123:, and I have noticed that there is frecuently a certain ammount of "Backlog", I will provide my help with that when available or needed. I have also noticed that some pages tagged with speedy deletion tags are often overlooked and they sometimes manage to survive a day or so even if they are clear cases of vandalism or nonsense, I will try to keep up with this kind of pages and monitor them to avoid recreation. I can also help in cases where pages are moved without prior disscusion and users are unable to move them back because the creation of a redirect page prevents the user from doing so, these kind of cases are frecuently seen in the Dragon Ball pages where characters are given a wide variety of names.
941:- Dark Dragon Flame, I'm sure you will make a good admin relatively soon (and I really like your answer to question #4 above), but the anon reservation above, along with your low participation in the Knowledge (XXG) namespace (a mere 241 edits), makes me want to see more administrative activity from you before I support. My advice is for you to become more involved in the Knowledge (XXG) community itself, such as at its desks and request pages, helping on backlogs, participating in policy discussions, etc. I'm sure you will do fine on these, and I look forward to supporting you for adminship in the future, say 3 to 6 months and about a thousand Knowledge (XXG) namespace edits from now.
1321:. The bulk of this editor's project space contributions have been to WikiProject pages, which indicates a good familiarity with community but not with the policies here. The candidate wants to help with AIV, but only has 26 edits to that page. In four random reports that I looked more closely at, one was reported after only two warnings. I'm not sure he is fully aware of blocking policy, and I'm not comfortable sending him out to start blocking vandals right now. He also wants to help out with speedy deletions, but I see very little participation in XfD. Again, I don't feel comfortable sending him out there to start deleting articles with so little experience in such matters. --
334:
something indirectly and those that are about a non-notable individual or organization. Articles for deletion should be carefully judged first and a AfD should be open if there is no way of expanding it, fixing POV and OR problems or other criteria violations, before nominating it should be researched if there is a place where they can be merged. With the page you present here I propose speedy deletion because it's unreferenced, there is a large amount of POV, there are critical grammar errors, there is not enought content to make a stub, and it fails to explain why the individuals are notable. -
964:. All of these were reported properly, and all were blocked save one who should have been blocked but wasn't only because the vandal had temporarily stopped. I.e., he gets it. But, I suppose 3.7876352 more edits to WP:AIV will prove he is trusworthy. This user's been around for four months and has way more than enough edits for anyone to evaluate with an eye towards trustworthiness. 3, 6, or 28,923,812 more months isn't going to make a difference. --
742:, I must say I am quite puzzled at some of the comments below, and glad to see Durin is taking a role in defending against those puzzling comments. A mere 241 Wiki-space edits? that's double of what I had over a year ago when I was elected an admin, the standards are becoming way too high and this is really supposed to be no big deal. Keep up the good work DDF, even if for some strange reason consensus cannot be reached here.
1369:
know, myself included, first ran into deletion policy when an article we were watching got tagged. If it's okay with you, that will be my method of judging the candidate's suitability to start deleting articles. I'm open to be convinced otherwise, but just FYI your charging around here like a rhetorical rhino goring everyone in sight doesn't do much for changing people's minds. --
828:. User has demonstrated his trustworthiness. I'm really baffled by people who can say things like "I think your'e a great editor and your edit history shows experience and prudence - you just need X more edits/months/whatevers". I'd trust this user with the mop, his answers demonstrate he'd use it wisely. I say give it to him.
745:
1276:
You say in your self-nom that you decided to apply today after another user suggested it. To me, and I may be wrong, it seems almost like an after thought. I would feel more comfortable knowing you had given more consideration to the task before applying. Maybe sit back and keeping working for a bit
785:
As do I. Incidentally only one editor has replied to Durin. How are supposed to build consensus if editors simply fly by and don't respond to comments? How does the bureacrat know if any of these editors would change their mind upon considering Durin's comments? This should be taken into account.
1368:
You are correct, I can't gauge how well someone understands speedy tagging unless they have a whole mess of declines. So, barring that possibility, I look for other signs that someone has delved into the world of deletion policy. I submit that AfD is usually the first frontier, since most editors I
252:
This one is specially important, if something can be considered libelous it should be taken out ASAP. I would try to talk to the user once without warning him or give him a {{test 1}} template, if this behavior continues I would warn him twice before proceeding to block, that unless the user has a
211:
and gather to keep either a page or material that clearly violates POV or is a violation of copyright (some pages are copied exactly as found on a source, but it seems useful wich makes users vote to keep it despite it being a violation of intellectual property), other rules such as Don't infringe
1506:
I don't see quite enough experience with admin-like activity but candidate appears to be trustworthy. Like
Transhumanist, I would recommend getting a little bit more involved in project space but the suggested 3-6 months of extra activity with 1000 Wiki-space edits seems like a definite overkill.
1061:
you had about the same time experience (~4 months) and fewer edits (3300) than this nominee. I'm curious. Why didn't you oppose yourself on your RfA? What it is about him that makes him less trustworthy, given his experience, than you were at that time, given your experience? Any diffs to show?
464:
No, that won't be necessary. Please read the part at the top of the page which states "Any
Wikipedians, including users who do not have an account and/or are not logged in ("anons"), are invited to participate in the comments section and ask questions." (In fact, I think I was the one who typed
1009:
I am concerned about this editor's upload history; there are a large number of deleted images most of which appear to have been uploaded as "fair use" and subsequently deleted, and that concerns me. Also, the spelling errors in the candidate's comments suggest a careless attitude that is not
419:
I have had personal experience with difficult administrators in
Knowledge (XXG), and feel that a more stringent review process is necessary to ensure that only patient, impartial people in the community are elevated to administrator status. I consider editing impulsively, or as the result of a
333:
I usually just add Speedy tags to pages that are clear nonsense or vandalism unless I found a page that is beyond hope I also tag those. I propose deletion when I find a page that is a good faith contribution but falls short of meeting the criteria, examples of these are pages that may promote
1383:
That was completely uncalled for. RfA is about consensus generation, not so that every person with a position can post obstacles to someone becoming an admin. If you don't like my comments fine; that's part of consensus development, but there's no call to be attacking me personally like that.
492:
I already commented about this, it should also be noted that I asked a few other users of the Dragon Ball WikiProject before reverting his edits wich were clearly vandalism by a user with vandalism warnings, this edit was a error by me and it happened within my first three weeks here.
1443:: I think you are very close. A couple months and you will surely have a successful RfA. While you have a lot of contributions I think you need more time here. However I like the answers to your questions. Try in a couple months after trying to fix what's suggested above.
72:) - I have been an editor in Knowledge (XXG) during the last five months. During my first two months I dedicated my time to learn and adapt to Knowledge (XXG)'s policies and guidelines. During this time period I joined three WikiProjects one Task force and founded the
426:
Listen, Goku IS NOT 6'1 HE IS 5'7. If you have a source that states otherwise provide it or at least comment it on the DISSCUSION PAGE, it will be reverted no matter how many times you put it, so don't waste your time-Dark Dragon Flame 04:28, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
1562:
are never reasons to delete an article. I really feel you're on the verge of having the policy knowledge that successful admins have, but you're not quite there yet. Another couple of months and some more improvement and I expect you'll sail through. Good luck,
911:, this was a hard choice for me, mostly because of the time you've been on Knowledge (XXG). I don't think you'll abuse the tools, and I'm pretty sure that you'd put them to good use. If this RfA fails, don't give up hope! Be sure to try again in a few months.
576:- Your contributions indicate that you can be trusted and you have just over 4000 Edits and your contribution to Wikiproject is good and even though you aren't very experienced (5 months), I think you would be able to use the tool wisely..--
175:, where I reverted the page three times and warned the user in an edit not to do so in a manner that may not have been polite, the incident was ultimately resolved in the article's talk page. I was a little stressed out when I was attending
1541:
I do think you're well on your way to being ready for adminship, but I'm afraid you aren't quite there yet. I was looking for a more detailed answer to my questions, particularly the ability to quote the relevant policies:
1010:
becoming in an administrator. And I'm not exactly thrilled about the candidate's user page. There is no glaring problem, just a lot of little annoyances that leave me uncomfortable with any option other than opposition.
212:
copyrights and Avoid bias should never under any circumtance be broken. Shortly a policy or headline should not be broken unless it conflicts with other policies or if doing so clearly improves
Knowledge (XXG) as a whole. -
1358:
Yes/no. You can't gauge how well someone understands speedy tagging since if they are *really* good at it, it looks like they've never done it. Also, XfD and speedy are quite different aspects of deletion policy.
1558:'s notability criteria relating to national tours) that it should be Prod'ed not speedy deleted (IMHO of course, its a deliberately borderline case). Its also worth noting that grammatical errors and fixable
1222:
So you can evaluate that he's a good editor, but not whether he's trustworthy? After four months and thousands upon thousands of edits, what more can he do to prove it? You obviously can evaluate him. --
420:
vendetta, to be the strongest warnings against adminship. That said, I found a quite angry comment left as a result of a factual error in this candidates' beloved anime character biographies:
1612:
395:
1393:
Haha rhetorical rhino, I must admit
Musculus that was pretty funny. But I agree with Durin on this one, he has every right to stick up for a user he feels would be a great administrator.
120:
816:. Metrics are meaningless. Either the candidate "gets it" or they don't. Metrics aren't going to tell anyone that. Only bothering to review the editor's contributions will reveal that.
155:
as well as having one as a FAC at the momment, the fact that all this has been made within a month makes me believe that there is hope in our goal of making the internet a better place.
359:
I notice you don't seem to have email enabled. Is there any particular reason for that? Email will often be the only way blocked and other inexperienced users can contact you. –
668:
leave me trusting him. While admittedly a little short on experience, I've got no doubts that he would use the tools correctly. Adminship is not a big deal, after all. Cheers,
1293:
Adminship is no big deal. It's not a special class of users that someone must train for and deeply consider before accepting the possibility of the extra buttons it grants. --
1058:
1120:
Sorry for the contradiction, let me rephrase that oppose comment. He is a good editor and all, but it is a little too early for adminship. Also I change my vote to neutral.--
997:
I just don't think this user is quite ready to become an admin quite yet. I have reservations against an edit war, and even though explained, just rubs me the wrong way.
165:
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?
281:
After you've reverted vandalism by an editor, do you warn the editor? If so, why and how, if not why not? Please refer to applicable policies and guidelines, if any.
1186:
No, I'm currently on a wikibreak but I feel the need to jump in because this RfA is neither clearly in support of the candidate nor clearly against the candidate. -
287:
I often do, unless the user has vandalism history and/or is on a vandalism spree or if the account seems to be vandalism exclusive, in this cases I go directly to
139:
I have contributed mostly to anime, professional wrestling, baseball, basketball and video games pages. The contribution that makes proud is the foundation of the
1240:(it is common practice for a signature to resemble to some degree the username it represents) policy knowledge seems to be in an inadequate level at this time.
232:"Editors should remove any contentious material about living persons that is unsourced ... Editors who re-insert the material may be warned and blocked" (from
1630:
717:
mere. I was promoted with similar experience to this user. I see most opposers have given no thought past numbers, or any rationale why it matters at all.
893:
1492:. I agree with Orphen that you are close, but I think you need to work on interactions more. Participating in an edit war is not a good thing. ···
407:
69:
207:
Although such cases are rare, there are some instances where the
Consensus rule needs to be broken, this includes when a number of users break
954:
I'm sure a robust 242 edits is the magic number then? Take a look at his contributions, not his edit counts. For instance, reports to WP:AIV:
445:
978:
I echo The
Transhumanist's comments and want to point out that hopefully soon, you will run again with more experience and succeed then.
391:
30:
17:
1344:
Yes, I'm aware of that. I think most users learn the ins and outs of deletion policy through participation in XfD. Make sense? --
884:
1591:
1136:
1099:
871:
1475:
you're definitely doing great, but I personally prefer you get a little more experience (time-wise) on
Knowledge (XXG).--
102:
Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve
Knowledge (XXG) as an administrator. You may wish to answer the following
526:
Comment about that? in this same page, what I meant was that I'm not hiding it, I even added a link to the user's page. -
1480:
1459:
590:
I don't see anything that leads me to believe this user will abuse the admin tools. No, not even his spelling errors.
63:
646:
324:
441:
1597:
1567:
1533:
1511:
1498:
1484:
1467:
1428:
1404:
1388:
1378:
1363:
1353:
1339:
1330:
1313:
1297:
1288:
1266:
1257:
1244:
1226:
1217:
1190:
1181:
1172:
1142:
1115:
1105:
1066:
1052:
1043:
1031:
1019:
1001:
989:
968:
949:
926:
903:
887:
875:
854:
842:
820:
800:
780:
758:
734:
705:
689:
677:
656:
637:- Good record, although I'd like to see more experience in projectspace. Nonetheless, adminship is no big deal.
629:
617:
605:
594:
582:
557:
534:
517:
497:
485:
472:
459:
406:
Please keep criticism constructive and polite. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review
374:
342:
299:
261:
240:
220:
84:
639:
430:
I don't believe that an administrator should behave in such a way, and recommend against promoting this user.
76:. Today following a suggestion made by a fellow user, I humbly present my nomination for your consideration.
984:
469:
433:
1399:
1374:
1349:
1326:
1015:
944:
919:
753:
527:
494:
437:
387:
335:
292:
254:
213:
77:
59:
787:
1305:
1040:
673:
625:
Great user and good editor very friendly. Deserves adminship and will most definitally use it for good.
578:
481:
455:
369:
253:
extensive vandalism history where I would give a block based on his contributions and previous blocks. -
237:
1611:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the talk page of either
466:
1048:
What, thousands upon thousands of edits and four months of dedication to the project aren't enough? --
840:
172:
797:
1249:
Has not demonstrated sufficient dedication to the project for me to trust this user with the tools.
1577:
1122:
1085:
813:
700:
686:
187:
1584:
1531:
1520:
1508:
1251:
1187:
1178:
1177:
I'm puzzled by your statement which seems to be saying that you are opposing because others are.
1169:
1129:
1092:
979:
867:
1555:
1543:
1309:
179:'s featured article candidacy, but I tried to satisfy all the points presented and took it easy.
602:
1394:
1370:
1345:
1322:
1011:
914:
774:
748:
728:
552:
548:
is probably quite relevant when attempting to assess the intentions of this anonymous user. --
507:
316:
669:
665:
361:
140:
73:
1559:
1547:
1237:
320:
312:
288:
233:
208:
198:
1425:
1027:, lacks of experience, and not enough participation in the administrative side of things.
713:
I suggest all those with editcountitis/timecountitis get yourselves cured quickly. 241 is
591:
1162:- I have to oppose because there is no clear consensus emerging. These sorts of diffs -
1204:
695:
614:
1624:
1524:
1493:
1262:
What might be sufficient demonstration of dedication? How are you evaluating this? --
863:
817:
626:
176:
144:
793:
Unless your Jimbo and its WP:ATT which I disapproved of (but took part nonetheless).
1564:
1028:
851:
766:
720:
549:
271:
1575:
I perfer more time on
Knowledge (XXG) (6+ month) before applying for adminship.--
1476:
1241:
998:
829:
883:
Intelligent answers and real understanding... I think you'd make a great admin
1446:
1385:
1360:
1336:
1294:
1278:
1263:
1223:
1112:
1063:
1049:
965:
1605:
The above adminship discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion.
1111:
Experienced but not experienced in other words? This doesn't make sense. --
1546:(which says you should be diligent in warning users who vandalize) and
685:
You seem like a good, reliable person so why not support you? Shalom.--
1523:
said come back here withing 6 months, we'll support you. Good luck. --
1615:
or the nominated user). No further edits should be made to this page.
323:? Could you illustrate your answer by telling me what you'd do with
147:
related pages, as a group we have been able to raise three pages to
744:
1202:- You're a good editor, but it's a bit too early in my opinion.--
1277:
longer and then come back. I'm sure you'll breeze through then.
1424:. Too early to judge. Trends of behavior in conflicts unclear.
1550::A7. In particular the HillstoneLows example has enough of an
171:
During my first month here I was in a mild edit conflict with
133:
What are your best contributions to Knowledge (XXG), and why?
453:
Please create an account to take part in this Rfa..Thanks..--
91:
Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:
121:
Knowledge (XXG):Administrator intervention against vandalism
506:
Can you please provide a diff of where you have done this?
29:
The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a
113:
What admin work, if any, do you intend to take part in?
1166:
1163:
962:
960:
958:
955:
897:
862:. I trust this user to not screw up with the tools. —
545:
1168:- make me think that the candidate's not there yet. -
55:
Final (18/14/7); Ended Sat, 05 May 2007 02:08:16 (UTC)
1083:experienced editor but its a little too early.--
106:questions to provide guidance for participants:
143:, a group focused on raising and improving all
8:
236:). How rigorously would you enforce this?--
1335:XfD is not the same as speedy deletion. --
664:My interactions with the user through the
408:Special:Contributions/Dark Dragon Flame
1304:Inadequate understanding of WP:BLP. --
479:Ok..that clears everything..Thanks..--
119:I have been a frecuent contributor to
18:Knowledge (XXG):Requests for adminship
1057:Interestingly enough, at the time of
7:
311:Where do you draw the lines between
197:Under what circumstances should one
1631:Unsuccessful requests for adminship
24:
763:I strongly endorse this comment.
743:
613:- friendly experienced editor.
394:. For the edit count, see the
1:
790:is policy; we don't do polls
390:'s edit summary usage with
98:Questions for the candidate
1647:
1568:17:10, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
1534:14:12, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
1519:You are doing well but as
1512:20:26, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
1499:18:08, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
1485:17:53, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
1468:05:04, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
1389:20:01, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
1379:19:57, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
1364:19:35, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
1354:19:29, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
1340:19:22, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
1331:19:15, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
1314:18:56, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
1298:15:28, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
1289:02:29, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
1267:15:40, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
1258:00:54, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
1245:21:50, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
1227:15:28, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
1218:15:37, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
1191:06:27, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
1182:20:22, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
1173:15:34, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
1116:15:28, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
1106:06:10, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
1067:15:37, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
1053:15:28, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
1044:05:32, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
1032:04:39, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
1020:01:03, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
1002:21:31, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
990:21:29, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
969:15:21, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
950:21:18, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
781:18:03, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
759:17:53, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
735:15:25, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
706:08:55, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
690:20:28, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
678:19:32, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
657:16:30, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
630:13:55, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
618:11:24, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
606:06:21, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
595:02:39, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
583:19:54, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
558:01:27, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
535:14:17, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
518:23:03, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
498:20:03, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
486:20:20, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
473:20:16, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
460:20:01, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
343:16:44, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
325:User:Gwernol/HillstoneLows
300:16:44, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
262:15:32, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
241:02:32, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
221:20:29, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
85:18:23, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
788:Knowledge (XXG):Consensus
1608:Please do not modify it.
687:James, La gloria è a dio
270:Optional questions from
141:Devil May Cry task force
74:Devil May Cry Task Force
40:Please do not modify it.
1598:14:43, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
1429:15:21, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
1405:06:19, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
1143:14:43, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
927:00:03, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
904:22:53, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
888:12:22, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
876:10:59, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
855:04:19, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
843:22:32, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
821:08:05, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
801:19:12, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
666:Devil May Cry taskforce
448:) 20:57, 27 April 2007.
375:06:11, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
186:Optional question from
153:Featured Article status
1039:- a little too early.
850:per Arkyan and Durin.
1236:candidates image and
885:Think outside the box
436:comment was added by
31:request for adminship
351:Optional question(s)
321:article for deletion
1554:of notability (see
1310:a pox on the boxes
410:before commenting.
151:status and one to
1402:
1312:
945:The Transhumanist
900:
795:
756:
704:
654:
555:
554:(fry that thing!)
495:Dark Dragon Flame
449:
388:Dark Dragon Flame
317:proposed deletion
60:Dark Dragon Flame
49:Dark Dragon Flame
1638:
1610:
1596:
1589:
1582:
1529:
1496:
1464:
1456:
1453:
1398:
1308:
1286:
1285:
1282:
1254:
1216:
1214:
1209:
1141:
1134:
1127:
1104:
1097:
1090:
1041:Metamagician3000
987:
982:
922:
917:
898:
836:
833:
812:. The candidate
791:
777:
769:
752:
747:
731:
723:
698:
655:
653:
651:
644:
581:
553:
515:
510:
484:
458:
431:
381:General comments
373:
366:
173:User:Finsfan8499
93:I accept per nom
42:
1646:
1645:
1641:
1640:
1639:
1637:
1636:
1635:
1621:
1620:
1619:
1613:this nomination
1606:
1590:
1583:
1576:
1525:
1494:
1483:
1466:
1460:
1447:
1444:
1283:
1280:
1279:
1252:
1210:
1205:
1203:
1135:
1128:
1121:
1098:
1091:
1084:
985:
980:
939:Oppose, for now
920:
915:
834:
831:
775:
767:
729:
721:
647:
640:
638:
577:
532:
511:
508:
480:
454:
438:207.207.127.254
432:—The preceding
417:
383:
362:
360:
340:
313:speedy deletion
297:
259:
218:
100:
82:
52:
38:
35:did not succeed
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
1644:
1642:
1634:
1633:
1623:
1622:
1618:
1617:
1601:
1600:
1570:
1536:
1514:
1501:
1487:
1479:
1470:
1458:
1432:
1431:
1419:
1418:
1417:
1416:
1415:
1414:
1413:
1412:
1411:
1410:
1409:
1408:
1407:
1316:
1302:
1301:
1300:
1271:
1270:
1269:
1247:
1231:
1230:
1229:
1197:
1196:
1195:
1194:
1193:
1188:Richard Cavell
1170:Richard Cavell
1157:
1156:
1155:
1154:
1153:
1152:
1151:
1150:
1149:
1148:
1147:
1146:
1145:
1070:
1069:
1055:
1034:
1022:
1004:
992:
973:
972:
971:
930:
929:
906:
890:
878:
857:
845:
823:
807:
806:
805:
804:
803:
737:
708:
692:
680:
659:
632:
623:Strong Support
620:
608:
597:
585:
565:
564:
563:
562:
561:
560:
538:
537:
528:
523:
522:
521:
520:
501:
500:
489:
488:
477:
476:
475:
416:
413:
403:
402:
401:
399:
392:mathbot's tool
382:
379:
378:
377:
348:
347:
346:
345:
336:
305:
304:
303:
302:
293:
267:
266:
265:
264:
255:
244:
243:
226:
225:
224:
223:
214:
183:
182:
181:
180:
159:
158:
157:
156:
127:
126:
125:
124:
99:
96:
95:
94:
78:
51:
46:
45:
44:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1643:
1632:
1629:
1628:
1626:
1616:
1614:
1609:
1603:
1602:
1599:
1595:
1594:
1588:
1587:
1581:
1580:
1574:
1571:
1569:
1566:
1561:
1557:
1553:
1549:
1545:
1540:
1537:
1535:
1532:
1530:
1528:
1522:
1521:Pascal.Tesson
1518:
1515:
1513:
1510:
1509:Pascal.Tesson
1505:
1502:
1500:
1497:
1491:
1488:
1486:
1482:
1478:
1474:
1471:
1469:
1465:
1463:
1455:
1454:
1452:
1451:
1442:
1439:
1438:
1437:
1436:
1430:
1427:
1423:
1420:
1406:
1403:
1401:
1396:
1392:
1391:
1390:
1387:
1382:
1381:
1380:
1376:
1372:
1367:
1366:
1365:
1362:
1357:
1356:
1355:
1351:
1347:
1343:
1342:
1341:
1338:
1334:
1333:
1332:
1328:
1324:
1320:
1317:
1315:
1311:
1307:
1303:
1299:
1296:
1292:
1291:
1290:
1287:
1275:
1272:
1268:
1265:
1261:
1260:
1259:
1256:
1255:
1253:Daniel Bryant
1248:
1246:
1243:
1239:
1235:
1232:
1228:
1225:
1221:
1220:
1219:
1215:
1213:
1208:
1201:
1198:
1192:
1189:
1185:
1184:
1183:
1180:
1179:Pascal.Tesson
1176:
1175:
1174:
1171:
1167:
1164:
1161:
1158:
1144:
1140:
1139:
1133:
1132:
1126:
1125:
1119:
1118:
1117:
1114:
1110:
1109:
1108:
1107:
1103:
1102:
1096:
1095:
1089:
1088:
1082:
1078:
1077:
1076:
1075:
1074:
1073:
1072:
1071:
1068:
1065:
1060:
1056:
1054:
1051:
1047:
1046:
1045:
1042:
1038:
1035:
1033:
1030:
1026:
1023:
1021:
1017:
1013:
1008:
1005:
1003:
1000:
996:
993:
991:
988:
983:
977:
974:
970:
967:
963:
961:
959:
957:
956:
953:
952:
951:
948:
947:
946:
940:
937:
936:
935:
934:
928:
925:
924:
923:
918:
910:
907:
905:
902:
901:
895:
891:
889:
886:
882:
879:
877:
873:
869:
865:
861:
858:
856:
853:
849:
846:
844:
841:
838:
837:
827:
824:
822:
819:
815:
811:
808:
802:
799:
794:
789:
784:
783:
782:
779:
778:
772:
771:
770:
762:
761:
760:
757:
755:
750:
746:
741:
738:
736:
733:
732:
726:
725:
724:
716:
712:
709:
707:
702:
697:
693:
691:
688:
684:
681:
679:
675:
671:
667:
663:
660:
658:
652:
650:
645:
643:
636:
633:
631:
628:
624:
621:
619:
616:
612:
609:
607:
604:
601:
598:
596:
593:
589:
586:
584:
580:
575:
572:
571:
570:
569:
559:
556:
551:
547:
544:
543:
542:
541:
540:
539:
536:
533:
531:
525:
524:
519:
516:
514:
505:
504:
503:
502:
499:
496:
491:
490:
487:
483:
478:
474:
471:
468:
463:
462:
461:
457:
452:
451:
450:
447:
443:
439:
435:
428:
424:
421:
414:
412:
411:
409:
400:
397:
393:
389:
385:
384:
380:
376:
371:
367:
365:
358:
355:
354:
353:
352:
344:
341:
339:
332:
329:
328:
326:
322:
318:
314:
310:
307:
306:
301:
298:
296:
290:
286:
283:
282:
280:
277:
276:
275:
274:
273:
263:
260:
258:
251:
248:
247:
246:
245:
242:
239:
235:
231:
228:
227:
222:
219:
217:
210:
206:
203:
202:
200:
199:ignore a rule
196:
193:
192:
191:
190:
189:
178:
177:Devil May Cry
174:
170:
167:
166:
164:
161:
160:
154:
150:
146:
145:Devil May Cry
142:
138:
135:
134:
132:
129:
128:
122:
118:
115:
114:
112:
109:
108:
107:
105:
97:
92:
89:
88:
87:
86:
83:
81:
75:
71:
68:
65:
61:
57:
56:
50:
47:
43:
41:
36:
32:
27:
26:
19:
1607:
1604:
1592:
1585:
1578:
1572:
1551:
1538:
1527:♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪
1526:
1516:
1503:
1489:
1472:
1461:
1449:
1448:
1445:
1440:
1434:
1433:
1421:
1397:
1395:Croat Canuck
1371:Mus Musculus
1346:Mus Musculus
1323:Mus Musculus
1318:
1273:
1250:
1233:
1211:
1206:
1199:
1159:
1137:
1130:
1123:
1100:
1093:
1086:
1080:
1079:
1036:
1024:
1012:Kelly Martin
1006:
994:
975:
943:
942:
938:
932:
931:
913:
912:
908:
896:
880:
859:
847:
830:
825:
809:
792:
773:
765:
764:
751:
749:Croat Canuck
739:
727:
719:
718:
714:
710:
682:
661:
648:
641:
635:Weak Support
634:
622:
610:
599:
587:
573:
567:
566:
529:
512:
429:
425:
423:DON'T DO IT
422:
418:
405:
404:
363:
356:
350:
349:
337:
330:
308:
294:
284:
278:
269:
268:
256:
249:
229:
215:
204:
194:
185:
184:
168:
162:
152:
149:Good Article
148:
136:
130:
116:
110:
103:
101:
90:
79:
66:
58:
54:
53:
48:
39:
34:
28:
1400:Go Leafs Go
1200:Weak Oppose
1081:Weak Oppose
1007:Weak oppose
839:•
814:measures up
754:Go Leafs Go
670:Lankybugger
579:Cometstyles
482:Cometstyles
456:Cometstyles
364:Luna Santin
1426:Mukadderat
916:*Cremepuff
892:Why not?--
798:Iamunknown
696:dario vet
415:Discussion
1552:assertion
1238:signature
615:Eaomatrix
396:talk page
1625:Category
1556:WP:MUSIC
1544:WP:BLOCK
1462:Contribs
1059:your RfA
864:CComMack
818:Vassyana
627:DBZROCKS
467:Picaroon
446:contribs
434:unsigned
104:optional
70:contribs
1573:Neutral
1565:Gwernol
1539:Neutral
1517:Neutral
1504:Neutral
1490:Neutral
1473:Neutral
1441:Neutral
1435:Neutral
1029:Terence
981:Captain
909:Support
881:Support
860:Support
852:JoshuaZ
848:Support
826:Support
810:Support
768:Majorly
740:Support
722:Majorly
711:Support
683:Support
662:Support
611:Support
600:Support
588:Support
574:Support
568:Support
550:Deskana
513:kantari
465:that.)
272:Gwernol
188:Adambro
1560:WP:POV
1548:WP:CSD
1477:danntm
1422:oppose
1319:Oppose
1274:Oppose
1242:feydey
1234:Oppose
1160:Oppose
1037:Oppose
1025:Oppose
999:Jmlk17
995:Oppose
976:Oppose
933:Oppose
894:U.S.A.
776:(hot!)
730:(hot!)
470:(Talk)
289:WP:AIV
234:WP:BLP
209:WP:COI
1450:Orfen
1386:Durin
1361:Durin
1337:Durin
1295:Durin
1264:Durin
1224:Durin
1113:Durin
1064:Durin
1050:Durin
986:panda
966:Durin
899:cubed
592:Frise
509:Nacon
33:that
16:<
1586:ston
1375:talk
1350:talk
1327:talk
1281:Jody
1131:ston
1094:ston
1016:talk
921:222*
701:talk
674:Yell
603:A.Z.
546:This
442:talk
386:See
370:talk
319:and
64:talk
1579:Pre
1495:日本穣
1306:Doc
1207:$ U
1124:Pre
1087:Pre
835:yan
832:Ark
715:not
649:ton
642:Wal
291:. -
238:Doc
1627::
1457:|
1384:--
1377:)
1359:--
1352:)
1329:)
1212:IT
1165:,
1062:--
1018:)
874:)
796:--
694:--
676:○
672:○
444:•
357:8.
331:A:
327:?
315:,
309:7.
285:A:
279:6.
250:A:
230:5.
205:A:
201:?
195:4.
169:A:
163:3.
137:A:
131:2.
117:A:
111:1.
37:.
1593:H
1481:C
1373:(
1348:(
1325:(
1284:B
1138:H
1101:H
1014:(
872:c
870:–
868:t
866:(
703:)
699:(
530:凶
493:-
440:(
398:.
372:)
368:(
338:凶
295:凶
257:凶
216:凶
80:凶
67:·
62:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.