Useight 1154:Miranda 1118:Miranda 1002:deleted 854:ClueNet 761:Anetode 733:ClueBot 686:WP:RFPP 597:either. 558:notable 525:Marlith 498:Marlith 389:ClueBot 326:ClueBot 274:Miranda 207:redlink 191:ClueBot 163:WP:RFPP 6164:didn't 6073:(Talk) 6055:Justin 5928:Justin 5827:Oppose 5673:really 5657:(talk) 5631:Oppose 5588:Oppose 5567:Oppose 5543:Oppose 5516:Marlin 5511:Orange 5504:Oppose 5479:Oppose 5438:Oppose 5421:oppose 5390:Oppose 5335:Oppose 5318:Oppose 5290:WP:AIV 5283:Oppose 5248:WP:SCV 5243:really 5238:. The 5236:Oppose 5134:Oppose 5122:(Talk) 5096:Oppose 5003:Oppose 4992:Riana 4988:should 4955:Oppose 4929:WP:UAA 4921:WP:CSD 4917:WP:AFD 4913:WP:AIV 4902:edits 4855:Daniel 4838:Addhoc 4772:Storkk 4768:Oppose 4759:Oppose 4741:Oppose 4721:Crispy 4717:Monobi 4713:Monobi 4682:(Talk) 4634:, 2007 4610:Sethie 4563:(Talk) 4546:(Talk) 4519:(Talk) 4507:Oppose 4467:Sethie 4434:Oppose 4382:Twenty 4317:(talk) 4314:kmccoy 4257:Oppose 4215:Oppose 4155:Oppose 4103:Oppose 3934:Mhking 3742:scribe 3724:Twenty 3700:anyway 3560:rocket 3515:Keegan 3432:(talk) 3429:kmccoy 3403:(talk) 3191:Twenty 3004:Animum 2795:Mønobi 2660:Mønobi 2599:Oppose 2521:. --- 2349:Rudget 2328:Shalom 2214:rocket 2191:rocket 1965:WP:AGF 1803:styles 1615:Oppose 1571:Tiddly 1557:, 2007 1539:Oppose 1394:(talk) 1391:kmccoy 1367:Keegan 1360:I was 1352:Keegan 1341:Keegan 1324:rights 1300:blocks 1192:, and 1176:(talk) 1173:kmccoy 737:WP:CSD 672:WP:AIV 668:WP:AIV 664:WP:AIV 636:WP:AIV 211:WP:SCV 161:, and 159:WP:SCV 155:WP:UAA 147:My bot 143:WP:AIV 106:. -- 91:(talk) 88:kmccoy 6156:: --> 6124:Talk 6092:talk 6005:Chris 5913:BOOM! 5795:BOOM! 5746:BOOM! 5684:EVula 5606:drama 5483:wrong 5468:Talk 5394:Irpen 5377:A. B. 5364:A. B. 5228:Shell 5202:Xoloz 5197:think 5173:Xoloz 4746:Dureo 4701:Talk 4646:mores 4600:Meegs 4407:Gurch 4396:from 4333:Gurch 4329:great 4193:to me 4112:JodyB 4022:fusco 4003:ESkog 3727:Years 3577:Xoloz 3532:(aka 3510:rocks 3328:Maser 3194:Years 3166:Cobra 3162:Glass 3096:panda 2952:notes 2949:Grace 2806:Gurch 2777:Chat 2771:Pedro 2720:Aqwis 2622:Dfrg_ 2607:inp23 2590:talk 2561:jj137 2502:Reedy 2432:: --> 2430:edits 2421:eland 2353:speak 2336:Peace 2332:Hello 2276:BOOM! 2247:Coren 2238:Coren 2152:Chat 2146:Pedro 2117:Chat 2111:Pedro 2064:Chat 2058:Pedro 2042:Chat 2036:Pedro 2000:Chat 1994:Pedro 1978:Chat 1972:Pedro 1923:Chat 1917:Pedro 1876:Chat 1870:Pedro 1800:Comet 1783:Chris 1773:Chris 1741:jonny 1541:like 1067:civil 1009:count 699:Talk 649:Talk 338:) to 195:WP:OP 139:WP:OP 60:(UTC) 33:that 16:< 6216:talk 6172:talk 6140:talk 6106:Cobi 6040:Luke 6023:talk 5990:talk 5899:talk 5871:talk 5782:Cobi 5773:Cobi 5730:here 5710:talk 5689:talk 5644:talk 5619:DYKs 5579:talk 5552:talk 5447:talk 5407:talk 5326:talk 5265:Kyok 5250:and 5206:talk 5177:talk 5159:talk 5142:talk 5100:Jack 5072:Cobi 5053:Cobi 5029:RTFM 5012:talk 4976:Mike 4971:zero 4885:talk 4872:talk 4842:talk 4825:talk 4776:talk 4750:talk 4725:Cobi 4665:Cobi 4654:talk 4648:. -- 4628:talk 4614:talk 4590:Some 4529:Cobi 4471:talk 4421:talk 4398:Cobi 4301:talk 4269:talk 4246:talk 4227:talk 4201:talk 4168:talk 4143:talk 4138:Aude 4118:talk 4093:talk 4076:talk 4059:talk 4042:talk 4017:Alex 3977:Pump 3956:ſtan 3938:talk 3892:URGH 3865:Jmlk 3852:talk 3844:will 3831:talk 3808:Миша 3787:ston 3764:talk 3688:wikt 3648:talk 3625:Note 3601:talk 3581:talk 3535:Wimt 3528:Will 3506:Lava 3490:Jack 3477:talk 3441:Jack 3412:Jack 3376:here 3362:alls 3345:talk 3252:lana 3229:222* 3211:talk 3130:talk 3113:talk 3047:talk 3030:Talk 3011:talk 2990:pray 2887:talk 2867:talk 2849:talk 2834:talk 2820:talk 2751:talk 2724:talk 2707:talk 2703:Nick 2689:desk 2683:talk 2646:talk 2603:Mart 2571:Talk 2484:talk 2466:talk 2426:talk 2405:talk 2399:. -- 2388:talk 2357:work 2315:talk 2256:Cobi 2133:talk 2096:here 1952:Cobi 1947:(ec) 1902:here 1888:owed 1848:Mark 1721:Neıl 1700:Scar 1674:talk 1660:Will 1649:talk 1645:Nick 1634:talk 1620:Will 1551:talk 1492:talk 1486:Self 1468:222* 1451:talk 1445:Self 1288:talk 1271:talk 1239:talk 1206:talk 1194:here 1190:here 1186:here 1095:here 1054:Will 1039:rfar 1021:logs 989:talk 985:Cobi 938:Cobi 936:See 914:talk 910:Cobi 871:Cobi 836:talk 577:talk 470:talk 442:very 407:talk 393:talk 352:talk 330:talk 108:Cobi 69:talk 65:Cobi 58:2007 47:Cobi 6212:EJF 5971:004 5966:MBK 5958:004 5953:MBK 5861:or 5846:SQL 5691:// 5687:// 5602:Lra 5529:Max 5487:Yet 5409:) ( 5040:eir 5025:eir 4936:Hdt 4719:or 4284:SQL 4189:His 3780:Pre 3738:WjB 3686:- 3565:boy 3555:Red 3358:ark 3303:004 3298:MBK 3279:man 3268:Mr. 3245:Kei 3067:BAG 3026:GHe 2627:msc 2507:Boy 2401:Nlu 2219:boy 2209:Red 2196:boy 2186:Red 2017:SQL 1936:SQL 1703:ian 1695:not 1598:Joe 1592:as 1579:Tom 1422:SQL 1338:. 1330:RfA 1222:SQL 1133:ODU 1045:spi 1015:AfD 888:19. 850:18. 819:or 801:17. 785:16. 769:15. 729:14. 682:13. 632:12. 568:11. 490:10. 482::) 205:), 203:III 79:RFA 6249:: 6218:) 6174:) 6142:) 6025:) 5992:) 5901:) 5873:) 5816:-- 5712:) 5697:// 5646:) 5638:-- 5590:- 5581:) 5560:) 5535:em 5449:) 5429:よ! 5413:) 5328:) 5308:╦╩ 5306:ˉˉ 5298:╦╩ 5208:) 5179:) 5161:) 5144:) 5111:-- 5105:?! 5038:th 5023:th 5014:) 4959:no 4938:83 4927:, 4923:, 4919:, 4887:) 4879:-- 4866:-- 4844:) 4827:) 4778:) 4752:) 4670:\ 4656:) 4642:No 4626:I 4616:) 4588:. 4500:) 4473:) 4448:ki 4444:eW 4440:Ru 4423:) 4367:-- 4365::) 4354:" 4303:) 4271:) 4248:) 4229:) 4203:) 4170:) 4095:) 4078:) 4061:) 4044:) 4005:) 3989:up 3983:me 3940:) 3854:) 3833:) 3813:13 3766:) 3713:) 3702:. 3682:-- 3650:) 3607:) 3603:• 3583:) 3495:?! 3464:- 3446:?! 3417:?! 3378:. 3347:) 3275:Z- 3143:ZZ 3132:) 3115:) 3049:) 3032:) 3024:. 2893:) 2889:• 2869:) 2851:) 2836:) 2822:) 2774:: 2757:) 2753:• 2730:) 2726:– 2709:) 2648:) 2533:-- 2487:) 2468:) 2419:el 2407:) 2390:) 2338:) 2334:• 2295:) 2289:Ed 2287:-- 2149:: 2135:) 2114:: 2061:: 2039:: 1997:: 1975:: 1920:: 1873:: 1865:. 1834:te 1832:ai 1830:hw 1828:et 1826:tl 1824:os 1820:an 1818:Ry 1676:) 1651:) 1636:) 1596:. 1549:I 1489:| 1483:Of 1448:| 1442:Of 1334:, 1273:) 1241:) 1208:) 1188:, 1115:. 1033:lu 920:) 916:• 900:A. 866:A. 862:? 859:, 813:A. 805:╦╩ 791:A. 775:A. 749:A: 710:A: 660:A: 614:A. 608:Q. 594:A. 550:A: 479:A: 472:) 453:9. 435:A: 431:? 416:A: 409:) 377:8. 361:A: 354:) 322:7. 304:A: 294:6. 283:A: 269:5. 260:A: 256:? 250:4. 239:A: 233:3. 225:). 223:II 215:II 199:IV 189:. 179:A: 173:2. 157:, 135:A: 129:1. 37:. 6214:( 6170:( 6138:( 6021:( 5988:( 5963:- 5897:( 5869:( 5724:│ 5708:( 5694:☯ 5642:( 5577:( 5555:· 5550:( 5532:S 5445:( 5405:( 5324:( 5272:o 5218:' 5204:( 5175:( 5157:( 5140:( 5115:~ 5010:( 4994:⁂ 4883:( 4870:( 4840:( 4823:( 4806:C 4801:/ 4774:( 4748:( 4675:~ 4652:( 4612:( 4596:× 4556:~ 4539:~ 4512:~ 4492:( 4469:( 4446:i 4442:n 4419:( 4350:" 4299:( 4267:( 4244:( 4225:( 4199:( 4166:( 4145:) 4141:( 4091:( 4074:( 4057:( 4040:( 3953:- 3951:J 3936:( 3921:@ 3916:L 3912:o 3909:B 3889:M 3875:7 3870:1 3850:( 3829:( 3794:H 3762:( 3711:c 3708:t 3706:( 3670:✽ 3646:( 3599:( 3579:( 3538:) 3380:♠ 3360:F 3356:D 3343:( 3213:) 3209:( 3145:~ 3128:( 3111:( 3061:E 3045:( 3028:( 3014:) 3008:( 3001:— 2956:§ 2925:— 2885:( 2865:( 2847:( 2832:( 2818:( 2749:( 2722:( 2705:( 2686:/ 2644:( 2566:♠ 2497:— 2481:( 2464:( 2454:) 2423:/ 2403:( 2386:( 2355:. 2330:( 2311:♫ 2291:( 2131:( 2090:│ 1896:│ 1822:P 1756:t 1749:m 1745:- 1726:☎ 1672:( 1647:( 1632:( 1576:- 1511:S 1332:) 1327:· 1321:· 1315:· 1309:· 1303:· 1297:· 1291:· 1286:( 1269:( 1237:( 1204:( 1198:7 1184:( 1135:P 1131:W 1089:│ 1047:) 1042:· 1036:· 1030:· 1024:· 1018:· 1012:· 1005:· 998:· 992:· 987:( 948:. 912:( 844:) 839:· 834:( 763:. 674:. 585:) 580:· 575:( 556:/ 539:C 534:/ 512:C 507:/ 468:( 405:( 396:· 391:( 350:( 333:· 328:( 221:( 213:( 197:( 165:. 72:· 67:(

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

Knowledge

:Requests for adminship/Cobi 2 - Knowledge

Index