245:(as I recall - it was a long time ago, and I'm sure there was plenty of blame to go around). I get into edit conflicts fairly often as I let myself get into contraversial articles. But there's a threefold path to resolution in most cases. Always explain yourself clearly in a conflict. When someone disagrees with you, if they're forced to guess what you're up to, they're likely to guess wrong, and often in an unproductive direction. Always listen to other editors, and make it clear you're listening. Even if they're just hammering away on the same wrong points, or being disruptive or uncivil or whatever, people are much nicer when they feel they're being heard (and vice versa). Three: Source - as I've said above, sourcing is the easiest way to resolve disputes - it'll tell me if I'm off-base, and show other editors where they're off-base as well. The best illustration of this is probably my involvement in the dispute about using images in the
1647:. I cite from books from time to time, as do many other editors. Myself and a few other editors found the articles in the Plain Dealer's online archives, and were able to confirm that the Plain Dealer's articles verified the claims - which is why the article ended up being kept in both AfDs. I certainly didn't result in them being kept on my own, especially in the second AfD I wasn't involved in - the article was kept because the claim that it wasn't reliably sourced was shown to be false. I really don't mind you opposing my RfA for legitimate reasons, spurious reasons or no reasons at all, for that matter, but I have to object to you opposing for demonstratably
93:) began editing here on Knowledge (XXG) September 2005. I first encountered WilyD on AfD and I quickly noticed that while he invariably had the opposite opinion I had, his opinions were always well reasoned and supported, which impressed me. Looking over WilyD's edit contributions, there is a good mix of vandal-fighting, article improvement (adding references, etc.), and talkpage discussions. WilyD understands the policies and guidelines here and I think he would use the mop and bucket responsibly to improve the project. In short, I think WilyD will be an asset as an administrator.
307:
new users about what is or isn't appropriate is their talk page. Beyond that, really inflamatory (or libelous or legal threats or what have you) on talk pages can always just be deleted. Best, I think, is to engage the user in dialogue on their talk. But ultimately being persistantly disruptive on a talk is no better than being persistantly disruptive on an article. The standards of behaviour are (obviously) higher on an article than on a talk page, though.
1425:
outside of the scope of consensus, as we are to be civil, and full-well having the knowledge that even if I am to assume good faith, that this opinion has no bearing on a consensus-building effort and belongs solely back at the aforementioned RfA. Precedent is never a reason to opine a !vote. I welcome all opinions, as I have demonstrated utmost civility my entire duration with the project. In this case, the oppose is simply offensive.
1757:- I'm looking at a good 10% missing and given how easy it is that's not so hot) and some swearing in the edit summaries that do exist. However some good vandal fighting (although I also worry about the lack of associated warning). Excellent answers to the questions, but anyone can create good answers. RfA is more about past history that wowing us with intentions. There's nothing as such
934:
here), but what he did was way better than going through a violation of policy. I'd personally would like to have an admin walk away from a stressful issue than flying off the handle and blocking the other party (if those were the only two choices). Plus, even admins need a break now and then. God knows we definitely have enough (but there's always room for more). --
225:. It enhances the reputation of the project when everything is sourced and verifiable. It makes it more viable as a resource for schoolkids (though I will say when I mark assignments, I see a lot of sourcing from Knowledge (XXG)). And it makes it more useful as a starting place for research. Plus, I like the way it looks.
627:- Good edit count, good usage of edit summaries. All contributions seem to be productive, and this editor seems trustworthy. My one concern however is that you are interested in closing AfD discussions, but after checking your contributions, I noticed that you are not currently active in participating in discussions. --
1424:
I don't think anyone was getting out of hand. RfA is about consensus. However, I feel this was a personal attack. I agree that Pedro is entitled to his opinions, and have no problem with that. I do, however, have a problem with taking a jab at a former candidate outside of his RfA. That is completely
244:
I only ever recall a single incident that made me really stressed - I ended up taking about five days off from editing and abandoning the dispute and article in question. It wasn't really an editing dispute that stressed me but an admin threatening to use his tools inappropriate in a content dispute
1442:
Sorry about the delay in replying - busy in RL. I have replied to this on your talk page, copied to The
Transhumanist. I reject your assertaions of incivility and personal attacks. I merely referenced a previous discussion, something we all do a lot here across RfA, Main Space, Talk etc etc. I find
361:
I don't think I've ever used a spoiler template while reading or writing an article - I don't ususally do much popular culture/literature type stuff. I've never inserted or removed a spoiler template, to the best of my recollection. I definitely appreciate the concern that it can make it hard to
306:
Okay, I'll admit I'm a little flummoxed by the vague nature of the question - there are lots of degress on vandalism and outrageousness. A user who's moved onto the talk page shows some willingness to be productive already. The short answer is: Engage - Ignore - Block. The best place to talk to
1381:
Pedro, I'm hoping that I am mistaken here. Please tell me you did not just take a shot at the candidate in the RfA you mentioned. I'm quite sure your oppose could have been made without it. In fact, if that is true, it is really in poor taste, and precedence is not going to help with a consensus.
933:
No offense to Giggy, but I liked his answer to Q3. He was being threatened, and instead of going into personal attacks, he dropped the issue. Of course, he could have gone through the RfC and related processes (which may end up getting him in trouble with the admin in question, but I'm rambling
1726:
I understand that people have lives and such. But being an admin who wants to close deletion debates, I think he'll run into more stress b/c of the decisions he'll have to make. And this stress could result in him taking more time off, and he wouldn't be able to accomplish his goal of fighting
1696:
I feel that taking five days off because of a stressful incident shows WilyD lacks dedication. I understand that knowing when you need a break could be a good thing, but if his main goal is to help eliminate backlog, this would be hard to accomplish if he needs time off to handle stress.
158:
is that I find myself from time to time with some free time I could spend editing, but not necessarily enough time to do the research I need to do to write. So being able to work on backlogs and requests would be nice, and valuable to the project. I would like access to
1047:
This editor has been swimming in some pretty rough waters. His work is among some of the most controversial articles we have. Emotions run high and yet he has been controlled and productive. I believe he will do just fine. I have seen not the first reason to reject.
680:- whilst i disagree very strongly with WilyD that consensus was ever reached in the Muhammad dispute, i find the nominator's comments quite accurate. from what i have seen, the user is thoughtful, sensible, considerate, and appears to be well-suited for the tools.
366:
to having them there, they're a much ruder shock than if there's no such expectation. Ultimately they don't have much "encyclopaedic value", I guess. They're probably unnecessary and they may be a bad precendent with respect to one-click hiding images and other
1714:
I don't make a habit of commenting other editors !votes and you are free to oppose for any reason you see fit, but it should be pointed out that nearly every admin takes wikibreaks. People have lives and it is better to take some cool down time than edit under
763:
per good answers to questions and candidate's strong overall record. Please consider configuring the "prompt for edit summary" preference to bring your summary rate even higher. I have considered the opposer's rationale and find it completely unpersuasive.
804:- I was on the fence, however, I like the user's honesty about the stress leave. It is much harder to walk away from a stressful situation than it is to stay and engage in fruitless debate. I applaud that honesty, and feel that shows transparency.
1542:
Put simply, that's a garbage reason to oppose. As said by undertow, it is much better to take a break than be dragging yourself around bitterly. 5 days is mild compared to the significant inactivity of numerous current administrators. --
1660:
Funny that you and those others never made any of those links from the archives available during the AfD discussion. But there's no point in continuing this discussion. I have made my position clear. My reasoning is far from false.
1344:
I personally think not and have come to the conclussion this editor thinks it is. We have too many admins who seem to think that they are a cut above we mere mortal editors, and we can well live without any more of that opinion -
1792:--after showing very effectively why it was notable, you asked the nom. to withdraw the nomination & then started arguing back and forth about it, which seems like overkill--and even perhaps looking for an unnecessary fight.
1328:
This looks like an argument over semantics. "Not a demotion" doesn't mean the same as "promotion", and "not a promotion" doesn't mean "demotion". I wasn't promoted at work today, but that doesn't mean I was demoted, either.
341:
1238:. I think you'll do fine. You seem to be pretty level-headed and, despite the oppose vote below, I think the fact that you took time off when you got your feathers ruffled shows immense maturity on your part. --
302:
Lets say a user vandalizes a site as his first edit then experiments with talk pages by writing outrageous statements but then shows a small amount of intent to make good edits, how would you deal with that?
1399:
Guys please, calm down. Pedro is entitled to his opinion, and don't cut him down for it (though I shouldn't be talking, if you look at what I said). Personally, I think this issue is getting out of hand.
1580:
and subsequent DRV and second AfD/ WilyD does not believe that an article needs reliable sources in order to stay on
Knowledge (XXG), but is willing to put up with arm waving and unsubstantiated claims.
714:: User has plenty of experience and seems to have quality edits and shows civility. Edit summary usage however is quite low, may I suggest changing it to forced in your preferences if you hadn't already?
257:
because I listened to what he had to say and picked out one good point I thought he was making - in the end, what I concluded was very different from what he wanted, but he at least felt he was being
1554:
I actually think it is a very good thing to do. Knowing you need a break from editing
Knowledge (XXG) and actually taking it shows maturity to me. It's not like he took a break from commanding the
249:
article, where my "four point" solution became more or less the consensus and remains so today. Even though I disagreed with ALM scientist about almost everything, his attitude towards me went from
993:. I recently had a conversation where I intially disagreed with something he had stated, but he provided excellent reasoning and I ended up agreeing with his position. Should make a good admin.
154:. As with anything, I plan to start with the easiest and most straightforward stuff to test the water, and move up to harder stuff as I get more comfortable. The biggest reason I'd like the
1789:
1671:
1577:
1346:
362:
write articles, if you're always straightjacketed with a spoiler warning - and sometimes using spoilers and sometimes not is probably "worst of all for not spoiling". If people get
1177:. My impression of WilyD is of one who speaks his mind, but he does so politely without any antagonism. Well experienced, and knowledgable in policy. Good fit for the admin ranks.
1349:
being a case in point. I'm not being nasty here, and I wish this editor every success, but I peronally can't support an editor questing for adminship for it's own sake. Sorry.
1606:
reliable sources - if this means I'm out of touch, so be it. But I think it's unfair to judge me based off the DRV and second AfD as I didn't participate in either ...
593:
I like what I see here. Good answers, excellent article work, and a pretty civil and level-headed user. We need admins and this here is a good candidate. All the best,
238:
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?
1613:
We have had this discussion before. The only link to the Miami Herald is to an opinion piece. There are no links to actual Plain Dealer, Times or Times
Picayune
1813:
395:
344:
in articles about books, movies, and stories. Where do you stand on this issue and do you use spoiler templates when reading these types of articles? Thank you.
280:
is contraversial. The key is just to be civil, intellectually honest and source things - and if something gets to you too much, stay away or take a break.
465:
1619:, merely to the Knowledge (XXG) articles on the newspapers. And the Plain Dealer's online archives do not come up with any sources to verify the claims.
1832:
1609:
668:- shows a good record of being able to get along with other editors, especially in some controversial areas, and has good answers to questions too. --
435:
526:, as I don't see anything within the user's contributions which might indicate a problem. Answers to the questions more than satisfactory. Cheers,
163:
as a list of articles to pay attention to - as an editor, I know that's the best place to find likely vandalism or just articles in need of love.
1247:
I actually find this user's approach to stressful situations to be one of the best I have seen, and find the opposition below strange. A look at
217:
I was already trying to solve editing dispute by looking for sources. In the end, I really believe the best dispute resolution isn't found at
371:
censorship. Personally, I'd rather do away with them a guess, but this is not really something I've been involved with, so I might be wrong.
1317:
I think that's negligible and it's just one's comprehension of the word. The candidate has more than proven they are up for the task. --
1251:
even suggests this candidate's approach (step away for a while). Support for being a good, level-headed, experienced and decidated user.
1525:
I'd much rather see an admin cool down than act when 'unsettled' for 5 days. What do you consider a reasonable amount of stress leave?
33:
17:
1194:. I think you will make a fine admin. I am particularly impressed with your response to question 3 and how you've handled yourself at
422:
1761:
in the past - I just can't really put a handle on this, but there's not a lot here that cries out for the tools and demotion. Sorry.
459:
352:
331:
1198:
and its archives. I just hope you'll not let janitorial tasks get in the way of your most noble endeavour ... sourcing. ;) Cheers,
792:
this guy seems to know his stuff, I am impressed by his knowledge and handling of conflict, I'd like to have this guy as an admin--
160:
1370:
I agree with you to certain extent. The RfA you mentioned really was a messy situation; I felt it should have succeeded. --
391:
213:
of my editing has increased with time, but you can see it pretty early on too - the more recent examples are just clearer -
429:
1413:
947:
634:
549:
Nice answers, plenty of experience, it would be nicer to see a higher edit sumamry usage but I'll not be picky. Regards —
129:
Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve
Knowledge (XXG) as an administrator. You may wish to answer the following
968:
793:
743:
489:
415:
294:
90:
76:
1603:
557:
488:
Please keep criticism constructive and polite. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review
872:
1292:. Anyone who honestly sees admin tools as a promotion is not fit to be an admin and does not understand that
830:
870:- meets all usual criteria for adminship, and the opposers' reasons (with respect) seem somewhat pedantic.
1595:
1555:
1531:
1431:
1388:
963:
903:
810:
1506:
1239:
1084:
1011:
656:
550:
349:
325:
1812:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the talk page of either
1544:
1371:
1318:
1181:
580:
1754:
1513:
877:
638:
628:
1662:
1620:
1582:
1166:
1036:
977:
825:
698:- I tried to find something that I didn't like, and I couldn't. Given the fact that the nominee
1798:
1778:
1735:
1719:
1705:
1678:
1665:
1655:
1623:
1585:
1562:
1549:
1537:
1520:
1467:
1437:
1419:
1394:
1376:
1365:
1333:
1323:
1312:
1271:
1259:
1242:
1230:
1204:
1186:
1169:
1150:
1128:
1109:
1098:
1086:
1072:
1039:
1025:
1013:
997:
985:
971:
953:
925:
892:
880:
862:
854:
835:
816:
796:
784:
768:
753:
706:
690:
672:
660:
643:
619:
607:
585:
571:
541:
518:
480:
356:
311:
284:
116:
97:
651:- A very good Editor and experienced too and the answers to the questions..mind blowing :P...--
1526:
1426:
1407:
1383:
1200:
1147:
941:
805:
703:
594:
206:
702:
stayed calm and neutral in some fairly controversial articles, definitely a good candidate.
151:
1729:
1699:
1599:
1081:
1006:
994:
850:
765:
653:
346:
321:
147:
1771:
1499:
1460:
1358:
1305:
1289:
1213:
1065:
531:
409:
191:
84:
70:
1644:
1248:
1005:, seen edits and conversations on talk pages, and seems to be very receptive and fair. --
218:
264:
If I've learnt anything, it's that edit conflicts are unavoidable. Every article, from
1716:
1178:
1106:
777:
681:
515:
273:
183:
94:
1670:
Fair enough - I just want to ask anyone who's considering judging me based on this to
1640:
1635:
222:
1826:
1491:
per Q3 answer. An admin can't just take 5 days off because of a stressful incident.
1195:
1159:
1125:
1115:
1033:
1022:
112:
Merci
Beaucoup - I accept. Always nice to know someone thinks you're a good editor.
1591:
1559:
1401:
1268:
1143:
935:
889:
859:
1330:
1253:
845:
669:
616:
187:
1447:
actually. I have a view and it's pretty straight forward. In what way are your
1080:
Makes informed choices and asks for information. Doesn't go off half cocked.
472:
Okay, since I've received a lot of complaints, I've switched my preferences to
1765:
1675:
1652:
1492:
1454:
1448:
1352:
1299:
1049:
717:
527:
477:
405:
387:
372:
308:
281:
226:
164:
113:
80:
66:
1806:
The above adminship discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion.
1794:
246:
182:
As an editor, I think my best skill is clearly my sourcing of articles.
265:
1816:
or the nominated user). No further edits should be made to this page.
199:
56:
1788:
I wonder a little about the (first) AfD for Beat Up a White Kid Day
776:
I know that this is a cliche but already thought you were a admin --
888:
Good mainspace contribs, seems he will be a mature administrator.
269:
1118:
277:
59:
176:
What are your best contributions to
Knowledge (XXG), and why?
1790:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles_for_deletion/Beat_Up_a_White_Kid_Day
1674:, where several of those links to the archive are presented.
1578:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Beat Up a White Kid Day
340:
After a recent MfD, many
Wikipedians are debating the use of
104:
Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:
579:
per the nominator. I'd trust this user with the tools. --
29:
The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a
1607:
1095:
900:- I think WilyD is fit to be an admin, and then some.
453:
447:
441:
254:
250:
214:
202:
195:
1288:
Changing from "Neutral to weak support" to oppose per
1094:
this trustworthy person to become an administrator.
190:
are two articles I've essentially written alone, and
826:
1451:at me helping this RfA and the 'pedia as a whole?
1063:
1050:
1639:then you're right to say that we disagree about
1628:If it's your contention that sources need to be
133:questions to provide guidance for participants:
140:What admin work do you intend to take part in?
194:was unsourced when I found it for instance.
8:
1340:No argument over semantics. The question is
1443:"taking a jab" to be a personal attack at
831:
1021:Nothing to suggest will abuse the tools.
1267:per all of the positive comments above.
1158:A very experienced user. Good luck. --
18:Knowledge (XXG):Requests for adminship
843:Good editor with no reason to oppose
7:
1119:
1114:Moved to support - obvious error. -
1753:Poor edit summary use (contrary to
530:
24:
1833:Successful requests for adminship
824:A good person to have the tools.
1214:
1142:Seems to know which end is up.
744:
732:
729:
726:
723:
718:
684:
1105:Is this in the wrong section?
558:
551:
394:. For the edit count, see the
261:and we were able to get along.
55:Final: (40/4/1); ended 13:58,
1:
1590:I'll admit I do consider the
1514:
1493:
1347:this retracted and recent RfA
1220:
1120:
150:and dealing with requests at
1751:Neutral towards weak support
1507:
1224:
778:
745:
719:
474:Prompt if edit summary blank
1500:
490:Special:Contributions/WilyD
390:'s edit summary usage with
345:
295:User:William Henry Harrison
125:Questions for the candidate
1849:
1672:look at the AfD discussion
1604:New Orleans Times Picayune
198:I am adding citations to
1809:Please do not modify it.
1799:03:56, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
1779:19:09, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
1736:00:59, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
1720:00:24, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
1706:00:15, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
1679:23:00, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
1666:21:44, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
1656:21:36, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
1624:21:18, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
1586:02:12, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
1563:20:19, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
1550:03:30, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
1538:02:08, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
1521:01:45, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
1468:11:02, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
1438:10:49, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
1420:22:38, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
1395:22:27, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
1377:21:02, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
1366:20:17, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
1334:20:11, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
1324:20:07, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
1313:19:44, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
1272:11:13, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
1260:10:42, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
1243:20:43, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
1231:20:25, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
1205:02:55, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
1187:06:31, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
1170:03:15, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
1151:02:32, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
1129:22:25, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
1110:08:54, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
1099:04:00, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
1087:20:04, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
1073:13:59, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
1040:12:16, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
1026:09:57, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
1014:01:34, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
998:12:25, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
986:09:53, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
972:23:34, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
954:22:22, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
926:21:34, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
893:20:19, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
881:16:03, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
863:13:47, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
855:09:01, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
836:03:01, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
817:02:11, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
797:00:47, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
785:21:41, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
769:21:39, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
754:21:22, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
707:20:47, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
691:20:33, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
673:20:11, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
661:19:00, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
644:18:16, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
620:17:27, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
608:17:15, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
586:16:23, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
572:15:49, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
542:15:44, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
519:15:13, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
481:21:44, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
357:01:29, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
312:16:06, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
285:15:07, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
117:14:14, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
98:13:58, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
1576:per WilyD's actions at
320:Optional question from
293:Optional question from
161:Special:Unwatched Pages
39:Please do not modify it
1596:Cleveland Plain Dealer
794:William Henry Harrison
615:- trustworthy editor.
34:request for adminship
1634:merely exist and be
700:never went ballistic
1558:, after all. :-)
1547:
1374:
1321:
984:this candidate! -
583:
492:before commenting.
1777:
1545:
1534:
1466:
1434:
1391:
1372:
1364:
1342:Is it a big deal?
1319:
1311:
1294:it's no big deal.
1184:
1168:
813:
688:
642:
581:
570:
536:
403:Links for WilyD:
209:and so on. This
207:Armenian Genocide
1840:
1820:
1811:
1776:
1774:
1763:
1732:
1702:
1600:Washington Times
1535:
1533:
1518:
1511:
1504:
1497:
1465:
1463:
1452:
1435:
1433:
1392:
1390:
1363:
1361:
1350:
1310:
1308:
1297:
1275:
1256:
1228:
1222:
1218:
1182:
1165:
1162:
1123:
1122:
1071:
1061:
1060:
1055:
970:
961:Works for me. --
921:
918:
915:
912:
909:
906:
879:
875:
853:
848:
833:
828:
814:
812:
782:
756:
750:
749:
738:
737:
734:
731:
728:
725:
686:
682:
659:
633:
604:
601:
564:
562:
555:
540:
534:
469:
428:
381:General comments
355:
342:spoiler warnings
41:
1848:
1847:
1843:
1842:
1841:
1839:
1838:
1837:
1823:
1822:
1821:
1814:this nomination
1807:
1772:
1764:
1730:
1700:
1532:
1461:
1453:
1432:
1389:
1359:
1351:
1306:
1298:
1277:
1254:
1160:
1070:
1056:
1051:
962:
919:
916:
913:
910:
907:
904:
873:
871:
849:
844:
811:
758:
752:
715:
652:
641:
602:
596:
514:as nominator.--
499:
421:
404:
383:
192:Peter Goldreich
127:
52:
37:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
1846:
1844:
1836:
1835:
1825:
1824:
1819:
1818:
1802:
1801:
1782:
1781:
1741:
1740:
1739:
1738:
1723:
1722:
1709:
1708:
1691:
1690:
1689:
1688:
1687:
1686:
1685:
1684:
1683:
1682:
1681:
1571:
1570:
1569:
1568:
1567:
1566:
1565:
1486:
1485:
1484:
1483:
1482:
1481:
1480:
1479:
1478:
1477:
1476:
1475:
1474:
1473:
1472:
1471:
1470:
1326:
1276:
1274:
1262:
1245:
1233:
1207:
1189:
1172:
1153:
1137:
1136:
1135:
1134:
1133:
1132:
1131:
1089:
1075:
1064:
1042:
1028:
1016:
1000:
988:
974:
956:
928:
895:
883:
865:
857:
838:
819:
799:
787:
771:
757:
742:
709:
693:
675:
663:
646:
637:
622:
610:
588:
574:
544:
521:
503:
502:
498:
495:
485:
484:
483:
470:
400:
399:
392:mathbot's tool
382:
379:
378:
377:
376:
375:
335:
317:
316:
315:
314:
297:
290:
289:
288:
287:
274:Coriolis force
262:
232:
231:
230:
229:
205:I am sourcing
184:Scott Tremaine
170:
169:
168:
167:
156:Mop & Pail
146:Well, closing
126:
123:
122:
121:
120:
119:
107:
106:
51:
46:
45:
44:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1845:
1834:
1831:
1830:
1828:
1817:
1815:
1810:
1804:
1803:
1800:
1797:
1796:
1791:
1787:
1784:
1783:
1780:
1775:
1769:
1768:
1762:
1760:
1756:
1752:
1748:
1747:
1746:
1745:
1737:
1734:
1733:
1725:
1724:
1721:
1718:
1713:
1712:
1711:
1710:
1707:
1704:
1703:
1695:
1692:
1680:
1677:
1673:
1669:
1668:
1667:
1664:
1663:Corvus cornix
1659:
1658:
1657:
1654:
1650:
1646:
1642:
1638:
1637:
1631:
1627:
1626:
1625:
1622:
1621:Corvus cornix
1618:
1617:
1612:
1611:
1610:
1608:
1605:
1601:
1597:
1593:
1589:
1588:
1587:
1584:
1583:Corvus cornix
1579:
1575:
1572:
1564:
1561:
1557:
1553:
1552:
1551:
1548:
1541:
1540:
1539:
1536:
1530:
1529:
1524:
1523:
1522:
1519:
1517:
1512:
1510:
1505:
1503:
1498:
1496:
1490:
1487:
1469:
1464:
1458:
1457:
1450:
1446:
1441:
1440:
1439:
1436:
1430:
1429:
1423:
1422:
1421:
1418:
1416:
1412:
1410:
1406:
1404:
1398:
1397:
1396:
1393:
1387:
1386:
1380:
1379:
1378:
1375:
1369:
1368:
1367:
1362:
1356:
1355:
1348:
1343:
1339:
1338:
1337:
1336:
1335:
1332:
1327:
1325:
1322:
1316:
1315:
1314:
1309:
1303:
1302:
1295:
1291:
1287:
1284:
1283:
1282:
1281:
1273:
1270:
1266:
1263:
1261:
1258:
1257:
1250:
1246:
1244:
1241:
1237:
1234:
1232:
1229:
1227:
1223:
1217:
1211:
1208:
1206:
1203:
1202:
1197:
1196:Talk:Muhammad
1193:
1190:
1188:
1185:
1180:
1176:
1173:
1171:
1167:
1163:
1157:
1154:
1152:
1149:
1145:
1141:
1138:
1130:
1127:
1124:
1117:
1113:
1112:
1111:
1108:
1104:
1103:
1102:
1101:
1100:
1097:
1093:
1090:
1088:
1085:
1083:
1079:
1076:
1074:
1069:
1068:
1062:
1059:
1054:
1046:
1043:
1041:
1038:
1035:
1032:
1029:
1027:
1024:
1020:
1017:
1015:
1012:
1010:
1009:
1004:
1001:
999:
996:
992:
989:
987:
983:
979:
978:Mailer Diablo
975:
973:
969:
967:
966:
960:
957:
955:
952:
950:
946:
944:
940:
938:
932:
929:
927:
924:
923:
922:
899:
896:
894:
891:
887:
884:
882:
878:
876:
869:
866:
864:
861:
858:
856:
852:
847:
842:
839:
837:
834:
829:
823:
820:
818:
815:
809:
808:
803:
800:
798:
795:
791:
788:
786:
783:
781:
775:
772:
770:
767:
762:
759:
755:
751:
748:
740:
739:
736:
735:
713:
710:
708:
705:
701:
697:
694:
692:
689:
687:
679:
676:
674:
671:
667:
664:
662:
658:
655:
650:
647:
645:
640:
636:
632:
631:
626:
623:
621:
618:
614:
611:
609:
606:
605:
599:
592:
589:
587:
584:
578:
575:
573:
568:
563:
561:
556:
554:
553:The Sunshine
548:
545:
543:
539:
538:
529:
525:
522:
520:
517:
513:
510:
509:
508:
507:
501:
500:
496:
494:
493:
491:
482:
479:
475:
471:
467:
464:
461:
458:
455:
452:
449:
446:
443:
440:
437:
434:
431:
427:
424:
420:
417:
414:
411:
407:
402:
401:
397:
393:
389:
385:
384:
380:
374:
370:
365:
360:
359:
358:
354:
351:
348:
343:
339:
336:
333:
330:
327:
323:
319:
318:
313:
310:
305:
304:
301:
298:
296:
292:
291:
286:
283:
279:
275:
271:
267:
263:
260:
256:
252:
248:
243:
240:
239:
237:
234:
233:
228:
224:
220:
216:
212:
208:
204:
201:
197:
193:
189:
185:
181:
178:
177:
175:
172:
171:
166:
162:
157:
153:
149:
145:
142:
141:
139:
136:
135:
134:
132:
124:
118:
115:
111:
110:
109:
108:
105:
102:
101:
100:
99:
96:
92:
89:
86:
82:
78:
75:
72:
68:
64:
63:
61:
58:
50:
47:
43:
40:
35:
32:
27:
26:
19:
1808:
1805:
1793:
1785:
1766:
1758:
1750:
1749:
1743:
1742:
1728:
1698:
1693:
1648:
1633:
1632:rather than
1629:
1615:
1614:
1592:Miami Herald
1573:
1528:the_undertow
1527:
1515:
1508:
1501:
1494:
1488:
1455:
1444:
1428:the_undertow
1427:
1414:
1408:
1402:
1385:the_undertow
1384:
1353:
1341:
1300:
1293:
1285:
1279:
1278:
1264:
1252:
1235:
1225:
1219:
1215:
1212:per above.
1209:
1201:Black Falcon
1199:
1191:
1174:
1155:
1139:
1091:
1077:
1066:
1057:
1052:
1044:
1030:
1018:
1007:
1002:
990:
981:
964:
958:
948:
942:
936:
930:
902:
901:
897:
885:
867:
840:
821:
807:the_undertow
806:
801:
789:
779:
773:
760:
746:
721:
720:
716:
711:
704:Orangemarlin
699:
695:
683:
677:
665:
648:
629:
624:
612:
597:
595:
590:
576:
566:
559:
552:
546:
532:
523:
511:
505:
504:
487:
486:
473:
462:
456:
450:
444:
438:
432:
425:
418:
412:
368:
363:
337:
328:
299:
258:
241:
235:
215:in June 2006
210:
179:
173:
155:
143:
137:
130:
128:
103:
87:
73:
65:
54:
53:
48:
38:
30:
28:
1731:Black Harry
1701:Black Harry
1449:allegations
1096:Yamaguchi先生
1082:jbolden1517
1008:Hojimachong
995:ChazBeckett
766:Newyorkbrad
567:Tellyaddict
347:Blackjack48
322:Blackjack48
188:Alar Toomre
1651:reasons.
1636:verifiable
497:Discussion
31:successful
1727:backlog.
1717:Isotope23
1715:stress.--
1630:linked to
1296:. Sorry.
1179:Sjakkalle
780:St.daniel
685:ITAQALLAH
516:Isotope23
448:block log
396:talk page
221:, but at
95:Isotope23
1827:Category
1616:articles
1602:and the
1546:Phoenix2
1373:Phoenix2
1320:Phoenix2
1265:Support
1183:(Check!)
1161:FayssalF
1034:Garion96
1023:Davewild
959:Support:
747:Contribs
582:Phoenix2
416:contribs
332:contribs
247:Muhammad
131:optional
91:contribs
77:contribs
1786:Neutral
1755:Nenyedi
1744:Neutral
1560:daveh4h
1269:Steveo2
1236:Support
1210:Support
1192:Support
1175:Support
1156:Support
1140:Support
1107:Charlie
1092:Support
1078:Support
1045:Support
1031:Support
1019:Support
1003:Support
991:Support
982:approve
931:Support
898:Support
890:daveh4h
886:Support
868:Support
860:Terence
841:Support
827:Captain
822:Support
802:Support
790:Support
774:Support
761:Support
712:Support
696:Support
678:Support
666:Support
649:Support
630:Nenyedi
625:Support
613:Support
591:Support
577:Support
565:(a.k.a
547:Support
524:Support
512:Support
506:Support
423:deleted
272:, from
266:Bathtub
152:WP:RFPP
148:WP:XfDs
1694:Oppose
1574:Oppose
1556:Allies
1489:Oppose
1331:Elkman
1286:Oppose
1280:Oppose
1255:Daniel
1116:hahnch
1037:(talk)
980:and I
965:Random
874:Walton
670:Elkman
657:styles
617:Addhoc
200:AU Mic
57:1 June
1773:Chat
1767:Pedro
1759:wrong
1676:WilyD
1653:WilyD
1649:false
1645:WP:RS
1462:Chat
1456:Pedro
1360:Chat
1354:Pedro
1307:Chat
1301:Pedro
1249:WP:DR
1148:wiser
1144:older
832:panda
654:Comet
635:Deeds
528:Lanky
478:WilyD
430:count
406:WilyD
388:WilyD
373:WilyD
309:WilyD
282:WilyD
270:Jihad
259:heard
227:WilyD
219:WP:RD
211:style
165:WilyD
114:WilyD
81:WilyD
67:WilyD
62:(UTC)
49:WilyD
16:<
1643:and
1641:WP:V
1290:this
1216:Buck
1067:talk
1053:Jody
976:I'm
908:e Tr
535:YELL
460:rfar
442:logs
410:talk
386:See
369:mild
364:used
326:talk
278:Dirt
255:this
251:this
223:WP:V
203:Here
196:Here
186:and
85:talk
79:) -
71:talk
60:2007
1795:DGG
1226:ofg
1221:ets
920:ist
917:man
911:ans
851:169
846:Lmc
560:Man
466:spi
436:AfD
276:to
268:to
253:to
1829::
1770:|
1598:,
1594:,
1502:gg
1495:G1
1459:|
1445:me
1411:tc
1405:hs
1400:--
1357:|
1329:--
1304:|
1240:13
1164:-
1146:≠
945:tc
939:hs
914:hu
905:Th
741:|
603:as
476:.
454:lu
338:6.
300:4.
242:A:
236:3.
180:A:
174:2.
144:A:
138:1.
36:.
1516:!
1509:y
1417:y
1415:h
1409:i
1403:W
1126:n
1121:e
1058:B
951:y
949:h
943:i
937:W
733:n
730:e
727:f
724:r
722:O
639:@
600:n
598:A
569:)
537:)
533:(
468:)
463:·
457:·
451:·
445:·
439:·
433:·
426:·
419:·
413:·
408:(
398:.
353:♣
350:♠
334:)
329:·
324:(
88:·
83:(
74:·
69:(
42:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.