1080:. Sorry to oppose someone who is clearly well motivated, but I see a number of problems - perhaps none individually would have been enough, but taken together they are. 1) Recent activity - I see nothing at all for months, then a quick burst in the RfA month - and that comes not long after a lengthy Wikibreak. After a couple of breaks, I'd want to see you building up at least several months of regular contributions before running for admin. 2) Those recent incorrect CSDs worry me a little, as they show incorrect understanding of the categories. 3) English grammar and technical errors. OK, people make mistakes, but you consistently don't seem to take care about getting things right, like capitalization, spacing, etc - consistent failure to capitalize "I" is something I find very irritating, for example. I think taking care over communication is very important for admins. Getting technical things right is also important - if you don't transclude your RfA properly, how can we trust you to close AfD's etc? Anyway, spend more time, get at least a few months of regular contributions behind you, and pay attention to details - and I hope I can support a future RfA. --
1212:
anyone to be perfect when it comes to spelling and grammar, but I do want to see a higher level of performance in that department. In addition, more active editing over a consistent period of time would also be a plus. I don't mind an occasional break, and I do understand that life gets in the way. In my opinion, though, admins should be available a bit more than what I'm seeing, mainly because admins should be available should the need to be communicated arise. I'm not a fan of completely going away for several months, popping back in and editing for a month, and then leaving again. As a final point, the incorrect speedy deletion nominations are also a concern. Otherwise, Staffwaterboy has done some great contributing, and if the points that I brought up are addressed over time, then I'd have no problem supporting in the future.
165:. I have gain much experience throughout the years of being active on Knowledge in learning new ways to handle difference types of situations correctly. I also feel that i have more confidence to support the discussion that i make here on Knowledge as well as respect the discussion of other users and sysops even if not in agreement with the other users.i am very stern about my position on vandalism here on Knowledge however i am willing to take the time to to look at a user or IP users contest for a block.
98:)Â â Hello i am Staffwaterboy i have joined the English Knowledge in 2006 were i started to learn more about Knowledge the structure and how it works. Throughout the years i have learned many new tricks and trades to reverting vandalism to creating a successful article on Knowledge. I feel i have grown in part with the other members here on the English Knowledge.Some of my main goals for this RFA is to be able to help out with backlogs in other projects of Knowledge such in
1000:
threads about speedies that have been declined or deleted under a different reason, and looking through your most recent tags I saw several that seemed overhasty to me or simply wrong, for example an Irish politician who served 8 years on Dublin city
Council, I'm not sure if all Dublin City Councillors would have the notability to pass the GNG, but it isn't what I expect to see an
1211:
Based on
Staffwaterboy's nomination, answers to the questions, and general communication elsewhere, I'm afraid that I have to oppose. For me, good communication skills are a mandatory requirement to become an administrator, and that includes using proper grammar and sentence structure. I don't expect
847:
Per the comments from ArcAngel. As regards to the formatting issues, it seems that even taking into account your comment, it would have been fixed quickly. There is also not enough experience in the mainspace in my opinion. All these factors seem to demonstrate that perhaps there is not quite enough
670:
Yes, the
English is poor (put charitably). But they don't want the tools to write articles - they want them to protect the articles. And everything suggests that they are able to do that. Furthermore, according to Jimbo becoming an admin is no big deal... in my view it should be given out like candy
999:
I like the clean block log, and I'm not bothered about your recent break, though it does mean I regard edits in
September last year as quite recent in your editing history. However I'm not convinced you are quite ready for the deletion button. Your talkpage history has a rather high proportion of
275:
Well it is definitely is an attention grab however this was done unintentionally,When responding to the questions i didn't change my cursor position before replying which caused this to happen;as well as a lack of closing symbol ''' for the bold font. I have fixed all the questions they should no
705:
I think this is a bit of a surprise for me going in the
Support column, as the opposes have raised a couple of concerns, including deletion tagging errors as mentioned by WSC, but I think he does has the necessities of an administrator. He has received a couple of barnstars, a clean block log and
772:
I'm sorry, but I don't feel comfortable here. In your opening statement you said "after two failed RFA's", yet this one indicated your 2nd? Then there's the matter of your transclusion. Someone with over 12k edits should know how to do it properly, which this one wasn't. Then, something very
984:
I need to see more demonstration of continued editing over a long period to support. Right now id only count one month of recent editing. There is good intentions it seems but i feel adminship is premature at this point for you. Grammar is not an issue for me (I and others make alot of those
1368:
The only concern raised above that dosen't bother me is the grammar/capitalization issue (although that won't endear you to me.) More concerning to me is the long absences you've taken. They're fine, but running for adminship right after a four month absence is not something I can support.
1401:
I don't expect every administrator to be Cicero, but it's pretty clear this user has very basic communication problems. An editor can get by like that, but being an administrator requires significant communication skills and a great deal of tact.
626:
User is experienced and will be able to help out in their intended areas. Based on automated edits, user has done thousands of vandalism revisions. Automated edit percentage is still reasonable. Several articles created, 300+ AIV reports, 190 RPP
1034:â The matter of the poor grammar and technical errors generating the nomination are troubling to me, but based on the supports I decided to still take a look at recent contributions. The first two I looked at weren't pretty. The
1328:. The vandalism reverts look fine to me at first glance. However, lack of attention to detail (as seen in this RFA) causes me to lack trust in the candidate's ability to execute admin actions, where details really matter.
209::Yes i have been in in a few conflicts with other users throughout my years here on Knowledge such with disagreements with information that should or should not be placed on articles. To solve this conflict and prevent a
181::I feel that my best contributions made here on Knowledge would be the reverting of vandalism as well as warning users for any possible disruptive edits that are being made.I have also created a few articles such as
869:) statement looks as bad in regard to sentence structure, capitalization, etc, as this one does. That is an immediate red flag to me. I respect that candidate's desire to contribute, but can not offer my support. --
238:
for a while i had a lot of personal concerns to deal with the two main factors were college as well as work.There were a few other issues but there were things in my personal life that i needed to address
213:
the user and myself try to communicate any issues or disagreements that are in question and if we are unable to come to a consensus on the issue i would typically get a 3rd opinion by a neutral user.
1010:
tag on. I also saw a couple of A7 tags on articles where I would have thought a G10 tag was more appropriate. Happy to reconsider in three or four months if you improve your deletion tagging.
1038:
converted three bad ELs into refs (one was a domain for sale, one was unreliable with very little information, and one linked to a non-applicable home page.) It was so bad that I stopped and
189:
and many others that were originally deleted due to a speedy deletion but recreated the article with proper citations and references.I also have experience with tagging articles that meet
970:
If you can't even pay attention to details like capitalization then I don't think you'll pay attention to things like policy. That is what you'll be interpreting or enforcing as an admin.
1512:
1097:
due to a lack of consistent editing history. I concur with Boings concern over
English grammar. The last thing we need in an administrator is poor communication skills. Regards,
269:
It is not much of a secret that i will use bold or colours to emphasise things on talk pages but what is your reason for making the answers to all of the questions here bold?
1046:
was an addition of a good ref, but it was just put in as a raw URL. I expect an admin to use a cite template on a new ref, or at the very least to give it a readable title. â
1063:â A higher level of command of the language is necessary; even for a vandal fighter. It is how we communicate, and lack of facility with it impedes a sysop's performance.--
575:
1139:
says it best, in particular with regard to your CSD tagging and
English grammar and technical errors. I'm sorry but I don't believe you're ready to be an admin just yet.
570:
773:
basic here - you didn't take out the nom acceptance line since this is a self-nom. Almost half your edits are to user talk pages, and only about 10% are to
Wikispace
455:
335:
330:
203:
Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or have other users caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?
451:
325:
886:
The lack of recent activity bothers me, especially when the candidate is applying for adminship after only about 10 days back. Also, the grammar is worrisome.
941:
1530:
1242:
I have reservations about the candidate's judgement and competence with regards to the project. Decent contributor, but not admin material at the moment. ~~
377:
1303:
Per
Epeefleche, Boing, Fetchcomms, et al. Someone who keeps making elementary grammatical mistakes cannot communicate effectively, and admins absolutely
364:
1277:
If one can't be bothered to regularly capitalize his or her I's, why should I assume that one would bother to carefully perform administrative tasks?
825:
Comment: The format of the RFA is due to the other RFA i did attempt in the past which was still redirecting to it, which was closed and archived.
136:
Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve
Knowledge as an administrator. Please answer these questions to provide guidance for participants:
865:
I am likely going to get nit-picked on this, but I can not support a candidate whose self-nomination (which, in itself, goes directly against my
953:
921:
Interesting oppose. I assume you're basing this on something... do you have any examples of incompetence on the part of this editor? I mean we
912:
565:
513:
371:
433:
357:
95:
407:
1230:
401:
591:
635:
active, received multiple barnstars, presumably understands fair use, clean block log etc. etc. etc. More than enough to support.
114:.After 2 other failed RFA's from 2008 i feel that i am more confident in the work i can help provide Knowledge as a adminstrator.
1291:
900:
30:
17:
416:
1247:
866:
957:
775:
and because you haven't "opted in", it's hard to judge your WP-related experience without having to do a bit of homework first
601:
69:
193:.Overall i feel that any contribution no matter how big or small can help out the Knowledge community in one way or another.
1085:
712:
539:
1017:
560:
748:
Potential, but needs to work on a couple of issues mentioned below. I do hope you will not give up and try again. -
1459:
1312:
1243:
949:
908:
555:
1147:
506:
186:
149::As stated above i plan to take part in several projects on English Knowledge; such as helping with backlogs of
1136:
1081:
975:
1488:
1463:
1439:
1421:
1393:
1360:
1341:
1316:
1298:
1272:
1251:
1234:
1203:
1176:
1149:
1127:
1110:
1089:
1072:
1055:
1026:
994:
961:
935:
916:
895:
878:
857:
835:
820:
803:
789:
757:
740:
724:
697:
680:
662:
645:
484:
470:
286:
249:
124:
74:
808:
Ok, based on that - I still oppose based on the lack of recent activity, plus lack of procedural knowledge.
1384:
833:
351:
284:
247:
122:
89:
534:
1435:
1227:
1051:
1012:
874:
733:
304:
Construct a grammatically correct sentence. (I just want to see if you can fix your grammar if you try).
1455:
1308:
1169:
990:
945:
904:
676:
261:
1511:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the talk page of either
1286:
1158:
1142:
1068:
499:
1104:
971:
658:
235:
1370:
1336:
826:
816:
785:
753:
693:
466:
429:
347:
277:
240:
115:
85:
67:
229:
Could you please explain your lack of activity from September 9th, 2010 to February 3rd, 2011?
1431:
1260:
1220:
1215:
1193:
1123:
1047:
870:
799:
718:
480:
182:
1162:
986:
672:
596:
296:
1281:
1064:
891:
853:
1427:
1426:
At this point, I don't believe it would be too much of a stretch to close this RfA per
1403:
1356:
1099:
654:
1524:
1332:
922:
903:, and I don't see signs of the candidate's ability to wield the new powers he seeks.
809:
778:
749:
689:
459:
221:
210:
190:
162:
158:
154:
150:
111:
107:
103:
99:
62:
1307:
be able to communicate, period, no matter what types of admin work they plan to do.
1477:
1187:
1119:
795:
707:
628:
476:
1259:
Only 2 active months in 2010, and then one in 2011, and then an RFA. No, sorry.
1004:
1450:
927:
887:
849:
637:
1505:
The above adminship discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion.
1351:
925:
every editor is competent unless there's something to suggest they aren't.
1430:
with encouragement to the candidate to perhaps try again in the future? --
1515:
or the nominated user). No further edits should be made to this page.
432:. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review
491:
732:
Adminship is no big deal and you seem like a trustworthy person.
944:
where he leaves his statement blank is a question-mark for me.
495:
1325:
going through the contributions, there's a bad A7 of a place
1184:
due to the improper grammar and recent CSD mistakes. Sorry. â
1448:
administrator be like Cicero. The last thing we want is a
29:
The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a
1118:
The candidate's opening statement kind of says it all.--
175:
What are your best contributions to Knowledge, and why?
143:
What administrative work do you intend to take part in?
1326:
1043:
1039:
1035:
395:
389:
383:
58:
584:
548:
527:
414:Edit summary usage for staffwaterboy can be found
1349:, concerns about temperament and experience. --
631:, 180 UAA reports, when they're active they are
456:Knowledge:Requests for adminship/Staffwaterboy 2
448:Knowledge:Requests for adminship/Staffwaterboy 3
452:Knowledge:Requests for adminship/Staffwaterboy
55:Scheduled to end 06:23, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
1195:
942:Knowledge:Editor review/Staffwaterboy-Review2
507:
8:
1475:. Concerns with maturity and experience. -
929:
848:knowledge yet to be given the mop. Sorry.
639:
514:
500:
492:
428:Please keep discussion constructive and
323:
1454:by one of the admins (BLP vio much?).
336:Requests for adminship/Staffwaterboy 3
331:Requests for adminship/Staffwaterboy 2
7:
326:Requests for adminship/Staffwaterboy
1531:Unsuccessful requests for adminship
671:to anyone who appears trustworthy.
321:
295:Additional optional question from
220:Additional optional question from
24:
18:Knowledge:Requests for adminship
1329:
719:
713:
708:
1386:
1371:
1188:
446:This RFA needs to be moved to
1:
1489:22:07, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
1464:22:40, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
1440:21:44, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
1422:21:23, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
1394:21:04, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
1361:20:33, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
1342:19:21, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
1317:19:14, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
1299:18:54, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
1273:18:29, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
1252:18:00, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
1235:17:55, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
1204:17:18, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
1177:16:13, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
1150:14:32, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
1128:14:25, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
1111:12:06, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
1090:11:42, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
1073:10:59, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
1056:10:49, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
1027:10:46, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
995:10:31, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
962:10:13, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
936:09:17, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
917:08:42, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
896:08:38, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
879:07:30, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
858:06:57, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
836:06:43, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
821:06:54, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
804:06:49, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
790:06:40, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
758:20:41, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
741:16:12, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
725:15:38, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
698:14:13, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
681:10:11, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
663:08:43, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
646:07:59, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
485:07:13, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
471:06:54, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
287:09:07, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
250:06:54, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
125:05:59, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
75:00:51, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
940:Communication issues aside,
794:Candidate has opted in now.
706:received four user rights.
187:An_Angel_Named_Billy_(Film)
132:Questions for the candidate
1547:
345:Links for staffwaterboy :
128:I withdraw my nomination.
234:Sure, i needed to take a
1508:Please do not modify it.
39:Please do not modify it.
901:Competence is required
59:Withdrawn by candidate
1244:Lothar von Richthofen
31:request for adminship
653:I trust this user -
597:Global contributions
276:longer be bold font.
262:delirious & lost
1137:Boing! said Zebedee
1082:Boing! said Zebedee
561:Non-automated edits
434:their contributions
320:RfAs for this user:
540:Edit summary usage
436:before commenting.
40:
1484:
1391:
1267:
1233:
985:mistakes) tough.
736:Basket of Puppies
610:
609:
183:Shank_(2009_Film)
38:
1538:
1510:
1485:
1482:
1419:
1416:
1413:
1410:
1390:
1385:
1382:
1340:
1297:
1294:
1289:
1284:
1268:
1265:
1226:
1223:
1201:
1197:
1190:
1182:Regretful Oppose
1173:
1166:
1146:
1107:
1102:
1024:
1020:
1015:
1009:
1003:
946:Strange Passerby
932:
931:
905:Strange Passerby
831:
814:
783:
738:
721:
715:
710:
642:
641:
556:Articles created
516:
509:
502:
493:
464:
419:
411:
370:
316:General comments
282:
245:
120:
65:
1546:
1545:
1541:
1540:
1539:
1537:
1536:
1535:
1521:
1520:
1519:
1513:this nomination
1506:
1497:
1481:
1478:
1417:
1414:
1411:
1408:
1379:
1375:
1292:
1287:
1282:
1278:
1264:
1261:
1221:
1185:
1171:
1164:
1159:Salvio giuliano
1140:
1105:
1100:
1022:
1018:
1013:
1007:
1001:
928:
894:
827:
810:
779:
766:
734:
638:
620:
611:
606:
580:
544:
523:
522:RfA/RfB toolbox
520:
460:
443:
415:
363:
346:
342:
340:
318:
278:
241:
134:
116:
82:
72:
63:
50:
35:did not succeed
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
1544:
1542:
1534:
1533:
1523:
1522:
1518:
1517:
1501:
1500:
1496:
1493:
1492:
1491:
1479:
1470:
1469:
1468:
1467:
1466:
1404:Andrew Lenahan
1396:
1377:
1373:
1363:
1344:
1319:
1301:
1275:
1262:
1254:
1237:
1206:
1179:
1152:
1130:
1113:
1092:
1075:
1058:
1029:
997:
979:
972:SchmuckyTheCat
968:
967:
966:
965:
964:
898:
890:
881:
860:
842:
841:
840:
839:
838:
823:
765:
762:
761:
760:
743:
727:
700:
683:
665:
648:
619:
616:
615:
614:
608:
607:
605:
604:
599:
594:
588:
586:
582:
581:
579:
578:
573:
568:
563:
558:
552:
550:
546:
545:
543:
542:
537:
531:
529:
525:
524:
521:
519:
518:
511:
504:
496:
490:
489:
488:
487:
442:
439:
425:
424:
423:
421:
412:
341:
339:
338:
333:
328:
322:
319:
317:
314:
313:
312:
311:
310:
299:
292:
291:
290:
289:
264:
260:Question from
257:
256:
255:
254:
253:
252:
224:
217:
216:
215:
214:
197:
196:
195:
194:
169:
168:
167:
166:
133:
130:
81:
78:
70:
49:
44:
43:
42:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1543:
1532:
1529:
1528:
1526:
1516:
1514:
1509:
1503:
1502:
1499:
1498:
1494:
1490:
1487:
1486:
1474:
1471:
1465:
1461:
1457:
1453:
1452:
1447:
1443:
1442:
1441:
1437:
1433:
1429:
1425:
1424:
1423:
1420:
1405:
1400:
1397:
1395:
1392:
1389:
1383:
1381:
1367:
1364:
1362:
1358:
1354:
1353:
1348:
1345:
1343:
1339:
1338:
1334:
1327:
1324:
1320:
1318:
1314:
1310:
1306:
1302:
1300:
1296:
1295:
1290:
1285:
1276:
1274:
1271:
1269:
1258:
1255:
1253:
1249:
1245:
1241:
1238:
1236:
1232:
1229:
1225:
1224:
1219:
1218:
1210:
1207:
1205:
1199:
1198:
1191:
1183:
1180:
1178:
1175:
1174:
1168:
1167:
1160:
1156:
1153:
1151:
1148:
1145:
1144:
1138:
1134:
1131:
1129:
1125:
1121:
1117:
1114:
1112:
1109:
1108:
1103:
1096:
1093:
1091:
1087:
1083:
1079:
1076:
1074:
1070:
1066:
1062:
1059:
1057:
1053:
1049:
1045:
1041:
1037:
1033:
1030:
1028:
1025:
1021:
1016:
1006:
998:
996:
992:
988:
983:
980:
977:
973:
969:
963:
959:
958:Editor review
955:
951:
947:
943:
939:
938:
937:
934:
933:
924:
920:
919:
918:
914:
910:
906:
902:
899:
897:
893:
889:
885:
882:
880:
876:
872:
868:
864:
861:
859:
855:
851:
846:
843:
837:
834:
832:
830:
829:Staffwaterboy
824:
822:
818:
815:
813:
807:
806:
805:
801:
797:
793:
792:
791:
787:
784:
782:
776:
771:
768:
767:
763:
759:
755:
751:
747:
746:Weak Support:
744:
742:
739:
737:
731:
728:
726:
722:
716:
711:
704:
701:
699:
695:
691:
687:
684:
682:
678:
674:
669:
666:
664:
660:
656:
652:
649:
647:
644:
643:
634:
630:
625:
622:
621:
617:
613:
612:
603:
600:
598:
595:
593:
590:
589:
587:
583:
577:
574:
572:
569:
567:
564:
562:
559:
557:
554:
553:
551:
547:
541:
538:
536:
533:
532:
530:
526:
517:
512:
510:
505:
503:
498:
497:
494:
486:
482:
478:
474:
473:
472:
468:
465:
463:
457:
453:
449:
445:
444:
440:
438:
437:
435:
431:
422:
418:
413:
409:
406:
403:
400:
397:
394:
391:
388:
385:
382:
379:
376:
373:
369:
366:
362:
359:
356:
353:
349:
348:Staffwaterboy
344:
343:
337:
334:
332:
329:
327:
324:
315:
309:
306:
305:
303:
300:
298:
294:
293:
288:
285:
283:
281:
280:Staffwaterboy
274:
271:
270:
268:
265:
263:
259:
258:
251:
248:
246:
244:
243:Staffwaterboy
237:
233:
232:
231:
230:
228:
225:
223:
219:
218:
212:
208:
205:
204:
202:
199:
198:
192:
188:
184:
180:
177:
176:
174:
171:
170:
164:
160:
156:
152:
148:
145:
144:
142:
139:
138:
137:
131:
129:
127:
126:
123:
121:
119:
118:Staffwaterboy
113:
109:
105:
101:
97:
94:
91:
87:
86:staffwaterboy
79:
77:
76:
73:
68:
66:
60:
57:
56:
48:
47:Staffwaterboy
45:
41:
36:
32:
27:
26:
19:
1507:
1504:
1476:
1472:
1449:
1445:
1432:Strikerforce
1407:
1398:
1387:
1372:
1365:
1350:
1346:
1330:
1322:
1304:
1279:
1270:
1256:
1239:
1216:
1213:
1208:
1194:
1181:
1170:
1163:
1154:
1141:
1132:
1115:
1098:
1094:
1077:
1060:
1048:UncleDouggie
1031:
1011:
981:
926:
883:
871:Strikerforce
862:
844:
828:
811:
780:
774:
769:
745:
735:
729:
703:Weak Support
702:
685:
667:
650:
636:
632:
623:
461:
447:
427:
426:
404:
398:
392:
386:
380:
374:
367:
360:
354:
307:
301:
279:
272:
266:
242:
236:WP:Wikibreak
226:
206:
200:
178:
172:
146:
140:
135:
117:
92:
84:
83:
54:
52:
51:
46:
34:
28:
1444:I'd rather
1331:RJaguar3 |
1266:ofutwitch11
987:Ottawa4ever
673:Egg Centric
602:User rights
592:CentralAuth
297:Perseus8235
1451:Pro Caelio
1065:Epeefleche
812:ArcAngel
781:ArcAngel
585:Cross-wiki
576:AfD closes
462:ArcAngel
441:Discussion
80:Nomination
53:(7/26/0);
1456:T. Canens
1309:T. Canens
867:standards
655:TBloemink
571:AfD votes
566:BLP edits
390:block log
1525:Category
1231:Contribs
1040:fixed it
1023:Chequers
954:contribs
913:contribs
750:Ret.Prof
690:Sokac121
629:requests
549:Analysis
528:Counters
358:contribs
222:ArcAngel
96:contribs
71:Contribs
64:Armbrust
1495:Neutral
1380:anguard
1240:Oppose.
1222:Hamster
1165:Perseus
1120:Hokeman
796:28bytes
730:Support
686:Support
668:Support
651:Support
624:Support
618:Support
477:28bytes
475:Moved.
365:deleted
1483:ASTILY
1473:Oppose
1399:Oppose
1366:Oppose
1347:Oppose
1323:Oppose
1257:Oppose
1209:Oppose
1189:GÆoley
1155:Oppose
1143:Salvio
1133:Oppose
1116:Oppose
1095:Oppose
1078:Oppose
1061:Oppose
1044:second
1042:. The
1032:Oppose
982:Oppose
923:assume
884:Oppose
863:Oppose
845:Oppose
817:(talk)
786:(talk)
770:Oppose
764:Oppose
709:Minima
633:highly
535:XTools
467:(talk)
239:first.
211:WP:3RR
191:WP:CSD
163:WP:UAA
159:WP:AFP
155:WP:AFD
151:WP:Aiv
112:Wp:RFD
108:WP:AFD
104:Wp:UAA
100:Wp:aiv
1321:(ec)
1288:COMMS
1283:ÆETCH
1217:Super
1106:amuse
1101:Cind.
1036:first
1019:Spiel
930:Swarm
888:Logan
850:Pax85
640:Swarm
430:civil
372:count
33:that
16:<
1460:talk
1436:talk
1428:SNOW
1388:Wha?
1376:ven
1357:talk
1352:Cirt
1313:talk
1305:must
1248:talk
1228:Talk
1196:Four
1172:8235
1161:. --
1157:per
1124:talk
1086:talk
1069:talk
1052:talk
1014:Ï¢ere
991:talk
976:talk
950:talk
909:talk
892:Talk
875:talk
854:talk
800:talk
754:talk
720:talk
694:talk
677:talk
659:talk
481:talk
454:and
450:per
417:here
402:rfar
384:logs
352:talk
161:and
110:and
90:talk
1415:bli
777:.
458:.
408:spi
378:AfD
1527::
1462:)
1446:no
1438:)
1418:nd
1412:ar
1409:St
1406:-
1359:)
1335:|
1315:)
1250:)
1202:â
1135:.
1126:)
1088:)
1071:)
1054:)
1008:}}
1005:A7
1002:{{
993:)
960:)
956:â¢
952:â¢
915:)
911:â¢
877:)
856:)
819:)
802:)
788:)
756:)
723:)
696:)
688:--
679:)
661:)
483:)
469:)
396:lu
308:A:
302:6.
273:A:
267:5.
227:4.
201:3.
173:2.
141:1.
106:,
102:.
61:.
37:.
1480:F
1458:(
1434:(
1378:M
1374:S
1355:(
1337:t
1333:u
1311:(
1293:/
1280:/
1263:T
1246:(
1214:~
1200:â£
1192:â
1186:â
1122:(
1084:(
1067:(
1050:(
989:(
978:)
974:(
948:(
907:(
873:(
852:(
798:(
752:(
717:(
714:c
692:(
675:(
657:(
515:e
508:t
501:v
479:(
420:.
410:)
405:·
399:·
393:·
387:·
381:·
375:·
368:·
361:·
355:·
350:(
207:A
185:,
179:A
157:,
153:,
147:A
93:·
88:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.