Knowledge

:Requests for adminship/Slp1 - Knowledge

Source 📝

74:
the articles were otherwise speedy deletable. I checked her CSD's going back to January, and every one she tagged deserved to be deleted. I also noticed that Slp often 'fixed' tags of other people who used the incorrect criteria (including removing tags if necessary.) If Slp1 were solely an anti-vandal fighter (or a deletionist), her use of G1 might be enough to get me to oppose, but Slp1 appears to fight vandalism as a change in routine from her normal activities! One of the things that I really liked about reviewing Slp's edits was the fact that there were a few articles that were tagged for deletion that she saved by working on them!
192:
last few decades! Yes, I am interested in lots of things, and aware that there is plenty more to learn in so many different areas. That's probably why I have so much enjoyed being part of this project: the opportunity to research and write about a variety of topics, the chance to learn to help and collaborate with editors from all over the world with very different backgrounds and perspectives, as well as of course the goal of providing unknown readers with an accurate, fair and balanced encyclopedia to consult.
1904:"My proudest moment as a content editor was when the École Polytechnique massacre article became a featured article and subsequently appeared on the mainpage". That kind of "dedication to the cause", plus no other obvious issues, equals a support every day of the week. Definitely not your stereotypical sign-up-and-revert-using-twinkle-till-I-can-pass-RfA candidate which tend to cause most of the problems due to a lack of discretion, understanding of more complex users and ability to interact intelligently. 714:
Rigorous referencing from high quality sources can also help in part with maintaining a neutral point of view and avoiding undue weight in articles. All very important in any credible encyclopedia. A reference or two can help to prove notability and that an article needs to be kept. And finally, my experience is that getting editors agreeing to cite all statements in an article can be a useful step to resolution and consensus during a dispute.
131:, which was revealed by Slp1's due diligence to be based upon marginal sources, including a poor copy of a Usenet FAQ, and which involved a COI with the manufacturer of an electronic fluency device for stuttering. Through that FAR, I observed how Slp1 worked diligently but firmly (with a difficult COI editor) to restore the sourcing and accurate text to several stuttering-related articles. Since then, I've seen Slp1 everywhere: popping up at 150:. The medical articles are always in need of more admins, where Slp1 is knowledgeable of sourcing and other policy issues. Slp1 is another of Wiki's valued, civil, courteous content contributors who also understand policies and guidelines and has demonstrated ability and willingness to contribute across the board to Wiki processes and to keep calm in difficult situations. 2093:. I like what I see in contribs, and I'm very impressed with the tone of communication with other editors. I've tracked a number of threads on her talk page, and I find her helpful and civil. I like the attitude towards speedy deletions reflected in the answer to question #1 above, as it suggests the nom intends to bring critical thinking into responding to CSD tags. -- 534:
well researched, clearly thought out and carefully expressed. Leaving an edit one hates in an article while discussing it one the talkpage can be irritating, but may be a better way forward in the longterm. Not always, of course, and there are many instances (e.g. BLP violations) when quick and decisive action is required.
2332:: I havent had any interactions with the person yet but I dont find any reason I should oppose her. Her answers impress me , indicates me how serious she is for the job. You have a steady editing pattern. Have seen many people suddenly increasing edit counts and then coming to RFA. Full support and best wishes to you -- 825:
actually do would depend on the specifics of the situation: the nature of the negative information, the status and previous edits of the editor (new/SPA/established/IP), whether multiple IPs were involved, the duration of time between insertions of the material, what kind of warnings had been issue before etc.--
1201:- I usually don't support based on co-nominations, but those explanations and diffs leave a really really good taste in my mouth. I can sympathize with a few misplaced CSD tags, but you know what? She removed faulty ones. Good for you. You have Wisdom89's support, for whatever it is worth. Good luck. 824:
either add a further graduated/final warning to the editor (my experience is that often it takes more that 2 warnings for things to sink in with people that "it ain't gonna happen"), engage the editor in some personal discussion about BLP policy etc, block the editor or protect the page. What I would
313:
to become a featured article in less than 6 months. It was there that I learnt the joys of researching and writing and especially collaborating with other editors: though I was perhaps the major contributor of content, the article wouldn't have been anything special at all without the involvement of
280:
would be to save some articles that are tagged too quickly. I have already removed tags I didn't agree with when patrolling newly created pages. As noted below and above, sometimes with a little research and help, an unpromising looking sentence or two can prove to be about a notable and verifiable
216:
Though it seems from the comments above that my editing shows more than usual variety, I actually consider myself to be a content editor first and foremost. And I don't plan to change that, or frankly to be a particularly active user of administrative tools. But the researching I like to do also has
73:
She is active with CSD's, which means, as many of you know, I had to check her edits closely. Since an over eager CSD'er can chase a way a great newbie, I generally don't like CSD'ers and only will recommend the best of the best. While I question some of her use of G1 (blatant nonsense/gibberish),
2655:
Thanks for positive feedback, Appletrees, even if you oppose. While I may hesitate at times (often not such a bad thing at times, I think!), I also sometimes make a conscious decision that my involvement and contributions may be more fruitful if I remain neutral and don't explicitly commit myself to
2640:
is only lain for her contributions "as an editor", not " meditator" to resolve the dispute around the issues. I felt she hesitated about her position at that time. I also saw her several commenting some matters at ANI a couple of time, but also have the same impression. I don't have anything against
1702:
I personally prefer the slow and easy method. Great answer. Regarding the rest of your qualifications: Over 2 years of consistent, quality contributions – the times you had to be tough you were – no incivility issues – an edit count that shows article building. Overall excellent job. Good luck
713:
positively affects many aspects of WP's articles, can even help focus issues in dispute situations. WP:V increases the likelihood of accuracy of the articles, and reduces the ability of editors to introduce original research, opinion, rumour, into articles, particularly important in BLP articles.
568:
Well, I must say that someone telling me that I "need to block" a certain user would raise a variety questions and doubts in my mind. It doesn't seem to be a usual route for administrator action, as far as I aware, and careful investigations would be needed to try and figure out what was going on.
533:
I think the most important lesson I have learnt is that very often in everyday editing, there is no rush. Responding too quickly, editing too quickly, reverting too quickly can be a mistake. Talkpage and article edits tend to be better and more productive when one takes the time to ensure they are
495:
says that the best predictor of future behaviour is past behaviour, and I think he's right, even if I feel slightly embarrassed to quote him! An RFA is an opportunity to collect multiple editors' opinions of an editor's past behaviour, by looking at edits and by hearing from other editors who have
191:
When I was at high school, the only prize I ever got was for "All Round Achievement": in other words, I had very broad interests/involvements and was pretty good (though not perhaps outstanding) at many of them. So I was very amused to realize, having read the above, how little had changed in the
426:
and state clear opinions based on this and with reference to policy and guidelines. Remember that there are real people at the other end of the screen, with real concerns, opinions, motivations, pressures and feelings. Whether or not I agree with them, whether or not firmness is required, I can
633:, and they advise that protecting the articles, particularly the Main Page featured article, is done only rarely, when extreme vandalism is being experienced. Other methods, such as blocking editors/IPs may be preferred. Getting consensus for protection of the Main Page featured article (on 275:
qualifier. Having absorbed this, I checked my last 100 speedy nominations (which took me back to the beginning of December, I'm not that prolific!) and found that 96 have been deleted, one was changed into a redirect and 3 others were copyright vios that either I or others rewrote to avoid
1510:
these days) are both, IMHO, highly trustworthy and experienced contributors, whose judgement I fully trust. Finally, her answers to the questions exhibit a well-versed understanding of policy and a willingness to assist the project. Absolutely no reason whatsoever to oppose this contributor.
421:
This provided a steep learning curve in Knowledge content editing, policy and guidelines and how to best to deal with conflict. In particular, be civil and polite, keep calm, seek help (from projects, noticeboards, RFCs, Third opinions etc), think carefully before editing, consider delaying
1759:. Slp is a good editor, who has impressed me with any work I have seen around the project. Strong article contributions and co-nominations; sound answers to the questions, which demonstrate competence; contribution history shows that he's trustworthy. I have no problems here; good luck! 399:
I have long found it a bit ironic that as a peaceable person who tends to avoid conflict in real life, it was a dispute that changed my editing style and frequency from that of an irregular gnomish-type editor as it was during my first nine months here (I actually edited first as
573:'s edits like? Has the editor been adequately warned? Are blocks going to prove preventive or would another intervention be more helpful? Depending on the situation, including whether I felt confident enough of making the right decision, I might easily also consider directing 628:
Once again, I would be cautious. I know that I should be partly because I once requested protection for the Main Page featured article and was politely informed that it wasn't done! There are specific guidelines for protecting articles linked to the mainpage at
345:
I have seen people having difficulties with the myriad policies, guidelines etc. I have enjoyed helping some of these editors navigate the rules of copyright violations, proving notability and verifiability, avoiding corporate promotion etc. (e.g.
756:. However, I confess that my understanding of things like Tor and anonymizing proxies and range blocks is weak in the extreme (wrong background/age, perhaps?) and I would refer such cases on to people who would have a better grasp of these things. 2038:
per nominations and the responses to all of the questions. They show that you have a deep understanding of all the relevant policies that administrators have to deal with, and I would be glad if you became an administrator. Good luck!
1741:
At times I will pick a random RFA to comment on. After reviewing this candidates contributions, and asking a couple of clarifying question, I feel comfortable this editor will not abuse the tools. This one has my support.
439:
and other noticeboards. In quite a number of cases, helping out in the dispute led to doing a good deal of content editing on the articles themselves, and in doing so I have learnt all sorts of fascinating things about an
777:
Someone inserts unsourced negative information into a biography, and you have already reverted them, twice... what options are available to you when he/she reinserts this information a third time, after being warned?
751:
In general, when an IP block is affecting a user with good editing history who promises not to mis-use the exemption by editing through a blocked anonymizing proxy. All I know about this comes from this policy page
1660:. Thoughtful and impressive answers to the questions. Seems level-headed and mature. If there was anything to waver over (there wasn't) her statements about verifiability would have clinched it for me.-- 2210:
In my experience, Slp1 is a hardworking editor who is consistently civil and fair in her dealings with others. I have much respect for the work she does and believe she is a true asset to the project.
1698:, believe that it is all about edit count – or how many GA & FA’s the individual participated in, in so many months. And they are important to a certain degree. However, when it comes to our 637:, say) would be probably be advisable. Short-term semi-protecting other mainpage linked articles are probably less controversial given high levels of vandalism, and in fact the 427:
still be respectful in my interactions. I have found these approaches have served me well in subsequent disputes that I have become involved in when responding to posts at the
1506:
level, which is excellent and necessary particularly in the administrative tasks she intends to take part in. The two nominators (who appear to be nominating contributors like
203:
Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Knowledge as an administrator. It is recommended that you answer these optional questions to provide guidance for participants:
1997:- per answers to questions and looking at past edits. Careful attention to detail, lots of activity on article talk pages. Let's have more Wikipedians like this as admins! 2570:
Excellent editor with many abilities to developte to Knowledge but I have a doubt that she is capable of handling disputed and heated matters when a conflict is raised. --
341:
The other thing I am quite proud of is the way I have been able to help some new editors and get some new pages get started. While engaging in my occasional patrolling of
1097:-- to name a few. She is one of the most civil, policy-oriented, article-oriented, and professional editors that I know. I support her nomination without reservation. 393:
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?
2633: 98:
She is active all over the place. She is involved with BLP, COI, and RS discussion boards. She has worked with usernames. Her comments on various talk pages are
106:. While I am very impressed with the rationale behind her contributions, the thing I like the most about Slp1 is that people perceive her as an admin already. 701:
Mmm. Not an easy question, as policies focus on such very different aspects of editing as editor behaviour and article content policies, as well as the famous
1420:- very conscientious, places strong emphasis on communication and collaboration, and has a good grasp of policy. I trust her to make considered decisions. 378: 2802: 2784: 859: 91:"that reflect eclectic interests, including some subjects had no interest in at all until waded in to help other editors in the middle of a dispute" 1143: 78: 899: 70:) - Getting a handle on Slp1 was quite a challenge. Most editors have a niche that they tend to fill, but not Slp1. Slp1 is all over the place. 491:
Goodness. I'm not sure how one could prove that anybody one knows only on the internet is worthy of trust. But there are some good indicators:
496:
interacted with the person, with the goal of determining if the candidate is worthy of trust. Hopefully my past edits indicate that I can be. --
256:. Balloonman has kindly pointed out my overuse of G1(Patent Nonsense) tag and underuse of G3 (Vandalism) tag when tagging silly articles such as 2585:
I'm going to respect your stance, but may I ask how and why you formulated such an opinion? Any diffs that you could provide would be useful.
1273: 569:
Is this an attempt at oneupmanship in a dispute? What are the specific actions/edits that are being used to justify this request? What are
2669: 89:
to meet Knowledge standards. This has led her to make major contributions to what she herself calls "a very bizarre mixture" of articles
1295:. A steady hand on the wheel for a long time. Love the answer to question #5 as well. I really wish more admins had that attitude. -- 1251: 992: 1485:
as I could not come up with any compelling reason not to (as apparently so far no one else has either). Bonne chance! Sincerely, --
1487: 886: 2479: 33: 17: 217:
applications in other domains where I have been active, such as responding to requests for help at various noticeboards such as
2388: 302: 929: 2605: 2118: 2081: 1930: 1789: 1731: 1594: 1221: 923: 301:
I am particularly proud of two quite different types of contributions. My proudest moment as a content editor was when the
855: 404:, but forgot my password (oops) and so started again in April 2006 with this unoriginally named account.) As noted above, 257: 1614: 1570: 1147: 684: 366:). And a quick bit of research and editing myself has sometimes contributed to helping an article avoid an early deletion. 2237: 2175:
Oh, damn...I wish I would have asked then, cause I spent a good amount of time trying to find some reason to oppose. :D
1985: 1036:. Balloonman + SandyGeorgia? Co-noms? Seriously? Good gravy, just give Slp the mop! No need to bother with an rfa... 893: 753: 638: 405: 2475: 2250: 1498:
There are many excellent reasons to support this user - Firstly, they are exceptionally well-rounded, contributing to
1360: 467:
life's too short to let online disputes of this sort bother me! And I don't really see that changing in the future.
309:
and subsequently appeared on the mainpage. Born out of a very difficult dispute (see below), the article went from
2268: 1618: 1352: 946: 879: 688: 423: 67: 2321: 1976:. Love her answers to the questions, trust Sandy's perception of her as a careful architect of articles. - Dan 1726: 1665: 1279: 970: 453: 374: 351: 82: 77:
When she stumbles across articles that need help, she will help out. For example, she recently participated in
2687: 2665: 2661: 1827: 1747: 1564: 1013: 978: 807: 422:
responses to de-escalate the situation (or even not responding at all), do careful research of the topic using
229:
noticeboards, and in some cases administrative tools would be useful. See for example the BLP violations on
2621: 1725:. Good content editor, and, besides quoting Dr Phil, see no reason to deny user the tools if she needs 'em. 1699: 1550: 1255: 123:; most of my interaction with Slp1 (who has edited since April 2006) has been related to the September 2007 2021:- Sandy + I've seen this editor around and I'm confident she will use the tools in a responsible manner. -- 1694:– Your answer to question #5 gave me all the reasons I needed to express a support opinion. Many here, at 2315: 1848: 1122: 359: 158: 2616:
I was very impressed by her advanced level of French ability and acute insight which helped to clean the
709:. But if I must choose one I will say Knowledge:Verifiability. I think appropriate sourcing of edits to 2264: 1804: 1349: 1071: 373:
Not all the editors have ended up happy with the decisions made. But I was pleased when a proud father,
363: 331: 2783:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the talk page of either
2660:
article is a specific example of just such a decision. In other situations I make other choices. See
2137: 820:
myself and add the citation if so (though hopefully I would have done that already!). If not, revert
2765: 2729: 2711: 2695: 2646: 2641:
her great jobs, but I'm not sure of her with admin tool when people need her help as administrator.--
2637: 2617: 2575: 2540: 2495: 2430: 2413: 2375: 2358: 2166: 2048: 1964: 1661: 1276: 1240: 1102: 475: 230: 111: 2227:
I'm thoroughly impressed with the well-roundedness of the candidate's contributions to the project.
737:
You don't have to write a long narrative on these, unless you want to. The answers can be short.  :)
2706:
Thank you for the enlightenment, but I need "many time" to read through them for reconsideration.--
2586: 2215: 2176: 2151: 2094: 1823: 1743: 1705: 1402: 1373: 1336: 1202: 1086: 1009: 974: 803: 574: 570: 547: 445: 441: 355: 323: 147: 381:, nevertheless returned to my page some months later to thank me for the help I had tried to give. 2595: 2552: 2518: 2445: 2130: 2113: 2075: 2059: 2026: 1926: 1888: 1784: 1592: 1533: 1516: 1442: 1300: 1211: 1043: 942: 802:
Thank you for the answer above. For (9) this is a recently deceased or currently living person.
238: 2769: 2733: 2715: 2699: 2681: 2650: 2611: 2579: 2557: 2544: 2527: 2499: 2483: 2466: 2449: 2433: 2417: 2400: 2379: 2362: 2345: 2324: 2300: 2272: 2255: 2242: 2219: 2202: 2181: 2170: 2156: 2142: 2125: 2097: 2085: 2062: 2030: 2013: 1989: 1968: 1951: 1934: 1913: 1899: 1869: 1852: 1831: 1808: 1791: 1751: 1736: 1717: 1686: 1669: 1652: 1635: 1599: 1579: 1554: 1537: 1520: 1493: 1477: 1446: 1429: 1412: 1389: 1364: 1340: 1323: 1304: 1287: 1259: 1246: 1227: 1193: 1174: 1151: 1126: 1106: 1077: 1056: 1017: 1003: 982: 834: 811: 797: 765: 723: 653: 598: 505: 416: 180: 162: 115: 2462: 2309: 2195: 1947: 1844: 1682: 1611: 1528:
per great nomination, see nothing to make me think user will not use the tools appropriately.
1172: 1139: 1115: 1094: 960: 681: 449: 401: 151: 2720:
As the mentioned pages cleared my doubt over her ability as a meditator, I change my vote to
2396: 2335: 2233: 1981: 1909: 1800: 1760: 1425: 1385: 1134:-- per the first three answers! I trust the rest shall be just as good? = ) Best of luck. -- 1067: 347: 265: 412:, were the subject of a heated dispute between December 2006 and January 2007, including a 2761: 2725: 2707: 2691: 2657: 2642: 2625: 2571: 2536: 2491: 2426: 2409: 2371: 2354: 2162: 2040: 2006: 1960: 1865: 1503: 1188: 1098: 630: 515: 107: 644:
while linked to the main page due to many disruptive edits from changing IP addresses. --
2677: 2281: 2211: 1648: 1455: 1398: 1397:
All of my interactions with Slp1 indicate that she is extremely qualified for the mop,
1332: 1282: 999: 873: 830: 793: 761: 719: 649: 594: 501: 436: 428: 413: 409: 249: 226: 218: 176: 140: 61: 2796: 2510: 2441: 2108: 2071: 2022: 1922: 1878: 1817: 1774: 1586: 1529: 1512: 1499: 1438: 1319: 1314: 1296: 1049: 1037: 964: 706: 702: 634: 586: 582: 578: 432: 335: 310: 277: 261: 253: 245: 222: 136: 132: 124: 2193:
per noms and everyone else in this list. Cant find a single reason to oppose.  ;)
2458: 1943: 1779: 1678: 1629: 1608: 1559: 1461: 1377: 1160: 1135: 710: 678: 667: 525:
Over your time here at Knowledge, what is the most important lesson you've learnt?
327: 315: 306: 144: 2392: 2285: 2228: 1977: 1905: 1546: 1421: 1381: 817: 785: 460:
along with many others! In general, while a few people have become a bit nasty,
2457:. She looks like a great editor. She meets all my standards. Best of luck! 2000: 1861: 1584:
A dedicated cleaner, with a cool head and good approach to improving content.
260:. I blame these errors in part on relying on my memory of an older version of 128: 2777:
The above adminship discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion.
2673: 2474:
Has been around since April 2006 with over 4000 mainspace edits.No concerns.
1695: 1644: 1085:. I've had the pleasure of working with Slp1 on several articles, including 995: 869: 851: 826: 789: 757: 715: 645: 590: 497: 319: 172: 90: 57: 1380:
watchlisted, so I see daily what a smart and collaborative editor Slp1 is.
276:
deletion. However, I think the reason that I would really enjoy working at
264:
which referenced only the rather strict definition of "pure vandalism" per
2425:
Very good answers to questions - seems serious, dedicated, and respected.
2629: 1840: 1064:. No problems here whatsoever. Glad to have you (almost) on the team! 492: 1502:, vandal-fighting, and article work. Another terrific anecdote is her 2787:
or the nominated user). No further edits should be made to this page.
1090: 457: 2150:- Can not find a reason to oppose (even after digging pretty deep). 618:
Requested you to protect an article that is linked to the main page?
1799:. The candidate builds quality content and works well with others. 945:. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review 342: 2308:
Nuff said, she'll be a great admin. I wish her the best of luck. -
677:
What do you consider the most important Knowledge Policy and why?
322:
and others. I have been having a similar positive experience on
1159:
I think she would be a great administrator for our community. --
234: 1266:
Ips cannot vote. Howver, I am willing to fill the place of the
973:) (note I have sneakily done so in a small way) for this RfA? 1643:. Best answers to the questions that I've seen in some time. 169:
Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:
2507:
Fine candidate. No concerns, no big deal. I made it, great.
1877:- Balloonman + SandyGeorgia, I have nothing to worry about. 1180:
Conditional support upon good answers to optional questions.
1860:- a very good editor who'll make good use of the tools. - 991:
Would this link to Wannabe Kate's tool result do the deed?
784:
Can I ask if this is a bio of a living person, or a person
546:
Can you tell me what procedures you would follow if user
29:
The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a
1942:
wonderful user, will definitely use the tools wisely. --
1822:, plus everything appears fine in all the right places. 745:
When can you apply an IP block exemption to a username.
295:
What are your best contributions to Knowledge, and why?
143:, and I've watched her quality content contributions to 85:
and helped educate him on Wikipolicy. She then helped
917: 911: 905: 642: 465: 463: 461: 382: 371: 369: 367: 286: 284: 282: 269: 103: 99: 86: 1843:. You absolutely deserve this. Have fun with the mop! 1331:, exactly the kind of user and admin we need more of. 53:
Final (73/0/1); Ended Sat, 24 May 2008 02:40:49 (UTC)
816:
The options that I see are: see whether the edit is
81:. Not only did she defend the actor, but she also 273:"This includes blatant and obvious misinformation" 959:Would it be worthwhile to include the details of 2634:Knowledge:Articles_for_deletion/Christian_Polak 210:What admin work do you intend to take part in? 485:How can we trust you as a Admin on Knowledge? 2280:- super editor. Kinda and considerate, never 252:and perhaps some straightforward closures at 8: 2724:. She will be a good admin with the tools-- 2387:. I'm always amazed by Slp1's patience on 1437:wowed by nom - cool person. All the best! 1627:well-rounded, nice answers to questions. 941:Please keep discussion constructive and 379:his daughter's article had been deleted 244:I could also envisage participating at 732:Question from 14:35, 17 May 2008 (UTC) 334:suggestions before submitting it as a 2632:. However, that good impression from 330:and are busy responding to excellent 258:Alvin and the Chipmunks meet Garfield 7: 2670:Talk:Treatment of multiple sclerosis 2686:As her nom, it was her contribs to 1185:per answers to questions. Regards, 24: 2803:Successful requests for adminship 2535:Good editor, no major concerns.-- 271:and did not include the present 187:Optional statement by candidate: 18:Knowledge:Requests for adminship 2284:. She will make a fine admin - 1959:Looks all in order. Good luck! 1677:Strong candidate, no concerns. 2656:one position or another. The 858:. For the edit count, see the 227:Knowledge:Conflict of interest 1: 558:Need to block a certain user? 2389:École Polytechnique massacre 2070:clear net positive. Cheers, 1489:Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles 754:Knowledge:IP block exemption 639:Ecole Polytechnique Massacre 406:Ecole Polytechnique Massacre 303:École Polytechnique massacre 219:Biographies of Living People 137:Reliable Sources Noticeboard 2161:I could have told you that! 1607:per answer to my question. 854:'s edit summary usage with 311:several requests of comment 241:being blocked indefinitely. 199:Questions for the candidate 2819: 2306:Support, support, support. 1545:, seems no reason not to. 947:Special:Contributions/Slp1 336:Featured Article candidate 2690:that really impressed me. 641:page was semi- protected 375:User talk:Emmabentleysdad 352:User talk:Last Contrarian 79:an XfD on an Indian actor 2780:Please do not modify it. 2770:17:54, 23 May 2008 (UTC) 2734:14:16, 22 May 2008 (UTC) 2716:13:39, 18 May 2008 (UTC) 2700:13:27, 18 May 2008 (UTC) 2688:Talk:Genie (feral child) 2682:13:22, 18 May 2008 (UTC) 2666:Talk:Genie (feral child) 2662:Talk:Hoofer Sailing Club 2651:12:28, 18 May 2008 (UTC) 2612:07:00, 18 May 2008 (UTC) 2580:05:22, 18 May 2008 (UTC) 2558:20:54, 23 May 2008 (UTC) 2545:05:58, 23 May 2008 (UTC) 2528:03:08, 23 May 2008 (UTC) 2500:03:04, 23 May 2008 (UTC) 2484:02:23, 23 May 2008 (UTC) 2467:18:34, 22 May 2008 (UTC) 2450:16:40, 22 May 2008 (UTC) 2434:15:42, 22 May 2008 (UTC) 2418:14:18, 22 May 2008 (UTC) 2401:12:28, 22 May 2008 (UTC) 2380:22:44, 21 May 2008 (UTC) 2363:14:05, 21 May 2008 (UTC) 2346:12:09, 21 May 2008 (UTC) 2325:11:51, 21 May 2008 (UTC) 2301:07:01, 21 May 2008 (UTC) 2273:06:46, 21 May 2008 (UTC) 2256:00:45, 21 May 2008 (UTC) 2243:17:56, 20 May 2008 (UTC) 2220:12:24, 20 May 2008 (UTC) 2203:11:13, 20 May 2008 (UTC) 2182:19:07, 19 May 2008 (UTC) 2171:19:03, 19 May 2008 (UTC) 2157:18:59, 19 May 2008 (UTC) 2143:17:34, 19 May 2008 (UTC) 2126:16:08, 19 May 2008 (UTC) 2098:12:20, 19 May 2008 (UTC) 2086:10:52, 19 May 2008 (UTC) 2063:00:49, 19 May 2008 (UTC) 2031:23:44, 18 May 2008 (UTC) 2014:23:00, 18 May 2008 (UTC) 1990:22:37, 18 May 2008 (UTC) 1969:13:53, 18 May 2008 (UTC) 1952:10:19, 18 May 2008 (UTC) 1935:07:16, 18 May 2008 (UTC) 1921:. A fine candidate. -- 1914:03:35, 18 May 2008 (UTC) 1900:02:21, 18 May 2008 (UTC) 1870:01:11, 18 May 2008 (UTC) 1853:00:36, 18 May 2008 (UTC) 1832:23:05, 17 May 2008 (UTC) 1809:22:28, 17 May 2008 (UTC) 1792:17:16, 17 May 2008 (UTC) 1767:17:03, 17 May 2008 (UTC) 1752:17:02, 17 May 2008 (UTC) 1737:16:44, 17 May 2008 (UTC) 1718:14:11, 17 May 2008 (UTC) 1687:13:49, 17 May 2008 (UTC) 1670:13:47, 17 May 2008 (UTC) 1653:13:14, 17 May 2008 (UTC) 1636:12:56, 17 May 2008 (UTC) 1600:10:33, 17 May 2008 (UTC) 1580:10:09, 17 May 2008 (UTC) 1555:09:20, 17 May 2008 (UTC) 1538:07:33, 17 May 2008 (UTC) 1521:07:32, 17 May 2008 (UTC) 1494:05:42, 17 May 2008 (UTC) 1478:05:39, 17 May 2008 (UTC) 1447:04:33, 17 May 2008 (UTC) 1430:03:10, 17 May 2008 (UTC) 1413:02:40, 17 May 2008 (UTC) 1390:00:32, 17 May 2008 (UTC) 1365:00:23, 17 May 2008 (UTC) 1341:00:08, 17 May 2008 (UTC) 1324:23:47, 16 May 2008 (UTC) 1305:23:41, 16 May 2008 (UTC) 1288:23:21, 16 May 2008 (UTC) 1260:23:14, 16 May 2008 (UTC) 1247:22:40, 16 May 2008 (UTC) 1228:22:24, 16 May 2008 (UTC) 1194:22:21, 16 May 2008 (UTC) 1175:22:19, 16 May 2008 (UTC) 1152:22:18, 16 May 2008 (UTC) 1127:22:16, 16 May 2008 (UTC) 1107:22:12, 16 May 2008 (UTC) 1078:22:07, 16 May 2008 (UTC) 1057:22:05, 16 May 2008 (UTC) 1018:12:39, 19 May 2008 (UTC) 1004:01:35, 18 May 2008 (UTC) 983:22:58, 17 May 2008 (UTC) 835:16:01, 17 May 2008 (UTC) 812:15:30, 17 May 2008 (UTC) 798:15:01, 17 May 2008 (UTC) 766:15:01, 17 May 2008 (UTC) 724:03:00, 17 May 2008 (UTC) 666:Optional questions from 654:23:45, 16 May 2008 (UTC) 599:23:17, 16 May 2008 (UTC) 577:to other venues such as 514:Optional questions from 506:22:36, 16 May 2008 (UTC) 454:Fathers' rights movement 450:an American conservative 414:user request for comment 181:22:02, 16 May 2008 (UTC) 163:00:05, 16 May 2008 (UTC) 116:06:53, 14 May 2008 (UTC) 408:and to a lesser extent 125:featured article review 38:Please do not modify it 2476:Pharaoh of the Wizards 2408:after consideration.-- 2060:Report false positives 786:"who has ceased to be" 360:User talk:Michaelsshaw 235:noted in this BLP post 707:What Knowledge is Not 474:Optional Question by 364:User talk:Clearbluepr 83:contacted the creator 34:request for adminship 2638:Talk:Christian Polak 1727:Deacon of Pndapetzim 1312:No problems here. -- 1238:Great answer to Q4. 703:Ignore all the Rules 550:requested that you: 437:Canadian Wikipedians 356:User talk :Glonneman 237:which ended up with 133:the Medicine Project 1617:2008-05-17T12:44Z ( 1565:dihydrogen monoxide 1374:William Wilberforce 1087:Nicholas John Baker 687:2008-05-17T02:20Z ( 446:a prisoner in Japan 424:WP:reliable sources 326:: we've made it to 324:William Wilberforce 148:William Wilberforce 141:the COI noticeboard 139:answering queries, 87:rewrite the article 2624:concern raised at 2526: 1634: 949:before commenting. 343:the new pages page 39: 2607: 2602: 2508: 2343: 2252:The Transhumanist 2241: 2141: 2012: 1893:Come Speak To Me' 1734: 1628: 1578: 1409: 1363: 1223: 1218: 1114:, obviously :-) 1095:G. Edward Griffin 1053: 305:article became a 231:Francisco Soberón 37: 2810: 2782: 2622:WP:Verifiability 2606: 2600: 2596: 2590: 2555: 2525: 2523: 2516: 2513: 2505:Post nom support 2342: 2333: 2320: 2314: 2298: 2295: 2293: 2265:SynergeticMaggot 2248:Are you married? 2231: 2198: 2179: 2154: 2135: 2133: 2121: 2116: 2111: 2011: 2009: 2003: 1998: 1896: 1885: 1881: 1820: 1787: 1782: 1777: 1765: 1730: 1716: 1632: 1568: 1492: 1490: 1475: 1473: 1470: 1467: 1464: 1407: 1359: 1357: 1348:good editor. - 1322: 1317: 1245: 1243: 1222: 1216: 1212: 1206: 1192: 1170: 1165: 1119: 1076: 1054: 1051: 1046: 1040: 933: 892: 867:Links for Slp1: 845:General comments 711:reliable sources 433:reliable sources 418:(not about me!!) 348:User talk:Nkelby 338:. Wish us luck! 307:featured article 223:Reliable Sources 155: 2818: 2817: 2813: 2812: 2811: 2809: 2808: 2807: 2793: 2792: 2791: 2785:this nomination 2778: 2754: 2658:Christian Polak 2626:Christian_Polak 2610: 2601: 2598: 2588: 2566: 2553: 2519: 2514: 2511: 2509: 2489:Per nom Support 2353:- No concerns. 2334: 2318: 2312: 2291: 2289: 2286: 2196: 2177: 2152: 2131: 2119: 2114: 2109: 2105:reliable user. 2007: 2001: 1999: 1889: 1882: 1879: 1818: 1785: 1780: 1775: 1761: 1704: 1662:Fuhghettaboutit 1630: 1597: 1574: 1488: 1486: 1471: 1468: 1465: 1462: 1460: 1406: 1353: 1315: 1313: 1241: 1239: 1226: 1217: 1214: 1204: 1186: 1166: 1161: 1117: 1065: 1050: 1044: 1038: 1030: 956: 885: 868: 847: 201: 189: 153: 50: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 2816: 2814: 2806: 2805: 2795: 2794: 2790: 2789: 2773: 2772: 2753: 2750: 2749: 2748: 2747: 2746: 2745: 2744: 2743: 2742: 2741: 2740: 2739: 2738: 2737: 2736: 2718: 2597: 2593: 2565: 2562: 2561: 2560: 2547: 2530: 2502: 2486: 2469: 2455:Strong support 2452: 2436: 2420: 2403: 2382: 2368:Strong support 2365: 2348: 2339: 2327: 2303: 2275: 2258: 2245: 2222: 2205: 2188: 2187: 2186: 2185: 2184: 2145: 2128: 2100: 2095:Moonriddengirl 2088: 2065: 2033: 2016: 1992: 1971: 1954: 1937: 1916: 1902: 1872: 1855: 1834: 1824:LessHeard vanU 1811: 1794: 1768: 1754: 1744:NonvocalScream 1739: 1720: 1700:Administrators 1689: 1672: 1655: 1638: 1622: 1602: 1595: 1582: 1572: 1557: 1540: 1523: 1496: 1480: 1449: 1432: 1415: 1403: 1395:Strong support 1392: 1367: 1343: 1326: 1307: 1290: 1264: 1263: 1262: 1230: 1213: 1209: 1196: 1183:Strong support 1177: 1154: 1129: 1112:Co-nom Support 1109: 1080: 1059: 1029: 1026: 1025: 1024: 1023: 1022: 1021: 1020: 1010:LessHeard vanU 986: 985: 975:LessHeard vanU 955: 952: 938: 937: 936: 934: 864: 863: 856:mathbot's tool 846: 843: 842: 841: 840: 839: 838: 837: 814: 804:NonvocalScream 771: 770: 769: 768: 739: 738: 729: 728: 727: 726: 693: 692: 663: 662: 661: 660: 659: 658: 657: 656: 620: 619: 608: 607: 606: 605: 604: 603: 602: 601: 575:Jirgrfdsfg9764 571:Jirgrfdsfg9764 560: 559: 548:Jirgrfdsfg9764 540: 539: 538: 537: 536: 535: 511: 510: 509: 508: 471: 470: 469: 468: 419: 387: 386: 385: 384: 339: 332:WP:Peer review 290: 289: 288: 242: 200: 197: 195: 188: 185: 184: 183: 49: 44: 43: 42: 25: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 2815: 2804: 2801: 2800: 2798: 2788: 2786: 2781: 2775: 2774: 2771: 2767: 2763: 2759: 2756: 2755: 2751: 2735: 2731: 2727: 2723: 2719: 2717: 2713: 2709: 2705: 2704: 2703: 2702: 2701: 2697: 2693: 2689: 2685: 2684: 2683: 2679: 2675: 2671: 2667: 2663: 2659: 2654: 2653: 2652: 2648: 2644: 2639: 2635: 2631: 2627: 2623: 2619: 2618:WP:Notability 2615: 2614: 2613: 2608: 2603: 2592: 2591: 2584: 2583: 2582: 2581: 2577: 2573: 2568: 2567: 2563: 2559: 2556: 2554:Antonio Lopez 2551: 2548: 2546: 2542: 2538: 2534: 2531: 2529: 2524: 2522: 2517: 2506: 2503: 2501: 2497: 2493: 2490: 2487: 2485: 2481: 2477: 2473: 2470: 2468: 2464: 2460: 2456: 2453: 2451: 2447: 2443: 2440: 2437: 2435: 2432: 2428: 2424: 2421: 2419: 2415: 2411: 2407: 2404: 2402: 2398: 2394: 2390: 2386: 2383: 2381: 2377: 2373: 2369: 2366: 2364: 2360: 2356: 2352: 2349: 2347: 2341: 2340: 2337: 2331: 2328: 2326: 2323: 2317: 2311: 2307: 2304: 2302: 2299: 2297: 2283: 2279: 2276: 2274: 2270: 2266: 2262: 2259: 2257: 2254: 2253: 2249: 2246: 2244: 2239: 2235: 2230: 2226: 2223: 2221: 2217: 2213: 2209: 2206: 2204: 2201: 2199: 2192: 2189: 2183: 2180: 2174: 2173: 2172: 2168: 2164: 2160: 2159: 2158: 2155: 2149: 2146: 2144: 2139: 2134: 2129: 2127: 2124: 2123: 2122: 2117: 2112: 2104: 2101: 2099: 2096: 2092: 2089: 2087: 2083: 2080: 2077: 2073: 2069: 2066: 2064: 2061: 2058: 2057: 2054: 2051: 2047: 2046: 2043: 2037: 2034: 2032: 2028: 2024: 2020: 2017: 2015: 2010: 2004: 1996: 1993: 1991: 1987: 1983: 1979: 1975: 1972: 1970: 1967: 1966: 1962: 1958: 1955: 1953: 1949: 1945: 1941: 1938: 1936: 1932: 1928: 1924: 1920: 1917: 1915: 1911: 1907: 1903: 1901: 1897: 1895: 1894: 1886: 1884: 1876: 1873: 1871: 1867: 1863: 1859: 1856: 1854: 1850: 1846: 1842: 1838: 1835: 1833: 1829: 1825: 1821: 1815: 1812: 1810: 1806: 1802: 1798: 1795: 1793: 1790: 1788: 1783: 1778: 1772: 1769: 1766: 1764: 1758: 1755: 1753: 1749: 1745: 1740: 1738: 1733: 1728: 1724: 1721: 1719: 1715: 1714: 1711: 1708: 1701: 1697: 1693: 1690: 1688: 1684: 1680: 1676: 1673: 1671: 1667: 1663: 1659: 1656: 1654: 1650: 1646: 1642: 1639: 1637: 1633: 1626: 1623: 1620: 1616: 1613: 1610: 1606: 1603: 1601: 1598: 1593: 1591: 1590: 1589: 1583: 1581: 1576: 1567: 1566: 1561: 1558: 1556: 1552: 1548: 1544: 1541: 1539: 1535: 1531: 1527: 1524: 1522: 1518: 1514: 1509: 1505: 1501: 1497: 1495: 1491: 1484: 1481: 1479: 1476: 1474: 1457: 1453: 1450: 1448: 1444: 1440: 1436: 1433: 1431: 1427: 1423: 1419: 1416: 1414: 1411: 1410: 1400: 1396: 1393: 1391: 1387: 1383: 1379: 1375: 1371: 1368: 1366: 1362: 1361:(and friends) 1358: 1356: 1351: 1347: 1344: 1342: 1338: 1334: 1330: 1327: 1325: 1321: 1318: 1311: 1308: 1306: 1302: 1298: 1294: 1291: 1289: 1286: 1285: 1284: 1281: 1278: 1275: 1269: 1265: 1261: 1257: 1253: 1252:86.137.221.99 1250: 1249: 1248: 1244: 1237: 1234: 1231: 1229: 1224: 1219: 1208: 1207: 1200: 1197: 1195: 1191: 1190: 1189:CycloneNimrod 1184: 1181: 1178: 1176: 1173: 1171: 1169: 1164: 1158: 1155: 1153: 1149: 1145: 1141: 1137: 1133: 1130: 1128: 1124: 1120: 1113: 1110: 1108: 1104: 1100: 1096: 1092: 1088: 1084: 1081: 1079: 1075: 1073: 1069: 1063: 1060: 1058: 1055: 1047: 1041: 1035: 1032: 1031: 1027: 1019: 1015: 1011: 1007: 1006: 1005: 1001: 997: 993: 990: 989: 988: 987: 984: 980: 976: 972: 969: 966: 962: 958: 957: 953: 951: 950: 948: 944: 935: 931: 928: 925: 922: 919: 916: 913: 910: 907: 904: 901: 898: 895: 891: 888: 884: 881: 878: 875: 871: 866: 865: 861: 857: 853: 849: 848: 844: 836: 832: 828: 823: 819: 815: 813: 809: 805: 801: 800: 799: 795: 791: 787: 783: 780: 779: 776: 773: 772: 767: 763: 759: 755: 750: 747: 746: 744: 741: 740: 736: 735: 734: 733: 725: 721: 717: 712: 708: 704: 700: 697: 696: 695: 694: 690: 686: 683: 680: 676: 673: 672: 671: 670: 669: 655: 651: 647: 643: 640: 636: 632: 627: 624: 623: 622: 621: 617: 614: 613: 612: 611: 610: 609: 600: 596: 592: 588: 584: 580: 576: 572: 567: 564: 563: 562: 561: 557: 554: 553: 552: 551: 549: 545: 542: 541: 532: 529: 528: 527: 526: 524: 521: 520: 519: 518: 517: 516:CycloneNimrod 507: 503: 499: 494: 490: 487: 486: 484: 481: 480: 479: 478: 477: 466: 464: 462: 459: 458:Japanese word 455: 451: 447: 443: 438: 434: 430: 425: 420: 417: 415: 411: 407: 403: 398: 395: 394: 392: 389: 388: 383: 380: 377:, upset that 376: 372: 370: 368: 365: 361: 357: 353: 349: 344: 340: 337: 333: 329: 325: 321: 317: 312: 308: 304: 300: 297: 296: 294: 291: 287: 285: 283: 279: 274: 270: 267: 263: 259: 255: 251: 247: 243: 240: 236: 232: 228: 224: 220: 215: 212: 211: 209: 206: 205: 204: 198: 196: 193: 186: 182: 178: 174: 170: 167: 166: 165: 164: 160: 156: 149: 146: 142: 138: 134: 130: 126: 122: 118: 117: 113: 109: 105: 104:policy driven 101: 96: 95: 92: 88: 84: 80: 75: 71: 69: 66: 63: 59: 55: 54: 48: 45: 41: 35: 32: 27: 26: 19: 2779: 2776: 2757: 2721: 2587: 2569: 2549: 2532: 2520: 2504: 2488: 2471: 2454: 2438: 2422: 2405: 2384: 2367: 2350: 2338:TinuCherian 2336: 2329: 2322:Vandalize it 2310:iaNLOPEZ1115 2305: 2287: 2277: 2260: 2251: 2247: 2224: 2207: 2194: 2190: 2147: 2107: 2106: 2102: 2090: 2078: 2067: 2055: 2052: 2049: 2044: 2041: 2035: 2018: 1994: 1973: 1963: 1956: 1939: 1918: 1892: 1891: 1883: 1874: 1857: 1845:Paragon12321 1836: 1813: 1796: 1770: 1762: 1756: 1722: 1712: 1709: 1706: 1691: 1674: 1657: 1640: 1624: 1604: 1587: 1585: 1563: 1542: 1525: 1507: 1482: 1459: 1451: 1434: 1417: 1401: 1394: 1378:Learned Hand 1369: 1354: 1345: 1328: 1309: 1292: 1272: 1271: 1267: 1235: 1232: 1203: 1198: 1187: 1182: 1179: 1167: 1162: 1156: 1131: 1111: 1082: 1066: 1061: 1033: 967: 940: 939: 926: 920: 914: 908: 902: 896: 889: 882: 876: 821: 781: 774: 748: 742: 731: 730: 698: 674: 665: 664: 625: 615: 565: 555: 543: 530: 522: 513: 512: 488: 482: 473: 472: 442:abolitionist 396: 390: 328:Good Article 298: 292: 272: 213: 207: 202: 194: 190: 168: 145:Good article 120: 119: 100:well thought 97: 93: 76: 72: 64: 56: 52: 51: 46: 30: 28: 2628:created by 1801:Majoreditor 1068:Malinaccier 410:Marc Lépine 171:I accept.-- 2762:Gurchzilla 2726:Appletrees 2708:Appletrees 2692:Balloonman 2643:Appletrees 2572:Appletrees 2537:CreazySuit 2492:Balloonman 2427:Olaf Davis 2410:Appletrees 2372:Ashton1983 2355:EdJohnston 2163:Balloonman 1839:Quite the 1560:Yes please 1242:Trees Rock 1099:J Readings 1052:Disclaimer 954:Discussion 818:verifiable 476:Trees Rock 129:Stuttering 108:Balloonman 31:successful 2212:Kafka Liz 1696:Knowledge 1405:<: --> 1399:Ruhrfisch 1372:. I have 1333:J Milburn 1270:. I'm an 912:block log 860:talk page 266:WP:VANDAL 127:(FAR) of 2797:Category 2630:User:PHG 2589:Wisdom89 2472:+Support 2442:Ling.Nut 2439:+Support 2316:TaLKBaCK 2238:contribs 2178:Tiptoety 2153:Tiptoety 2091:Suppport 2082:contribs 2072:Casliber 2023:CapitalR 1986:mistakes 1931:contribs 1923:jbmurray 1841:polymath 1703:to you. 1588:Gazimoff 1530:Davewild 1513:Valtoras 1504:civility 1439:Vishnava 1350:Diligent 1297:JayHenry 1205:Wisdom89 971:contribs 880:contribs 631:WP:MPFAP 435:and the 402:User:Slp 102:out and 68:contribs 2758:Neutral 2752:Neutral 2722:support 2550:Support 2533:Support 2459:Bearian 2423:Support 2406:Support 2385:Support 2351:Support 2330:Support 2278:Support 2261:Support 2225:Support 2208:Support 2191:Support 2148:Support 2103:Support 2068:Support 2036:Support 2019:Support 1995:Support 1974:Support 1957:Support 1944:PeaceNT 1940:Support 1919:Support 1880:Realist 1875:Support 1858:Support 1837:Support 1814:Support 1797:Support 1771:Support 1763:Anthøny 1757:Support 1723:Support 1692:Support 1679:Johnbod 1675:Support 1658:Support 1641:Support 1631:Spencer 1625:Support 1605:Support 1543:Support 1526:Support 1483:Support 1456:WP:WTHN 1452:Support 1435:Support 1418:Support 1370:Support 1355:Terrier 1346:Support 1329:Support 1320:iva1979 1310:Support 1293:Support 1268:support 1233:Support 1199:Support 1163:Crohnie 1157:Support 1136:Cameron 1132:Support 1118:Georgia 1083:Support 1062:Support 1034:Support 1028:Support 887:deleted 668:Zginder 493:Dr Phil 316:bobanny 281:topic. 250:WP:PROD 154:Georgia 2672:‎. -- 2564:Oppose 2521:(talk) 2393:Wafulz 2229:SWik78 2132:Rudget 2002:Frank 1978:Dank55 1906:Daniel 1819:Keeper 1710:hoesss 1547:Stifle 1500:WP:CSD 1454:- Per 1422:Risker 1382:qp10qp 1274:Editor 1093:, and 1091:gaijin 1039:Keeper 635:WP:ANI 587:WP:3RR 583:WP:ANI 579:WP:AIV 452:, the 278:WP:CSD 262:WP:CSD 254:WP:AFD 246:WP:CSD 239:a user 135:, the 121:Co-nom 2282:BITEy 2120:Shark 2008:talk 1965:Cobra 1961:Glass 1862:Bilby 1508:crazy 1404:: --> 1116:Sandy 943:civil 894:count 152:Sandy 16:< 2766:talk 2730:talk 2712:talk 2696:talk 2678:talk 2674:Slp1 2647:talk 2636:and 2620:and 2576:talk 2541:talk 2515:rium 2512:Cena 2496:talk 2480:talk 2463:talk 2446:talk 2431:Talk 2414:talk 2397:talk 2376:talk 2359:talk 2269:talk 2234:talk 2216:talk 2167:talk 2138:Help 2110:Sexy 2076:talk 2027:talk 1982:talk 1948:talk 1927:talk 1910:talk 1866:talk 1849:talk 1828:talk 1816:per 1805:talk 1786:Dude 1776:Koji 1748:talk 1732:Talk 1683:talk 1666:talk 1649:talk 1645:Deor 1596:Read 1551:talk 1534:talk 1517:talk 1472:nine 1443:talk 1426:talk 1386:talk 1376:and 1337:talk 1301:talk 1283:wiki 1256:talk 1236:Good 1123:Talk 1103:talk 1072:talk 1014:talk 1008:Yes? 1000:talk 996:Slp1 979:talk 965:talk 924:rfar 906:logs 874:talk 870:Slp1 852:Slp1 850:See 831:talk 827:Slp1 808:talk 794:talk 790:Slp1 762:talk 758:Slp1 720:talk 716:Slp1 705:and 650:talk 646:Slp1 595:talk 591:Slp1 502:talk 498:Slp1 456:, a 320:Dina 177:talk 173:Slp1 159:Talk 112:talk 62:talk 58:Slp1 47:Slp1 2760:-- 2115:Sea 2042:Raz 1619:UTC 1615:der 1612:gin 1280:the 1168:Gal 1048:| 1042:| 961:Slp 930:spi 900:AfD 822:and 689:UTC 685:der 682:gin 616:6b. 556:6a. 429:BLP 2799:: 2768:) 2732:) 2714:) 2698:) 2680:) 2664:, 2649:) 2604:/ 2578:) 2543:) 2498:) 2482:) 2465:) 2448:) 2429:| 2416:) 2399:) 2391:.- 2378:) 2370:. 2361:) 2344:- 2292:is 2271:) 2263:. 2236:• 2218:) 2200:| 2197:Qb 2169:) 2140:?) 2084:) 2053:am 2050:fl 2045:or 2029:) 2005:| 1988:) 1984:)( 1950:) 1933:) 1929:• 1912:) 1898:) 1868:) 1851:) 1830:) 1807:) 1773:-- 1750:) 1735:) 1685:) 1668:) 1651:) 1562:! 1553:) 1536:) 1519:) 1458:. 1445:) 1428:) 1388:) 1339:) 1303:) 1277:of 1258:) 1220:/ 1150:) 1125:) 1105:) 1089:, 1045:76 1016:) 1002:) 994:-- 981:) 918:lu 833:) 810:) 796:) 782:A: 775:9. 764:) 749:A: 743:8. 722:) 699:A: 675:7. 652:) 626:A: 597:) 589:-- 585:, 581:, 566:A: 544:6. 531:A: 523:5. 504:) 489:A: 448:, 444:, 431:, 397:A: 391:3. 362:, 358:, 354:, 350:, 318:, 299:A: 293:2. 268:, 248:, 233:, 225:, 221:, 214:A: 208:1. 179:) 161:) 114:) 36:. 2764:( 2728:( 2710:( 2694:( 2676:( 2668:, 2645:( 2609:) 2599:T 2594:( 2574:( 2539:( 2494:( 2478:( 2461:( 2444:( 2412:( 2395:( 2374:( 2357:( 2319:· 2313:· 2296:n 2294:o 2290:l 2288:A 2267:( 2240:) 2232:( 2214:( 2165:( 2136:( 2079:· 2074:( 2056:e 2025:( 1980:( 1946:( 1925:( 1908:( 1890:' 1887:( 1864:( 1847:( 1826:( 1803:( 1781:† 1746:( 1729:( 1713:S 1707:S 1681:( 1664:( 1647:( 1621:) 1609:Z 1577:) 1575:O 1573:2 1571:H 1569:( 1549:( 1532:( 1515:( 1469:e 1466:s 1463:a 1441:( 1424:( 1408:° 1384:( 1335:( 1316:S 1299:( 1254:( 1225:) 1215:T 1210:( 1148:c 1146:| 1144:p 1142:| 1140:t 1138:( 1121:( 1101:( 1074:) 1070:( 1012:( 998:( 977:( 968:· 963:( 932:) 927:· 921:· 915:· 909:· 903:· 897:· 890:· 883:· 877:· 872:( 862:. 829:( 806:( 792:( 788:? 760:( 718:( 691:) 679:Z 648:( 593:( 500:( 483:4 175:( 157:( 110:( 94:. 65:· 60:( 40:.

Index

Knowledge:Requests for adminship
request for adminship
Slp1
Slp1
talk
contribs
an XfD on an Indian actor
contacted the creator
rewrite the article
"that reflect eclectic interests, including some subjects had no interest in at all until waded in to help other editors in the middle of a dispute"
well thought
policy driven
Balloonman
talk
06:53, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
featured article review
Stuttering
the Medicine Project
Reliable Sources Noticeboard
the COI noticeboard
Good article
William Wilberforce
SandyGeorgia
Talk
00:05, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
Slp1
talk
22:02, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
Biographies of Living People
Reliable Sources

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