1990:: My original encouters with this user were positive, in administrative comments that indicated a reasonable, new user. So, though I was surprised to see an RfA so soon, I was favorably compelled to investigate the user further. Before that, however, newly arrived on an (ancillary) Knowledge (XXG) IRC channel, he proceeded to try to give me what I can only describe as an abrasive lecture first on article content disputes and, more surprisingly, on how this low-traffic and otherwise friendly channel ought to be run, and then again the next day. I find his comments there, here, and others brought up here to raise flags on civility and AGF. They also indicate a rather peculiar view of policies and practices: whereas he seems to consider the letter of policy to be inviolate and beyond any independent judgment, he also seems to think that matters not fully and explicitly covered in a Policy page are open to whatever personal notions, regardless of long-standing practice and reasonable implications of existing guidelines. His responses to hypothetical questions on the RfA talk page do not relieve these concerns and otherwise show some unfamiliarity with Knowledge (XXG) workings. Such concerns and unfamiliarity in combination with brief tenure and my examination of edits lead me to believe that this user must have more experience before being given the keys. —
400:
Major edits: 100% Minor edits: 87.09% Average edits per day: 249.57 (for last 500 edit(s)) Article edit summary use (last 588 edits): Major article edits: 100% Minor article edits: 99.83% Analysis of edits (out of all 4605 edits shown on this page and last 0 image uploads): Notable article edits (creation/expansion/major rewrites/sourcing): 0.28% (13) Significant article edits (copyedits/small rewrites/content/reference additions): 0.74% (34) Superficial article edits (grammar/spelling/wikify/links/tagging): 32.01% (1474) Superficial article edits marked as minor: 85.67% Unique image uploads (non-deleted/reverts/updates): 0 (checks last 5000) Breakdown of all edits: Unique pages edited: 2380 | Average edits per page: 1.93 | Edits on top: 26.95% Edits marked as major (non-minor/reverts): 11.31% (521 edit(s)) Edits marked as minor (non-reverts): 40.76% (1877 edit(s)) Marked reverts (reversions/text removal): 6.43% (296 edit(s)) Unmarked edits: 35.59% (1639 edit(s)) Edits by
Knowledge (XXG) namespace: Article: 43.97% (2025) | Article talk: 18.74% (863) User: 2.84% (131) | User talk: 14.68% (676) Knowledge (XXG): 18.37% (846) | Knowledge (XXG) talk: 1.26% (58) Image: 0% (0) Template: 0% (0) Category: 0.04% (2) Portal: 0% (0) Help: 0% (0) MediaWiki: 0% (0) Other talk pages: 0.09% (4)
2232:. I apologize that no one informed you about the merger. I had suspected that someone already did, and closed the case. Why leave a case open when it was merged already? Mind you, the case was left open far too long, the merge had taken place weeks ago, and not by me (also there was discussion on the talk page about the merger). Since then I have rewrote the artilce, heavily citing my sources, and no further disputes have arose. I just figured you had forgotten to close the case, and did it for you in a kind gesture. Again, my apologizes and best wishes, you never can tell if a cabalist is MIA. Although you did not however, adress this concern with me before this RfA :) And please explain on the talk page of this RfA what exactly you dislike about my comments, and which ones.
2170:. In fairness this was probably a good solution however I saw no discussion that had taken place over the merge and no agreement to it - he was lucky the dispute did not follow the merge. This was all very well and good however what I found slightly annoying (although I am sure he did not intend it that way) was that he had closed the mediation in my absense and did not even inform me, either of the merge or closing the case, on my talk page, on my talk page. I would worry that given admin tools SynergeticMaggot would perform correct and prudent admin functions but without taking the time to notify any users who may wish to know. -
1197:. Having been a Wikipedian for three months really does not give one a full range of experiences. I've been on just a bit longer than you and have approximately the same number of edits. Considering such as well as your experience with your limited experience with many of the technicalities of Knowledge (XXG), I think it would be best for you to re-submit in the future, at which time I am certain you will pass through. Right now seems a bit too soon, and I'd like to see just a bit more experience. I would be happy to support your RfA in the future, but I just do not feel you are quite ready yet.
1899:(I could've sworn I'd already done this yesterday, but I think I was having trouble connecting to WP at the time.) I'm really not concerned with how long SynergeticMaggot has been editing on WP, as I think that can be (although is not always) an unfair criteria. However, I am very concerned with his interactions with other users, I am in no way convinced that the user fully understands WP's policies and guidelines, and marking pretty much every edit as minor is... odd. In particular, Gwernol and AnnH bring up some important points that need to be addressed. --
1485:. As for giving warnings to him using the test templates...When I did that, it did not say I couldnt use it for the purpose I used it for. But JKelly cleared this up for me. Also, I've commented below about my few mistakes (5 out of a possible 90 accurate vandal reverts) using VandalProof in the Neutral section below. I've also discussed the matter with a moderator of VP on irc channel WP-bootcamp. He has informed me that they are in fact common mistakes that will be fixed in a newer version.
1863:. SynergeticMaggot has both good and bad qualities. He certainly has developped in his three months the technical proficiency to be an administrator, involving himself in just about every aspect of Knowledge (XXG). He knows AfD, the administrator noticeboard, most of the Knowledge (XXG) policies, and other things an administrator should have. However, he lacks the spirit of Knowledge (XXG) and has recently used this proficiency to convince me to stop editting for Knowledge (XXG).
1204:
variety of areas accross the encyclopedia, obviously picking up a lot on the way. Speaking as a fellow high volume editor, I have no qualms supporting SM because I know just how much you can pick up in a short amount of time. I think that as long as SM has been involved in all aspects, he could not have got this far without knowing policy because he would have been pulled up on it by those he came accross in his travels in the encyclopedia
2166:(SynergeticMaggot was not involved in this case) which was highly complicated on a very complicated subject. In fairness a certain user was the only one at fault however I was able to get both sides of the story and was working out a way for everyone to be happy. I left for a 2 day holiday (informing the participants of this) and when I returned SynergeticMaggot had merged the disputed article into
369:
now. :p But I'm not sure that any editors/users can say that they havent been in a conflict. But if they havent, I applaud them for their capabilities of never being in one, and making sense to other editors who have strong feelings about an article they wish to edit, without it resulting in reverts. These are true role models for
Knowledge (XXG).
757:
helpful especially for the newbies and I'm sure he will be a good admin. I also think, quality is more important than quantity, so his time on wiki and the number of edits are not that important (although it is still important), but the most important thing is how he can contribute and help the others with his somewhat small number of edits. --
500:- works well with other editors even during disputes, discusses thoroughly on talk pages, is open to other editors' positions and sometimes evem changes his position based on well-reasoned arguments. I think I introduced him to AfDs and since then have seen him take on all kinds of tasks beyond what the average newer editor usually does. —
1509:
details, and links to his
Myspace profile, which gives more details. SynergeticMaggot did not add any information that would suddenly make it possible for a stalker to track down someone's identiy; it was more a case of some silly bickering between two users who know each other in real life — nothing more.
1185:. Forgive me for asking, but I'd like to know what constitutes as experience here? Is it just that I have only been here for 3 months? Or is it that I dont have experience in such tasks equivalent to that of which an admin does? Also I thank you for your decision and look forward to the clarification :)
1585:
other editors in connection with an AfD that was flooded with apparent sockpuppets at the last minute. SynergeticMaggot was cleared. I cannot emphasize enough that this should not be held against him. Someone else happened to unleash what turned out mostly to have been meat puppets/brand new editors
368:
articles talk page. Although it caused me stress, I have since left this behind and started anew with dispute resolution by becoming a med. cabalist. This allows me to see both sides of a conflict with much clarity, and also allows me a venue to help. So in other words, no users now cause me stress
1879:
at the computer. However, since their original skirmishes, they have been working together to get articles they don't like deleted rather than improved. I have faith that one day he will see the err of his ways, but until he does and actually works to improve
Knowledge (XXG) articles rather than
1621:
per above. Also, I have to add that I do not like the idea of having an admin, who is often perceived as an authority figure on
Knowledge (XXG), with a name of "Maggot". Admins need to set good examples, and be aware of the fact that they are often perceived as representatives of Knowledge (XXG)
1508:
edit, for the sake of fairness, I'd like to clarify something. Obviously, posting details that could identify another editor in real life is a complete no-no; but I do not consider that that happened in this case. The user in question gives his real name on his user page, along with other personal
399:
Viewing contribution data for user
SynergeticMaggot (over the 4605 edit(s) shown on this page) (FAQ) Time range: 99 approximate day(s) of edits on this page Most recent edit on: 0hr (UTC) -- 31, Jul, 2006 || Oldest edit on: 19hr (UTC) -- 22, April, 2006 Overall edit summary use (last 1000 edits):
756:
As a new member on
Knowledge (XXG), I'm impressed by the way he has contributed and helped the newbies. From some of my experiences, he always improves my articles and warn me (not straight to delete it) which is good so I can improve it rather than lose it. So I'm a newbie and I see he is very
2087:
were just silly mistakes that is caused by using VP at high speeds. User needs to slow down a little, and understand that having arguments across WP to users whom you personally know should be avoided and ignored. Should wait a little longer (3 months?) and re-apply. I can't support due to the
1203:
I don't think that the time matters so much when you make a high number of edits in a short amount of time (as long as they are involved in all aspects of the encyclopedia) what makes someone who has less edits but has been here for a lot longer more experienced? I have noticed SM involed in a
1075:
question within two minutes of my having posted it. Since consensus is not going to be reached, urge candidate to continue as an active editor, address issues raised by oppose and neutral voters, and re-apply down the trail. No comment on username, but if you do change it, let us know.
621:
The nominee really could help us out significantly with the extra admin tools. Three months and four thousand edits is certainly enough, as long as the nominee demonstrates understanding of how things work, dedication, and trust. I don't see anything that makes me think otherwise. --
2115:
I know, i've had the same problem. Which is why I stopped using VP for now as it doesn't beat manual rc patrol. ;) I don't suggest you withdraw your RfA just yet as you may get some helpful criticism to act upon to ensure your next RfA passes (assuming you will try again).
1685:. Premature. I usually think an admin should have one year of wikipedia presence, or six months at a minimum for exceptional cases. Three months is too short and the inexperience is manifested in some of the diffs and AN/I messages recently involving the candidate. --
1870:
He is an ardent deletionist and has opted to use
Knowledge (XXG) procedures such as AfD rather than work with his opposition to improve the article. When many large chunks of text were deleted without discussion, I reverted, and he accused this of being vandalism
2439:. A statement that covers why a maggot is preferred to a butterfly (i.e. SynergeticButterfly , plus it doesnt have a good ring to it) can be attained after reading the first "...Did you know?" (I also just created Portal:Thelema) Anyhow, have a nice night. :p
82:) – SynergeticMaggot very much reminds me of my early days on Knowledge (XXG) - A hardworking janitor devoting a lot of his time welcoming and helping newcomers, doing stub-cleanups, and vandal-fighting. He has also shown much interest in the sysop process of
1494:
Oops. I just realized that those were content dispute diff's. This was also cleared up by JKelly. Please ignore what I previously said, I had thought that the diff's represented mistakes I had made on recent changes patrol that were cleared up. My apologies.
1221:. When voting in the RfA, I usually like to see that a candidate has maintained having a large amount of quality edits over a more extended period, thus illustrating a deeper devotion indicated by both time and involvement on Knowledge (XXG).
446:
Username
SynergeticMaggot Total edits 4585 Distinct pages edited 2372 Average edits/page 1.933 First edit 15:47, April 22, 2006 (main) 2017 Talk 859 User 130 User talk 674 Category 2 Category talk 4 Knowledge (XXG) 841 Knowledge (XXG) talk 58
1339:
that you'd only change your confusing signature when you ran for adminship or the mediation cabal. That seems to imply you were aware that this was wrong but would only change it when you believed it was in your self-interest. Later there is
789:
excellent contributor for just a 3 month stay, brilliant vandal bopper. Would do well with the tools, although it would be even better if you slowed down just a touch (which you say you've done) in response to what was brought up down below.
1387:
And I have made an additional response now. Although I never wished to change the decision, but I somehow feel I have to respond to a number of misunderstandings in other places. Is there not somewhere else I can discuss these with others?
1569:"Oppose" per AnnH, especially the misuse of vandalism templates. Would support in future after more experience, assuming he tempers the behavior observed by AnnH and others above (also see Andeh's perceptive "Neutral" comment below) --
2481:
I dont expect anyone to care what my username means, but if you are going to take an issue over it, you could at least read my userpage. Its specified there. The real issue here is whether its offensive or not. And thats a no.
1697:
Not confident that nom has a good understanding of
Knowledge (XXG) policy and guidelines. 1. Nom marks all edits as minor, and argues that usage is correct per policy. See comments in top thread on this RFA talk page.
647:. SynergeticMaggot clearly has both the desire and the ability to help us out, the answers to the questions are good also. I fail to see how we would benefit from making him wait for adminship, he is ready for it now.
1151:
candidate in a few months, but I cannot ignore time with the project, because time here shows a determination and unwilting interest. Very, very good user, but I'm not so blown away so as to ignore the inexperience.
1120:. From what I've seen of him, I think he's a pretty high quality guy. Nobody is perfect, and I've appreciated his help in times past. I realize this probably won't succeed, but I'd just like to register that opinion.
1172:
I'm sorry, but this candidate seems too new. Three months is really not long enough, esp. considering edit count. However, this candidate should, indeed, be re-submitted in the future when he has more experience.
1874:
to the point of actually threatening blocking without being an administrator. That certainly wasn't good faith. I can vouch that he is not the same as 999, as I have known 999 to edit while SynergeticMaggot was
363:
My past conflicts between other editors usually result in friendships. I'd be naive to assume I would never run into them again on similar article topics. When I first started editing, I ran into conflict on the
552:
I originally voted "oppose" on the basis of inexperience, but in viewing the candidates talk page contributions, I found several examples of exceptional skill and maturity, especially in dealing with conflicts,
2163:
267:
Anything I do I take pride in on Knowledge (XXG), so I guess anything I listed in the above response under currect projects. As for contributing via non backlog means, I think I'm most proud of my additions to
1348:
because you consider guidelines like this something you have to "submit to". You have improved, but these are still relatively recent and you have a habit of resorting to borderline incivil comments such as
216:
2418:." So I made a mistake, was told about it on my userpage, and corrected it. Besides, there is no rule against changing your vote on an RFA. And yes you should change your username, as a
2006:
I didnt seem to understand most of this, but will address any further unofficial optional questions (I believe you gave me 5 of these) on the talk page. I also changed the counter for you.
2507:
2199:
1712:
2. On July 27, 2006, nom spams talk pages for support of a proposal. 3. Per concerns raised by AnnH, which do not actually involve mishaps with VP as some other oppose comment indicate.
1622:
culture. Having a pseudonym is one thing, but in my mind, this particular name goes a bit too far, sorry. As such, I would be more comfortable if he created a different handle first. --
1408:
1397:
Its entirely appropriate for you to respond, and I agree that this discussion is valuable to more than just you and I. Probably the best place to continue it is on this RfA's talk page.
1088:
very efficent, clears through backlogs like a bulldozer. Yes he is new, but he knows the policy fairly well, and what he does not know he is willing to listen to others. (saw on IRC) ——
2044:, still doesn't see the need to have changed his signature, argumentative with opposers (and even neutrals) here, marking far too many edits as minor, has only been here three months.
483:
I have other comments I'd like to make, but I'm unsure if I can leave them here, so if someone who has more experience with these requests see's this, please move it! I'd like to thank
2333:
Thank you for contributing to my RfA. Although I'd like to point out that you changed your decision three times now. Please review the full RfA before doing this again. Thank you. :)
871:. A tireless contributor, SynergeticMaggot, despite having had made a couple of mistakes in the past and being a relatively new editor, would most likely not abuse admin powers. --
1908:
Would you mind giving diffs on the talk page. I'm supposed to be taking these as things to work on. Although I cant see what I've done wrong by you if you dont show me :) Thanks.
1448:
intended for established editors during a disagreement over article content. And a would-be admin should know to subst those templates if he is using them. Also, I don't care for
1147:
Has been here only 3 months, and just about 99% of the last 500 mainspace edits are minor. However this seems to be part of an extensive project. Certainly this user would be a
357:
Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or do you feel other users have caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?
86:, being concerned of a possible backlog has started discussion on the feasability for non-sysops to take over part of the job. Personally I think it'd be better if he were to
520:
2140:
Oh I wont be withdrawing! Mailer might have to pull me away :p Also, I adding the unsigned for your comment. Thanks, if i'm rejected I will in fact be self nom'ing myself.
2106:. Yeah. I had in fact slowed down once I made 5 mistakes out of around 80-85 accurate reverts from vandals. All mistakes were cleared up and I have receieved no warnings.
848:. Looks like a hard-working and dedicated editor, and extremely unlikely to abuse the tools. I see a few incidents of growing pains, but I can't begrudge anyone those. --
697:
118:
Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Knowledge (XXG) in this capacity. Please take the time to answer a few generic questions to provide guidance for voters:
964:
Whilst we've had our differences they've generally been personable and productive dialogues. This user is certainly developing and could use the admin role usefully.
557:. I have found enough knowledge of policy, and enough demonstration of capability for me to ignore my usually high standards for time with the project. Good luck,
1817:. I have concerns about the maturity and general Wiki-fu of this candidate, in light of the behaviour AnnH has dug up, and his comments here and on the talkpage.
1230:
Understood. But the reason I have a large amount of edits in a small time is because I take care of backlogs, and I do this fast. Just wanted to clarify this :)
487:
for nominating me, as it was very unexpected. I've also been looking over RfA for some time now, and know that there are optional questions, so bring them on! :p
1951:: This user is far too new to be considered an admin. Even 74% for major edit summaries is not enough. And where are the rest of the namespace contribs?! --Slgr
2468:" probably won't understand it either at first glance. No one is going to research your username before quickly drawing a conclusion, true? I rest my case.
227:
vandalism, just fixing minor or the usual mistakes made by new users or unfamiliar editors). Also I'd continue to help others through IRC wikipedia-bootcamp,
2525:
2282:. Does not meet my criteria of 6 months. As this is the only criteria missed, and everything else looks great, I will support on reapplication in October.
134:
2391:
Well I think you are wrong. I kindly directed you to carfully review this RfA, due to your constant decison changing. My apologies if you still feel I
1249:
You are a good contributor and editor but I would like to see someone who has been registered to Knowledge (XXG) for at least 5-6 months (as stated in
195:
and various projects I am currently in (if I have time mind you, admin tasks might prove to keep me busy but who knows, I love to keep busy), such as
2203:
2294:: seems reasonable person, but some mistakes are due to inexperience. Would prefer to see a period without mistakes like these before supporting.
1022:
Good users make good admins. I've had some dealings with SM and I'm glad he's running... just a little sad he won't make it this time around. ---
883:
He has almost 5k edits, how can this not be enough for some people?? He also seems like a good user, so we should be happy to hand over the mop.
416:
79:
536:
2215:
2185:
722:
1350:
1341:
1336:
577:
2088:
confrontation with a user they know in real life, yet I can't oppose because they obviously have good intentions for WP, and time isn't
329:
321:
220:
30:
17:
2132:
309:
293:
2032:
per personal attack at the bottom of the page. And the attack is incorrect, as I only changed my vote once from oppose to neutral.
2167:
269:
2259:
1968:
2432:
1934:. I don't think 3 months is long enough, plus there are too many concerning diffs above that are just too recent to overlook.
248:
477:
341:
333:
1031:
126:
1670:
1646:
1444:
Those templates are for warning anons or newly-registered vandals who may not be aware of the blocking policy. They are
2431:
Which of course is symbolic. I don't expect you to understand it, but if you wished to know more, you should check out
2160:
1452:
edit. Since you know King Vegita in real life, that comment, if absolutely necessary, could have been made in private.
301:
261:
Of your articles or contributions to Knowledge (XXG), are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
1699:
1601:
707:
130:
1353:. All together these add up to an oppose from me, although with more time I could see supporting you in the future.
1513:
1456:
1375:
412:
73:
337:
2486:
2472:
2443:
2426:
2399:
2384:
2371:
2358:
2337:
2324:
2310:
2298:
2286:
2266:
2254:
2236:
2220:
2190:
2144:
2110:
2098:
2068:
2052:
2036:
2024:
2010:
2001:
1973:
1943:
1926:
1912:
1903:
1889:
1855:
1838:
1826:
1809:
1792:
1766:
1754:
1742:
1722:
1689:
1674:
1661:
1650:
1637:
1626:
1613:
1590:
1573:
1561:
1541:
1518:
1499:
1489:
1473:
1461:
1416:
1401:
1392:
1382:
1369:
1357:
1327:
1303:
1234:
1225:
1212:
1189:
1177:
1162:
1133:
1112:
1100:
1080:
1063:
1051:
1035:
1014:
1002:
980:
968:
956:
944:
921:
887:
875:
863:
840:
823:
806:
781:
761:
748:
736:
685:
651:
636:
612:
581:
573:
561:
544:
504:
467:
434:
394:
107:
94:
1981:
I love his edits, but he is too new, according to my critia. If you put him up in a month I'll support him. --
1550:
285:
2159:, I would love to vote support but in my dealings with this user I had one niggle: I was the mediator in the
2295:
2021:
1923:
1822:
1250:
715:
660:
2120:
2128:
1610:
1481:. He was neither offended by it, nor complained about it, yet apologized for what he has said about me on
1315:
856:
382:
325:
313:
1952:
1559:
933:
773:
236:
2483:
2440:
2396:
2368:
2334:
2263:
2233:
2141:
2107:
2084:
2007:
1939:
1909:
1885:
1851:
1750:
per evidence of need to learn more of wikipedia policy and guidelines, as well as problems noted above.
1510:
1496:
1486:
1453:
1389:
1366:
1231:
1186:
1047:, but few policies of wikipedia. Yes, I agree that learning to twist the policies would be difficult! --
473:
406:
305:
104:
69:
2506:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the talk page of either
297:
1881:
1847:
1774:
per use of VandalProof and odd patterns of marking edits as minor. I understand that marking edits as
1378:
at on the candidate's talk page. I do not consider this "cleared up" and my oppose remains unchanged.
2380:
Actually yes I do, and apparently I wasn't the only one per the recent oppose votes above. Thanks!
1964:
1666:
1642:
1289:
1261:
1044:
953:
850:
671:
1846:. SynergeticMaggot would be a good administrator in the future, but he is not ready for the job yet.
2436:
2250:
1701:
IMO, few if any of nom's edits should be marked minor. Clearly these edits should be marked major.
1159:
1153:
1093:
997:
819:
570:
558:
438:
289:
528:
I trust the nominator, and see nothing wrong with this user after a cursory glance of their work.
1818:
1720:
942:
872:
745:
513:
484:
461:
91:
2172:
I was informed that my impression of events is incorrect, I apologise to SynergticMaggot and am
1282:
1254:
664:
208:
62:
2350:
Changing my vote to oppose per the above personal attack. Perhaps you should review the policy
711:
703:
694:
2246:
2124:
2094:
2064:
1763:
1606:
1598:
1537:
1470:
1335:
sorry, but back in June there were some worrying conversations on your talk page. For example
1208:
1027:
815:
608:
594:
317:
2351:
1072:
769:. I've seen this user around a bit and I'm convinced that this user would make a good admin.
284:. I'm also please I was able to help other admins on AfD, by closing a few (all of my closes:
1995:
1935:
1835:
1805:
1780:
1077:
624:
501:
365:
281:
273:
2422:
is a term for the larval stage of the fly life cycle, famous for eating decomposing flesh.
1345:
244:
240:
232:
212:
200:
196:
188:
184:
176:
172:
168:
164:
160:
156:
152:
148:
147:, although I think I'd enjoy doing all of them. Most improtantly, taking care of all xfD's(
83:
2469:
2423:
2381:
2355:
2321:
2283:
2211:
2181:
2033:
1960:
1900:
1296:
1268:
1121:
918:
912:
832:
778:
770:
678:
277:
1880:
just get them deleted, it would be a bad move for Knowledge (XXG) to honor him with this.
1482:
228:
204:
180:
1581:
The question came up on the talk page about a checkuser I requested on SynergeticMaggot
1089:
989:
977:
529:
2519:
2049:
1739:
1713:
938:
799:
733:
456:
1217:
I'm afraid the problem with that is the idea of having a large amount of edits in a
179:, and watching all the important or semi-important pages that admins watch (such as
2307:
2061:
1533:
1413:
1398:
1379:
1354:
1205:
1109:
1060:
1048:
1023:
1011:
896:
719:
605:
591:
2060:. Changed from Support because the candidate keeps arguing with the oppose votes.
280:
from deletion by sourcing the whole article and expaning, and anything else found
1043:: I am sure all intelligent editors would learn! He does not have to learn about
1991:
1801:
1751:
1623:
1222:
1198:
1174:
884:
791:
758:
175:'s ), copyvio's, speedy deletes, moves, blocks, protects, unprotects, help via
125:
What sysop chores, if any, would you anticipate helping with? Please check out
2500:
The above adminship discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion.
2206:
as they suggest an inability to accept constructive criticism and opinions. --
1982:
1587:
1570:
569:. Great contributor, even if most of your contributions are to minor cleanup.
2245:
did that merge. SynergeticMaggot simply reported it in the mediation case. -
1778:
is a matter of personal judgement, but that's not a good judgement call. --
1686:
1344:
where you say you are going to recreate an article that you are aware fails
693:
I think he is very skilled in nominating unnecessary articles for deletion.
1872:
2045:
965:
648:
450:
2020:
per AnnH. Marginal on time and edits, but appears unready for the tools.
659:
Even though this user hasn't been registered for 5 months (as stated in
1586:
voting the same way he voted. It was a pure coincidence in his case. --
1432:. Uses non-admin rollback equivalent for edits that are not vandalism.
144:
2510:
or the nominated user). No further edits should be made to this page.
2419:
2395:
you. As I was told, you have to have thick skin on Knowledge (XXG).
1407:(the conversation referred to has been moved, with permnission, the
988:
If Mailer trusts him, so do I. Here's to getting out of Singapore.
814:
I agree with most, if not all, of the positive comments above. -
1059:
Industrious and capable. I have no objection to the username.--
952:
per above. Very sensible person, good for AfDs especially. --
2083:
obviously a hard worker, the stuff mentioned under oppose by
1071:
per above, plus appreciation for his having just answered my
101:
Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:
1313:
per Mike 7 and my own experience and what I see around here.
663:), they have accomplished a lot in their short time here. --
1365:. I believe I've cleared this up on Gwernol's talk page.
29:
The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a
1710:
1708:
1706:
1704:
1702:
1505:
1449:
1442:
1440:
1437:
1435:
1433:
976:
a hardworking editor who already knows his way around.
590:
yet another "I thought you already were" vote from me.
554:
426:
420:
1738:
per pretty much everything that's been said above. --
251:
that I'm looking forward to getting it off the ground.
1532:
per the others above. I don't think it's time yet. --
1868:
1866:
1864:
604:
because the cadidate arguing with the oppose votes.
2416:please review the full RFA before doing this again
1597:Per Gwernol's notes and the mis use of VP. Sorry,
191:, etc. etc.). I'll also continue to do my normal
2176:as I feel it would be unfair for me to vote. --
2464:" to understand it, please keep in mind that "
1439:Sends vandalism warnings in content disputes.
2460:" to understand it. So if you don't expect "
8:
2320:: leaning towards support with more time.
714:as well as co-operator of a joint account
223:(please note that I prefer not to call it
2262:is the link if anyone wishes to view it.
2198:Also I am put off by the users comments
272:(rewrote from scratch) with the help of
247:, and I've created a WikiProject called
2174:retracting both my comments and my vote
18:Knowledge (XXG):Requests for adminship
7:
1549:I feel this RfA is a bit premature.
2526:Unsuccessful requests for adminship
2367:You interpreted that as me biting?
710:sockpuppet account of indef banned
24:
2168:Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn
270:Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn
171:'s, and lets not forget my fav.,
1504:As others have also objected to
695:The greatest man in the universe
243:. Plus I'm just starting out in
127:Category:Knowledge (XXG) backlog
1922:, username worries me a bit. --
1469:Needs more time on the 'pedia.
1730:. Taking this up on talk page.
90:hold the mop and bucket. :) -
1:
103:I accept the mop and bucket.
135:administrators' reading list
2306:: per Stephen B Streater --
476:'s edit summary usage with
114:Questions for the candidate
2542:
2487:05:12, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
2473:05:00, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
2444:01:01, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
2427:00:56, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
2400:00:50, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
2385:00:45, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
2372:00:12, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
2359:23:50, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
2338:19:50, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
2325:17:31, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
2311:14:13, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
2191:22:14, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
2069:00:20, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
2053:23:53, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
2037:23:50, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
2025:00:19, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
2011:00:04, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
2002:23:49, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
1974:14:06, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
1944:01:37, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
1927:22:00, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
1913:15:43, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
1904:15:38, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
1890:11:42, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
1856:11:42, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
1839:09:41, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
1827:06:16, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
1810:02:16, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
1793:01:34, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
1134:19:57, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
1113:18:05, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
1101:00:49, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
1081:18:57, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
1064:17:27, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
1052:11:26, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
1036:01:59, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
1015:20:58, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
1003:20:39, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
981:17:00, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
969:13:46, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
957:00:06, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
945:20:28, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
922:19:45, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
915:17:43, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
888:11:05, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
613:00:19, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
129:, and read the page about
2299:21:22, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
2287:19:11, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
2267:15:10, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
2255:14:54, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
2237:12:30, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
2221:12:26, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
2145:14:15, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
2111:10:01, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
2099:09:28, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
1767:23:26, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
1755:21:09, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
1743:20:13, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
1723:19:42, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
1690:17:22, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
1675:22:58, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
1651:16:50, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
1627:16:43, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
1614:16:19, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
1591:20:26, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
1574:10:47, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
1562:09:56, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
1542:07:57, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
1519:12:02, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
1500:10:34, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
1490:10:30, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
1474:22:43, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
1462:07:38, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
1417:12:11, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
1402:11:51, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
1393:11:47, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
1383:11:06, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
1370:10:30, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
1358:02:02, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
1328:00:46, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
1304:00:05, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
1275:21:37, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
1235:01:39, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
1226:01:34, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
1213:23:31, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
1190:21:22, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
1178:21:07, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
1163:21:14, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
1156:20:52, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
917:Changed to neutral vote.
876:19:20, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
864:16:20, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
841:15:20, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
824:14:42, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
807:13:17, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
782:13:13, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
762:11:04, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
749:10:34, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
737:05:58, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
723:10:08, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
698:05:21, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
686:00:05, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
652:23:57, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
637:23:33, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
598:23:19, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
582:21:18, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
562:21:14, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
545:20:53, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
521:20:47, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
505:20:23, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
468:20:31, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
435:20:31, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
395:00:12, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
108:20:19, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
95:18:12, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
2503:Please do not modify it.
744:, I almost forgot. =P -
40:Please do not modify it.
1659:waiving my criteria. -
716:User:The Breakfast Club
233:contributors' help page
931:A good contributor. --
221:counter-vandalism unit
2435:and my newly created
2164:Golden Dawn tradition
235:, as I'm a member of
197:recent changes patrol
84:Articles for Deletion
31:request for adminship
1409:this RfA's talk page
1045:theory of relativity
903:12:28, 01 August '06
433:contributions as of
1695:Sorry, must oppose.
831:Looks good to me.--
742:Nominator's support
555:such as this thread
205:welcoming committee
2456:You don't expect "
2433:WikiProject Occult
2296:Stephen B Streater
1635:per VP concerns -
732:per Hanuman Das.
466:
249:WikiProject Occult
2219:
2189:
2137:
2123:comment added by
2066:
1972:
1834:per the above. --
1791:
1673:
1649:
1210:
1158:Moved to Support
635:
610:
596:
449:
380:All user's edits.
2533:
2505:
2484:SynergeticMaggot
2441:SynergeticMaggot
2397:SynergeticMaggot
2369:SynergeticMaggot
2354:. Thanks! :-)
2335:SynergeticMaggot
2264:SynergeticMaggot
2234:SynergeticMaggot
2210:
2180:
2142:SynergeticMaggot
2136:
2117:
2108:SynergeticMaggot
2097:
2065:
2008:SynergeticMaggot
1958:
1955:
1910:SynergeticMaggot
1789:
1786:
1783:
1718:
1665:
1641:
1604:
1557:
1556:
1497:SynergeticMaggot
1487:SynergeticMaggot
1390:SynergeticMaggot
1367:SynergeticMaggot
1324:
1321:
1318:
1301:
1294:
1287:
1273:
1266:
1259:
1232:SynergeticMaggot
1209:
1187:SynergeticMaggot
1131:
1126:
1000:
996:
992:
941:
936:
904:
899:
862:
859:
853:
838:
835:
804:
797:
776:
683:
676:
669:
633:
630:
627:
609:
595:
542:
518:
474:SynergeticMaggot
464:
459:
453:
442:
429:
423:
407:SynergeticMaggot
391:
388:
385:
366:Aleister Crowley
201:new pages patrol
105:SynergeticMaggot
70:SynergeticMaggot
52:SynergeticMaggot
42:
2541:
2540:
2536:
2535:
2534:
2532:
2531:
2530:
2516:
2515:
2514:
2508:this nomination
2501:
2118:
2093:
2022::) Dlohcierekim
1953:
1784:
1781:
1714:
1602:
1552:
1551:
1322:
1319:
1316:
1297:
1290:
1283:
1269:
1262:
1255:
1127:
1122:
998:
994:
990:
954:Musaabdulrashid
934:
932:
905:
902:
897:
857:
851:
849:
836:
833:
800:
792:
774:
679:
672:
665:
628:
625:
541:
533:
514:
462:
457:
451:
448:
439:Interiot's tool
432:
427:
421:
404:
401:
389:
386:
383:
278:Stella Matutina
209:mediation cabal
58:Final (32/31/5)
55:
38:
35:did not succeed
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
2539:
2537:
2529:
2528:
2518:
2517:
2513:
2512:
2496:
2495:
2494:
2493:
2492:
2491:
2490:
2489:
2476:
2475:
2449:
2448:
2447:
2446:
2411:
2410:
2409:
2408:
2407:
2406:
2405:
2404:
2403:
2402:
2388:
2387:
2375:
2374:
2362:
2361:
2343:
2342:
2341:
2340:
2314:
2313:
2301:
2289:
2277:
2276:
2275:
2274:
2273:
2272:
2271:
2270:
2269:
2224:
2223:
2153:
2152:
2151:
2150:
2149:
2148:
2147:
2077:
2076:
2072:
2071:
2055:
2039:
2027:
2015:
2014:
2013:
1985:
1976:
1946:
1929:
1917:
1916:
1915:
1894:
1893:
1892:
1841:
1829:
1812:
1795:
1769:
1757:
1745:
1733:
1732:
1731:
1692:
1680:
1679:
1678:
1629:
1616:
1595:
1594:
1593:
1564:
1544:
1527:
1526:
1525:
1524:
1523:
1522:
1521:
1464:
1427:
1426:
1425:
1424:
1423:
1422:
1421:
1420:
1419:
1404:
1330:
1308:
1307:
1306:
1243:
1242:
1241:
1240:
1239:
1238:
1237:
1192:
1166:
1165:
1160:AdamBiswanger1
1154:AdamBiswanger1
1141:
1137:
1136:
1115:
1103:
1083:
1066:
1054:
1038:
1017:
1005:
983:
971:
959:
947:
926:
925:
924:
901:
890:
878:
866:
843:
826:
809:
784:
764:
751:
739:
727:
726:
725:
688:
654:
642:
641:
640:
615:
564:
559:AdamBiswanger1
547:
535:
523:
507:
494:
493:
489:
488:
481:
478:mathbot's tool
445:
444:
443:
410:
398:
378:
377:
373:
372:
371:
370:
350:
348:
347:
346:
345:
255:
254:
253:
252:
131:administrators
116:
115:
111:
110:
54:
49:
47:
45:
44:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
2538:
2527:
2524:
2523:
2521:
2511:
2509:
2504:
2498:
2497:
2488:
2485:
2480:
2479:
2478:
2477:
2474:
2471:
2467:
2463:
2459:
2455:
2454:
2453:
2452:
2451:
2450:
2445:
2442:
2438:
2437:Portal:Occult
2434:
2430:
2429:
2428:
2425:
2421:
2417:
2413:
2412:
2401:
2398:
2394:
2390:
2389:
2386:
2383:
2379:
2378:
2377:
2376:
2373:
2370:
2366:
2365:
2364:
2363:
2360:
2357:
2353:
2349:
2348:
2347:
2346:
2345:
2344:
2339:
2336:
2332:
2331:
2330:
2329:
2328:
2327:
2326:
2323:
2319:
2312:
2309:
2305:
2302:
2300:
2297:
2293:
2290:
2288:
2285:
2281:
2278:
2268:
2265:
2261:
2258:
2257:
2256:
2252:
2248:
2244:
2240:
2239:
2238:
2235:
2231:
2228:
2227:
2226:
2225:
2222:
2217:
2213:
2209:
2205:
2201:
2197:
2194:
2193:
2192:
2187:
2183:
2179:
2175:
2171:
2169:
2165:
2162:
2158:
2154:
2146:
2143:
2139:
2138:
2134:
2130:
2126:
2122:
2114:
2113:
2112:
2109:
2105:
2102:
2101:
2100:
2096:
2091:
2086:
2082:
2079:
2078:
2074:
2073:
2070:
2067:
2063:
2059:
2056:
2054:
2051:
2047:
2043:
2040:
2038:
2035:
2031:
2028:
2026:
2023:
2019:
2016:
2012:
2009:
2005:
2004:
2003:
1999:
1998:
1993:
1989:
1986:
1984:
1980:
1977:
1975:
1970:
1966:
1962:
1957:
1950:
1947:
1945:
1941:
1937:
1933:
1930:
1928:
1925:
1924:CharlotteWebb
1921:
1918:
1914:
1911:
1907:
1906:
1905:
1902:
1898:
1895:
1891:
1887:
1883:
1878:
1873:
1869:
1867:
1865:
1862:
1859:
1858:
1857:
1853:
1849:
1845:
1842:
1840:
1837:
1833:
1830:
1828:
1824:
1820:
1816:
1813:
1811:
1807:
1803:
1799:
1796:
1794:
1788:
1787:
1777:
1773:
1770:
1768:
1765:
1761:
1758:
1756:
1753:
1749:
1746:
1744:
1741:
1737:
1734:
1729:
1726:
1725:
1724:
1721:
1719:
1717:
1711:
1709:
1707:
1705:
1703:
1700:
1696:
1693:
1691:
1688:
1684:
1681:
1677:
1676:
1672:
1668:
1664:
1663:
1658:
1654:
1653:
1652:
1648:
1644:
1640:
1639:
1634:
1630:
1628:
1625:
1620:
1617:
1615:
1612:
1611:
1608:
1605:
1600:
1596:
1592:
1589:
1584:
1580:
1577:
1576:
1575:
1572:
1568:
1565:
1563:
1560:
1558:
1555:
1548:
1545:
1543:
1539:
1535:
1531:
1528:
1520:
1517:
1516:
1512:
1507:
1503:
1502:
1501:
1498:
1493:
1492:
1491:
1488:
1484:
1480:
1477:
1476:
1475:
1472:
1468:
1465:
1463:
1460:
1459:
1455:
1451:
1447:
1443:
1441:
1438:
1436:
1434:
1431:
1428:
1418:
1415:
1412:
1410:
1405:
1403:
1400:
1396:
1395:
1394:
1391:
1386:
1385:
1384:
1381:
1377:
1373:
1372:
1371:
1368:
1364:
1361:
1360:
1359:
1356:
1352:
1347:
1343:
1338:
1334:
1331:
1329:
1326:
1325:
1312:
1309:
1305:
1302:
1300:
1295:
1293:
1288:
1286:
1280:
1276:
1274:
1272:
1267:
1265:
1260:
1258:
1252:
1248:
1244:
1236:
1233:
1229:
1228:
1227:
1224:
1220:
1216:
1215:
1214:
1211:
1207:
1202:
1201:
1200:
1196:
1193:
1191:
1188:
1184:
1181:
1180:
1179:
1176:
1171:
1168:
1167:
1164:
1161:
1157:
1155:
1150:
1146:
1142:
1139:
1138:
1135:
1132:
1130:
1125:
1119:
1116:
1114:
1111:
1107:
1104:
1102:
1098:
1097:
1091:
1087:
1084:
1082:
1079:
1074:
1070:
1067:
1065:
1062:
1058:
1055:
1053:
1050:
1046:
1042:
1039:
1037:
1033:
1029:
1025:
1021:
1018:
1016:
1013:
1009:
1006:
1004:
1001:
993:
987:
984:
982:
979:
975:
972:
970:
967:
963:
960:
958:
955:
951:
948:
946:
943:
940:
937:
930:
927:
923:
920:
916:
914:
911:
907:
906:
900:
894:
891:
889:
886:
882:
879:
877:
874:
873:Gray Porpoise
870:
867:
865:
860:
854:
847:
844:
842:
839:
830:
827:
825:
821:
817:
813:
810:
808:
805:
803:
798:
796:
788:
785:
783:
780:
777:
772:
768:
765:
763:
760:
755:
752:
750:
747:
746:Mailer Diablo
743:
740:
738:
735:
731:
728:
724:
721:
717:
713:
709:
705:
701:
700:
699:
696:
692:
689:
687:
684:
682:
677:
675:
670:
668:
662:
658:
655:
653:
650:
646:
643:
639:
638:
632:
631:
620:
616:
614:
611:
607:
603:
599:
597:
593:
589:
585:
584:
583:
579:
575:
572:
568:
565:
563:
560:
556:
551:
548:
546:
540:
539:
531:
527:
524:
522:
519:
517:
511:
508:
506:
503:
499:
496:
495:
491:
490:
486:
485:Mailer diablo
482:
479:
475:
471:
470:
469:
465:
460:
454:
440:
436:
430:
424:
418:
417:Contributions
414:
408:
403:
402:
397:
396:
393:
392:
375:
374:
367:
362:
359:
358:
356:
353:
352:
351:
343:
339:
335:
331:
327:
323:
319:
315:
311:
307:
303:
299:
295:
291:
287:
283:
279:
275:
271:
266:
263:
262:
260:
257:
256:
250:
246:
242:
238:
234:
230:
226:
222:
218:
217:stub removing
214:
210:
206:
202:
198:
194:
190:
186:
182:
178:
174:
170:
166:
162:
158:
154:
150:
146:
142:
139:
138:
136:
132:
128:
124:
121:
120:
119:
113:
112:
109:
106:
102:
99:
98:
97:
96:
93:
92:Mailer Diablo
89:
85:
81:
78:
75:
71:
67:
66:
64:
61:Ended 20:55,
59:
53:
50:
48:
43:
41:
36:
32:
27:
26:
19:
2502:
2499:
2465:
2461:
2457:
2415:
2392:
2317:
2316:
2315:
2303:
2291:
2279:
2242:
2229:
2207:
2195:
2177:
2173:
2156:
2155:
2125:Andypandy.UK
2119:— Preceding
2103:
2089:
2080:
2057:
2041:
2029:
2017:
1996:
1987:
1978:
1948:
1931:
1919:
1896:
1876:
1860:
1843:
1831:
1823:befuddle me!
1814:
1797:
1779:
1775:
1771:
1764:Tom Harrison
1759:
1747:
1735:
1727:
1715:
1694:
1682:
1662:CrazyRussian
1660:
1657:Weak Support
1656:
1655:
1638:CrazyRussian
1636:
1632:
1631:Changing to
1618:
1609:
1582:
1578:
1566:
1553:
1546:
1534:Lord Deskana
1529:
1514:
1478:
1466:
1457:
1445:
1429:
1406:
1362:
1332:
1314:
1310:
1298:
1291:
1284:
1278:
1270:
1263:
1256:
1251:my standards
1246:
1245:
1218:
1194:
1182:
1169:
1148:
1144:
1143:
1128:
1123:
1117:
1105:
1095:
1085:
1068:
1056:
1040:
1019:
1007:
985:
973:
961:
949:
928:
909:
908:
892:
880:
868:
845:
828:
811:
801:
794:
786:
766:
753:
741:
729:
690:
680:
673:
666:
661:my standards
656:
644:
623:
618:
617:
601:
587:
586:
566:
549:
537:
525:
516:Rama's arrow
515:
509:
497:
381:
379:
360:
354:
349:
264:
258:
224:
213:stub sorting
192:
140:
122:
117:
100:
87:
76:
68:
60:
57:
56:
51:
46:
39:
34:
28:
2161:Medcab case
1936:Sarah Ewart
1920:Weak oppose
1836:HResearcher
1762:, too new.
1567:Weak Oppose
1311:Weak Oppose
1277:Changed to
1247:Weak Oppose
1094:ask me for
1078:Newyorkbrad
600:Changed to
502:Hanuman Das
274:Hanuman Das
143:In a word,
2470:Stubbleboy
2424:Stubbleboy
2414:You said "
2382:Stubbleboy
2356:Stubbleboy
2322:Stubbleboy
2284:Themindset
2241:Actually,
2212:Tmorton166
2182:Tmorton166
2090:everything
2034:Stubbleboy
1901:Kicking222
1819:fuddlemark
1800:per AnnH.
1790:(joturner)
1337:suggesting
1219:small time
1108:why not?
919:Stubbleboy
913:Stubbleboy
852:Aguerriero
634:(joturner)
538:review me!
428:Block Logs
245:advocating
63:2006-08-06
2216:Review me
2186:Review me
1554:hoopydink
1149:fantastic
1010:per nom.
978:Kimchi.sg
712:User:1028
704:User:'sed
530:RandyWang
512:per nom.
276:, saving
241:Esperanza
237:Concordia
229:help desk
2520:Category
2230:Response
2133:contribs
2121:unsigned
2046:User:Zoe
1969:contribs
1965:messages
1716:FloNight
1579:Comment:
1376:response
829:Support.
771:DarthVad
708:admitted
702:This is
376:Comments
225:fighting
145:backlogs
133:and the
88:actually
80:contribs
2352:WP:BITE
2318:Neutral
2308:Guinnog
2304:Neutral
2292:Neutral
2280:Neutral
2196:Comment
2157:Neutral
2104:Comment
2081:Neutral
2075:Neutral
2062:Viridae
1861:Comment
1728:Comment
1479:Comment
1467:Oppose.
1414:Gwernol
1399:Gwernol
1380:Gwernol
1374:See my
1363:Comment
1355:Gwernol
1279:Support
1223:Michael
1206:Viridae
1199:Michael
1195:Comment
1183:Comment
1175:Michael
1118:Support
1110:Semperf
1106:Support
1086:Support
1073:WP:help
1069:Support
1061:Runcorn
1057:Support
1049:Bhadani
1041:Support
1020:Support
1012:Ryūlóng
1008:Support
986:Support
974:Support
962:Support
950:Support
939:iva1979
929:Support
910:Support
898:FireFox
893:Support
881:Support
869:Support
846:Support
812:Support
787:Support
767:Support
754:Support
730:Support
720:Gwernol
691:Support
657:Support
645:Support
619:Support
606:Viridae
592:Viridae
588:Support
567:Support
550:Support
526:Support
510:Support
498:Support
492:Support
2420:Maggot
2208:Errant
2178:Errant
2058:Oppose
2050:(talk)
2042:Oppose
2030:Oppose
2018:Oppose
1992:Centrx
1988:Oppose
1979:Oppose
1949:Oppose
1932:Oppose
1897:Oppose
1844:Oppose
1832:Oppose
1815:Oppose
1802:Stifle
1798:Oppose
1785:abjotu
1772:Oppose
1760:Oppose
1752:Kukini
1748:Oppose
1736:Oppose
1683:Oppose
1633:Oppose
1624:Elonka
1619:Oppose
1547:Oppose
1530:Oppose
1430:Oppose
1346:WP:BIO
1333:Oppose
1170:Oppose
1145:Oppose
1140:Oppose
885:Seivad
834:Kungfu
759:Imoeng
629:abjotu
602:Oppose
437:using
340:, and
231:, and
219:, and
193:chores
189:WP:AIV
185:WP:ANI
177:WP:RAA
173:WP:AfD
169:WP:CFD
165:WP:IFD
161:WP:RFD
157:WP:TFD
153:WP:SFD
149:WP:MfD
2095:Andeh
1983:Kitia
1956:ndson
1782:tariq
1776:minor
1740:Steel
1671:email
1647:email
1588:A. B.
1571:A. B.
1483:WP:AN
1317:Voice
1253:). --
1129:Chimp
1124:alpha
1090:Eagle
626:tariq
384:Voice
181:WP:AN
65:(UTC)
33:that
16:<
2466:they
2260:Here
2251:Talk
2204:here
2202:and
2200:here
2129:talk
2085:AnnH
1997:talk
1961:page
1940:Talk
1886:Talk
1852:Talk
1806:talk
1687:JJay
1667:talk
1643:talk
1607:hway
1538:talk
1511:AnnH
1506:this
1454:AnnH
1450:this
1351:this
1342:this
1320:-of-
1096:help
999:fist
991:Karm
858:talk
837:Adam
820:Talk
472:See
422:Logs
413:Talk
405:See
387:-of-
342:here
338:here
334:here
330:here
326:here
322:here
318:here
314:here
310:here
306:here
302:here
298:here
294:here
290:here
286:here
282:here
239:and
215:and
167:'s,
163:'s,
159:'s,
155:'s,
151:'s,
74:talk
2393:bit
2247:999
2092:.--
1877:not
1583:and
1471:1ne
1446:not
1323:All
1024:J.S
966:ALR
816:999
795:jam
734:Joe
706:an
649:Rje
571:Roy
409:'s
390:All
2522::
2462:me
2458:me
2253:)
2135:)
2131:•
2000:•
1967:-
1963:-
1942:)
1888:)
1882:KV
1854:)
1848:KV
1825:)
1808:)
1603:ig
1540:)
1299:pm
1285:Tu
1281:--
1271:pm
1257:Tu
1099:)
1034:)
895:—
822:)
802:es
793:--
718:.
681:pm
667:Tu
580:.
543:)
441:*:
425:▪
419:▪
415:▪
361:A:
355:3.
344:).
336:,
332:,
328:,
324:,
320:,
316:,
312:,
308:,
304:,
300:,
296:,
292:,
288:,
265:A:
259:2.
211:,
207:,
203:,
199:,
187:,
183:,
141:A:
137:.
123:1.
37:.
2249:(
2243:I
2218:)
2214:(
2188:)
2184:(
2127:(
2048:|
1994:→
1971:)
1959:(
1954:@
1938:(
1884:(
1850:(
1821:(
1804:(
1669:/
1645:/
1599:H
1536:(
1515:♫
1458:♫
1411:)
1292:s
1264:s
1092:(
1032:c
1030:|
1028:t
1026:(
995:a
935:S
861:)
855:(
818:(
779:r
775:e
674:s
578:A
576:.
574:A
534:/
532:(
480:.
463:e
458:H
455:.
452:G
431:)
411:(
77:·
72:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.