Knowledge (XXG):Requests for adminship/Wrp103

235:- I've contributed to a number of FF articles (my favorite RPG ... how many 60-somethings have you heard say that? ;^) The reason I list this article is because it is a good example of what I call "content creep". IMHO, an article like this one should present an overview of the series, pointing the reader to other articles for more information. There are two types of readers - somebody who has never played any FF games and wants to know what all the fuss is about, and somebody like me who has played every game multiple times, has purchased all the re-releases, and even bought platforms simply because a FF title was there. ;^) The casual reader only wants to know an overview of the topic, and that is the audience that I try to focus on. There are some, however, that feel the need to include every detail, exception, etc. known to mankind. This leads to a ton of detail that probably drives a lot of casual readers away. I originally tried to simply remove the detail, but it would crop up again within a few weeks. What I have since tried to do is move the details down to footnotes and/or to separate articles and include a pointer so that the casual reader can simply read the content and the fans can find all the juicy details. Every so often, I do a major purge of the detail sections and create a new page or a new section on some detailed page. This illustrates one of my basic approaches to conflict: that rather than confronting content creep directly, I diverted it into a footnote or a more detailed article. Hopefully, the article meets the needs of both types of readers. 577:, I don't believe I violated it since I'm not paid for my work on the site. I also believe my contributions (after the first few) were accurate and NPOV. I can see where others might think COI apply (especially the "too close" principle), and would encourage them to examine the article and challenge or remove any sections they think are inappropriate. While I realize the reason for COI, I am also a firm believer of ignoring all rules when necessary. Each of us (I assume) write about articles that we care about and have some amount of expertise and/or are interested in. I also believe that I am able to separate my thoughts and feelings from what I write in an article. I think that is a basic principle behind NPOV. There needs to be a balance between interest and bias. I believe that Cheryl Wheeler is one of the greatest singer/songwriters around. I certainly can't say that in the article, even though I can find references that make that claim (including ones that I didn't create! ;^) If you look at the history for that article, the last content edit I made was Oct 2006, except for a minor correction to somebody's description of a song that was made Feb 2007. It is unlikely that I would add any more significant content to the article, although I will continue to monitor it. 1896:, his response was to start my nomination. I hadn't planned on applying so soon, but since it is "no big deal", I figured that was fine. As explained elsewhere, my nomination started before I had formally accepted it, so this whole thing started off on the wrong foot. The reason I don't know what else I would be doing is because I'm not totally sure what the possibilities are, since I haven't finished reading all the admin docs. I can tell you, however, that I am looking for ways to help Knowledge (XXG) (which is my motivation for the application) but at the same time, I'm not the type to go "Gee, I wonder what this button does?" ;^) Regardless of what capabilities I have, I will only use them if I am confident I know what I'm doing. From what I have read, admin is given to people that can be trusted. I think I am such a person, and so I have applied. 693:. It has turned into nothing more than a list of favorite unknowns and a few people others have heard of. :-( I have tried several times to strip it down, but it kept creeping back. I finally added (or was it someone else?) a comment that they couldn't add any more without discussing them on the talk page. That has limited content creep (see FF above), but the article is still a mess. I wish I had more time to work on this, but until we can get a consensus of what the article is about, it will continue to be a mess. Part of the problem is that half of us use the term for artists who travel the coffee-house and folk festival circuit, while others consider anyone who performs and has written a song. Both definitions are valid, and unfortunately both use the same term for their definitions. 500:

that picture is one of a number of images that he sent me top post on the website for promoters, and knows that I have a clause on my website that anything can be used to promote Cheryl, I wasn't worried. The fair use description certainly fit her, so I uploaded the image. I should also point out (and encourage you to double check it by visiting the web site) that I don't get paid for maintaining that web site. In fact, her manager was less than enthusiastic when I started. (To be fair, this was long before the web and back in the rec.music.folk days of yesteryear. ;^) I would hope I haven't done any POV edits on any of those pages (except, of course, for my first few edits. ;^) I will go into more detail later.

2251:, but in this case your concern is unfounded. There has been some discussion within a small group of long-time editors/admins as to his nomination, and I left a note on a couple of pages letting them know that I had gone ahead with the nomination. That's not canvassing. I'm a long-time admin (since 2004), but honestly I don't review the RfA pages daily to see when someone of interest gets nominated, so I appreciate being clued in on important nominations of people I've worked with, when the person cluing me in knows I have an interest. I've received word about some very great and prolific admins this way, and I wouldn't have known unless somebody told me. 2356:

guessing, based on some statistics and my (possibly bogus) comments. One way to do this is to create a template that we can use to tag the articles that the candidate has performed multiple edits on within some recent period. The tag could say something like "User XXX has been nominated to become an administrator. You may express your support or concerns by clicking on this link." The avoids the issue of canvassing for votes, since those with positive and negative experiences could respond. Personally, I would tend to ignore the positive responses but explore the negative ones (which would probably be more frequent, anyway.)

282:

people who seem incapable of understanding NPOV, and the rest of us have trouble maintaining it, especially when it involves our belief systems. There are some that seem to believe NPOV means something that they agree with. IMHO, many times they aren't deliberately creating POV edits, they just don't recognize alternative ways a statement can be interpreted. And while there are some who are strong POV pushers, I give most people the benefit of the doubt for as long as possible. Since the question asks about future behavior, I should add that I expect to continue to deal respectfully with people.

535:

the entire content was generated by me, but Cheryl, her manager, her agent, and her record label all referred to my site as Cheryl's site. Once her manager understood the importance of a web presence, he needed the site to become official. He wanted to pay me, which I again refused, and so we compromised - I still generate the content on my own, but I dropped the catchy title and made it so the casual visitor could easily believe it is a normal official site. I moved the disclaimers to below the fold under the "About" section. You will also find on the bottom of each page the statement:

1900:

watchlist, making sure they don't deteriorate. My schedule can sometimes get hectic, which can limit how much time I have. I have a full-time job and teach part time; I am active in my church 10-20 hours a week; I have a wife, kids, and grandkids that I enjoy being around; and, being 62 years old, I need more sleep than I did when back in my 20's, 30's, and 40's. Nevertheless, I have been committed to spending time on Knowledge (XXG), promoting it to others, etc. I fully expect to continue doing what I can to make Knowledge (XXG) better, regardless of the outcome of this nomination.

363:

warning (i.e., not shortly after the last warning and they might have missed it), I will nominate them. Part 2 - According to the admin guide, in addition to the criteria I normally use to submit, any nominations that involve things other than straight vandalism should be handled elsewhere (like 3RR, edit wars, pov, etc.) I would check the actual edits associated with the warnings, and if it wasn't obvious, I would probably also check out the person who reported, just to make sure there isn't a personality issue. Did I answer your question sufficiently?

967:

support of a mainframe O/S (IBM TSS when at CMU), worked on Unix internals when at Bell of PA (not Bell Labs, a local department - and not the kernel), and have been a system administrator a number of times. This means that I am used to having (and respect) powerful tools, and know what it is like to be able to crash machines, destroy data, and cause all kinds of havoc for large numbers of people. Having the admin tools won't go to my head, and wherever possible, I would probably set up a testbed under my user page to try things out for the first time.

858:

want to control, etc. Such motivations would be an excellent reason to discourage and/or oppose such a nomination. IMHO, if they feel they must do something to become an administrator (other than apply, of course) then I would be suspicious / nervous. While it makes sense to wonder if you are ready to become an admin, doing something specifically to increase your chances is like doing charity work so that others will think well of you. Doing the right thing for the wrong reason cancels out much of the good that could otherwise be done.

560:

OR, which raised an interesting situation. I suppose I could have referenced my web site as a source, but that didn't seem right, so I left the article unsourced. I really can't justify removing any of the article because I don't have references. IMHO, somebody could go to the site, find the information and add a reference to the article. If anyone else were writing the article, they could go to the site, summarize what they read and add a reference to the site. IMHO that would be perfectly acceptable.

894:

eyes to other areas that will be of interest to me. For example, I only recently joined the welcoming committee - not because I wasn't interested, but I hadn't known about it. I've been welcoming people for a long time, but didn't think to look for a group to join. One of the things I like about Knowledge (XXG) is that you can do the right thing pretty much whenever you want - revert vandalism, welcome and/or help people, etc. I guess that is one reason why I didn't consider adminship earlier.

836:

painless, I could see that it could be a problem for people who lack self-confidence, are easily offended, etc. For example, the complaints about my lack of editing history in WP space is somewhat surprising, but to me it is an interesting situation; to others it could be a crushing blow. If the potential candidate has seemed somewhat sensitive in past situations, then I might even discourage them from applying, or at least warn them that there will be people who will oppose and criticize them.

1982:- insufficient Wikispace involvement and a weak answer to Q1, which is important. I liked the second paragraph of your answer, but I like it as an answer to a question that wasn't asked. I'm not keen on opposes based on "no need of the tools", but you've hardly asserted a solid case, particularly as AIV has fewer backlog problems these days. I'll happily support you in a future RfA if you participate in XfD and other Wikispace issues and come back with a clearer sense of what you 776:, the desire for citations has to be balanced with the availability of citations. Since the article is about an ongoing series, any citation you use will (or at least can) become outdated when the next title in that series is released. While it is very easy to find reviews and articles about a specific FF title, it is much harder to find one specifically about the entire series, and when found, you would have to check the date to determine if it is obsolete or not. 316:. The original page got deleted as a vanity page, so I created a new one that got flagged for deletion again. I'm not proud, so I asked for help from several folks who had helped with other issues in the past. Fortunately, the page was kept (mostly thanks to others). If you read the discussion page for the second AfD nomination, you will see a number of my comments responding to critics. That should give you an idea of how I deal with others. 1078:- adminship is no big deal. If a user wants to do nothing but patrol backlogs all day, that's great. But if someone is mainly an article writer and would do little other than the occasional blocking of a vandal or deletion of a nonsense page, that's fine too. The question is do we trust him not to abuse the tools, not whether he can recite the image use policy backwards in Spanish while balancing a copy of the GFDL on his nose. -- 2022:(although I do not agree with the concept of acceptance by a project before adminship as it seems to push this slight weird but working wiki democracy towards a form of party politics), and I approved of your reasoning that if you don't get the mop you will just go back to doing what you are doing now. Total edits in both mainspace and wikispace are too low for me to consider you are ready just now.-- 624:. I think that if you were to examine my edit history, you would be hard pressed to find anywhere that I reacted to somebody changing what I wrote, except for factual and POV disputes. Actually, there are a number of times when I deliberately add some poorly worded statement hoping that somebody will come along later and make it sound better. 718:

evasive, I am serious about my comment that I am volunteering to help. I am the type of person that when I see an odd item in the wrong place in the supermarket will carry the item over to where it belongs. I don't have a preconceived notion of where I could best help, and am (and will continue to be) open to any and all suggestions.

2195: 1803:

another editor is given the tools. In this specific case, it is quite reasonable to believe that we take a risk every time we promote an admin, and a lack of need for tools indicates that the risk is not worth taking, so not only is David inappropriately claiming authority that he does not have, he also is just plain wrong.

2287:

I would be glad to answer any questions you might have to help you decide. As for your comment about things I'm not interested in, I hope I would use care to make sure whatever I do is correct, regardless of whether or not I find it exciting. Over the years, I have learned ways to make all kinds of

2272:

That isn't really the big issue. My problem is more that everyone involved here seems to have an oddly small amount of experience for 3 years. Like I said, this just means that I have to study it, not that I am certain to withold support (and I wouldn't blame the candidate for other people's problems

2170:

heard of Wheeler--and seen half a dozen of her shows. Artists like this widely distribute their photo to be used by concert promoters in newspapers, posters, and on websites. While I think you are correct about image licences, Bill certianly hasn't put Knowledge (XXG) into any "real-world" risk and

1962:

They could've opposed allowing the candidate to do deletion tasks until they got the experience. I don't see why we should not allow someone to work in areas they are knowledgeable in if they happen to not have experience in one of the other fields. Take me, I rarely touch page protection unless it's

1909:

Changing !vote to "Support" based on the answer above. My chief concern was that the nominee was ambivalent towards getting the tools, and that would lead to ambivalence when judging when and how to use them. Based on Bill answer above, it seems that this impression was more due to the rapid progress

1891:

Let me clarify - I didn't say I wasn't interested in doing other, equally important tasks and backlogs; I said I wasn't sure what else I would be doing. I wasn't going to mention this, but based on some other comments, I think it is appropriate. I had asked several people what they thought about me

1802:

As David Gerard has not been chosen by the community to determine what arguments are valid or not, this comment by him and all other equivalent ones should be disregarded. It is the right of each editor to decide what they consider significant in determining whether the project will be better off if

215:

is the article that got me started at Knowledge (XXG). I am a big fan and run her web site. I checked out the article (which was a bare stub) and added significant content ... which then got mostly reverted. ;^) Fortunately, the person who ripped my contribution to shreds did it gently, and I have

197:

That is kinda like asking me which of my grandchildren I like best. ;^) I tend to contribute towards articles that are of interest to me, and therefore try to make them as good as possible. I have a wide range of interests, and so my watchlist has been getting longer and longer, so in some cases my

2413:

The honest answer is that I'm not totally sure what I would do as an admin. At a minimum, I would continue what I have been doing. I would also explore other areas and see where I can best contribute. I would be surprised if you were satisfied with that answer. Frankly, I'm not satisfied with it,

559:

My initial few edits were the first I made on Knowledge (XXG) and didn't really understand any of the policies. My first version was very fan-related, but after it got ripped apart, I sort of figured out what was wanted, and continued to build the initial article from there. Later, I learned about

534:

you will see that I am totally responsible for the contents of the website. I don't receive directions from Cheryl or her manager for any content I write (although Cheryl will point out factual errors ever so often). Until recently, I called it "The Unofficial Official Cheryl Wheeler Site" because

499:

As for Cheryl, I take great pains to make sure people know that I run her website, which is why I stated that above when I listed her article, and why I added that comment to the image upload. The short answer for the image is that I asked her manager for permission but never got a response. Since

259:

that allows me to copy and paste templates into talk pages. I also included some tutorial text for anyone who might be interested. Once somebody vandalizes a page on my watchlist I leave them a user warning message, add them to my watchlist, and then check their other contributions to see if there

2084:

be considered vandalism. I then gave the example of vandals that keep removing recent warning messages in order to hide the fact that they previously vandalized, and thus avoid getting blocked. I've run into a couple of these folks, BTW. I revert their deletions and explain why they shouldn't do

793:

indicates that Knowledge (XXG) is not a "how to" source, but it doesn't make a lot of sense to have an article about a knot or dance without some description of how you make/do it. Every so often, somebody tries to claim that gamefaqs isn't an appropriate site to link to because it has a blog. If

717:

activities that I would not do; I simply don't know enough about all of them to give an answer that I would be willing to live with. I could make up something nice about "I plan to be more active in AFD, CSD, FOOBAR, and ZORK", but I would rather give you an honest answer. At the risk of sounding

2125:

That is one way to interpret it, although IMHO it has never escalated into anything close to an edit war. If a known vandal keeps deleting their uw messages in order to avoid getting higher level messages, I will watch them like a hawk and assign the appropriate level warning messages. I had one

1999:

I appreciate your comments, and don't think they were harsh. Frankly, I'm not trying to present a solid case; I am more volunteering to help out. If the end result is "no", then I will continue to do what I've been doing (although this has opened my eyes up to a number of other areas that I will

857:

I just realized I didn't address your question about what advice I would give to somebody who wanted to become an administrator. The first question I would ask them is "why do you want to become one?" I suspect that some view admin as an endorsement of some sort, or it makes them important, they

835:

I don't feel I have a sufficient grasp of all the duties/capabilities of an admin to answer that question for sure. I would most likely wait for somebody to ask me about being an admin rather than go out and try to convince people to become one. Although this particular nomination has been quite

1512:

Adminship should be available to good experienced editors regardless of how frequent we think they will use the tools. Those steeped in Knowledge (XXG) bureaucracy aren't the only ones capable of making intelligent wise decisions. Those that have shown maturity in handling conflicts and edit with

899:

I have been teaching for a long time. I enjoy teaching complex, intellectually challenging courses, but I also enjoy helping newbies learn. IMHO, there is nothing better than seeing the light come on in the eyes of somebody who just grokked a difficult subject. That is one reason why I like to

893:

There are many areas of Knowledge (XXG) that I am not familiar with. Not because I'm not interested, but more because I tend to focus on whatever I'm doing, and so far my activities have filled up most of my spare time. I enjoy learning new things, and expect this application process to open my

1872:

Besides vandal-fighting, the nominee hasn't expressed much interest in tackling some of the other, equally as important tasks and backlogs. Plus, the relatively low number of edits in the WP and WP Talk spaces is troubling, as that's where a lot of the dirty work of running this place gets done.

468:

I hope you don't mind, but I will answer these questions in two phases. As I mentioned elsewhere, I hadn't planned on getting nominated at this point, and it turns out this is one of the worst weeks for me to be responsive here. (My boss just gave me a rush program to write and my evenings are

362:

Let me answer that in two parts. The criteria I use to nominate someone is that they have clearly been vandalizing, and have been given enough warnings in a reasonably short length of time (warnings from a couple weeks/months ago wouldn't count.) Then, if they clearly vandalize after the final

281:

I firmly believe that the only person who can give me stress is myself. We can't control what happens to us, but we can control how we react to it. So no, I haven't gotten any stress from users, but yes, I have had a number of editing conflicts over the years. I have found that there are some

2403:

Reviewing your contributions, I see that you are excellent at warning vandals and issuing the appropriate tag levels on their Talk pages; more worrying is the paucity of contributions to the policy space in your time here. Most of the edits I see are to AIV and ArbCom nominations. You need to

2355:

While I don't presume to speak for Kelly, the goal appears to get feedback from people with experience from the candidate. That sounds like a great idea to me. Looking at the people voting, only a couple have actually worked with me and have a good idea of what I am like. The rest of you are

1899:

As for the number of edits, part of that is because of my tendency to focus on whatever I'm currently doing. I don't tend to wander around poking at things to see what is there. Once I'm aware of something, I will research it and learn what I can. I spend a lot of time monitoring pages on my

966:

Some have expressed concern about my lack of experience in certain areas. While I don't agree that is a problem, I can certainly understand the concerns. Perhaps it would help to know that I am a software engineer, have been programming since the 1960's; I have been solely responsible for the

384:

BigDT's comment about reciting "image use policy backwards" made me giggle so much I wondered if it was an inside joke, so I decided to see for myself. I noticed you've uploaded exactly one image on the English Knowledge (XXG) (and apparently do not have an account at Wikimedia Commons). So I

545:

While it is true that I copyright the content, I also allow others to use is. (If you read the handouts at her concerts, they often quote from the site.) Actually, none of the text I added to the Knowledge (XXG) article were copied from the site, although the content is basically the

2033:

I appreciate your comments. I'm not sure about having a wikiproject endorse a candidate, either, although it would allow people who worked with the candidate to discuss their strengths and weaknesses. That's why I thought posting a notice on recent pages might produce good results.

169:

expect to do is use any administrative abilities related to any pages that I contribute to regularly. I strive for NPOV and feel that might raise conflict of interest issues. There may be some obvious exceptions, of course, but in general I would try to keep out of the way. I am a

2322:

I had a bad habit of not looking at my user page until recently. That top part was one of my first edits, and I haven't touched it for a while. Actually, I only started to use that page recently when I noticed other people who were using their page for bookmarks, copy-paste, etc.

2230:

This is giving me a bad feeling. Two people, both active for more than three years, yet neither seems to have a really keen grasp of Knowledge (XXG). And I had to stop the nominator from messing up this guy's chances by canvassing. I am going to have to study this quite a bit.

841:

If someone is quite happy being an editor and has not expressed any interest in being an admin, why ruin a good thing? Now, if my nomination is approved and I find out there are gaping holes that need to be fixed by more admins, then I might change my mind about that. ;^)

1952:

David should be ignored, as per above. Additionally, this is absolutely a valid concern. Participation in the deletion process is the best possible evidence of how the candidate would be likely to use the deletion tool, which is one of the tools under consideration.

799:

You certainly should not invoke it just because it is convenient, and if others call your reasoning to question, you should probably not try to push the issue. There are lots of things that make sense to one of us but sound completely wacko to the rest of us. ;^)

416:

At that point I almost asked, "If you are the webmaster of a Cheryl Wheeler web site which this image is "from", and since (I would hope) you either own the rights to this image (or maybe some other images) of Cheryl Wheeler (maybe you even know her personally)...

389:, a musician who, is still alive and still "touring extensively". as stated in the article (granted, I have never heard of her). So I was going to ask "Wouldn't it be easy to replace this with a freely-licensed image?" but then I noticed your upload comment: 594:. I must admit that I have a lot of problems with this sometimes. I understand the need for it, and would love to see actual references when practical. There are some cases where finding references can be difficult. You can read some of my comments at 264:

was active, when I got to visit interesting pages. During the few times when I have nothing else to do (or need a break from monitoring recent changes), I will visit random pages. I've even fixed a few obvious typos on topics I knew next to nothing

222:

I am very pleased with the way this article is developing. We have somehow managed to avoid all the POV rancor that often shows up in these kinds of articles. Both sides have been honestly trying to understand the other and create a balanced NPOV

1819:

Limited project-space experience, which an admin really does need. Also, and while this may seem a trivial pint it reflects an understanding of how wikipedia operates, you beglected to accept your RfA nomination. An admin does need to know how RfA

530:

Yes, I know Cheryl and yes, I run her web site. As I said above, I receive no payment for any of what I do. I do, however, receive advance copies of her CDs, she puts me on her guest list, and other perks like that. If you look on her website

2404:

demonstrate a knowledge of the policies and guidelines in at least the XfD areas for a start. Finally, the answer to question one doesn't give me a true impression of what you would do as an admin - just block people who are reported on AIV?

602:

is that when somebody adds something they think is common knowledge but the rest of us don't. It would be great if we could always find references, but in some cases the references themselves are disputed. For example, consider the article

2374:

minor point, I know, but did you accept the nomination? Also, too few edits in Wikispace to show an overall understanding of WP. However, that notwithstanding, your contributions are all positive so with more experience I would support.

1622:. Have noted the editor on many articles and worked with him on several. I've always found him to be responsible and courteous in his interaction with others. He has been particularly attentive in dealing with vandals and new editors. 1312:

While I have concerns about the editors total amount of project space work, the edits in Wikispace and the answers to the questions above demonstrate a good attitude, a decent understanding of policy and an ability to listen to others.

2308:- I see no serious problems with this candidate, although I wish his user page linked to the Knowledge (XXG) articles for e.g. Unisys, instead of external sites. I would likely support if only he were endorsed by a WikiProject. 598:. I have already discussed this issue with my dilemma about Cheryl's article. There is a fine line sometimes between common knowledge and OR, and I struggle with this issue a number of times. What I have found for the 1833:

and me. I asked him to check and, if he thought the answers were detailed enough, to let me know and I would accept the nomination and we could proceed. The next I heard, he had already started the process. ;^)

2163: 2414:

either, but it is accurate. I would rather give you an honest answer rather than make up something that sounds good. I would like to be more involved helping Knowledge (XXG), and this seemed like a good step.

2388:

to check out my answers, and if he thought they were fine, I would formally accept the nomination and then he could start the process. Apparently, he missed that part and started the process and then told me.

766:

makes sense. I realize that isn't being explicit, but that is the rule of thumb that I think should be used. As for when it should not be used, the general rule should be never ... unless you have a good

260:

is any more damage left around. In the process I have learned about a number of topics I probably wouldn't have learned about otherwise (and a few I wish I hadn't. ;^) I had the same kind of fun when the

1753:

Insufficient project-space experience; like Amarkov, I surprised to see so few edits there from someone who has been around for a while. Record is too sparse adequately to judge preparedness for the mop.

432:

So I'd like to get a better feel for how well you understand a handful of polices/guidelines. Of course, nobody really understands all of them, but I'd like to at least know what these ones mean to you:

421:

you have reached some agreement with the actual copyright holder(s). So, if one of these scenarios is true, wouldn't it be easy for you to get at least one photo of Ms. Wheeler released to under a free

152:

I have been fairly active monitoring and reverting vandalism, and plan to continue that activity. I don't understand why some people feel to need to vandalize, but they do. I expect to monitor

2126:

person who insisted they didn't do any vandalism, and I pointed out that somebody did, and suggested that they register and login to avoid getting associated with others that share the same IP.

1433:. Good contributor, excellent temperament. Not every admin needs to be an XfD wonk, and this user can certainly help us with our backlogs, even if simply doesn't need to contribute to them. 303:. The "edit war" itself ran between 5 April and 6 April. As you can see, I try to arrive at a consensus and usually keep snide comments and other non-constructive comments to a minimum. 1064:- I have worked with him a long time and I have always appreciated his level headed approach in working in difficult situations. Were I an admin, I would have recommended him myself. -- 2288:

things interesting that would otherwise drive me crazy. ;^) I expect the same will apply here - I would look over the options and work wherever I think I could to the most good.

2162:

Doesn't your statement on this reflect a somewhat recent change in policy and isn't this confusing in general? (At least, thats what I'm gathering on this after scanning through

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 participants:

822:

If you become an admin, would you encourage any users with the potential to become admins, to request adminship? What is you advice to anyone seeking to become an admin? (

482:). (I am horrible with images - if you go to Cheryl's web site and click on "pictures" you will see "coming soon" which has been there for a while.) Also, my edits to 275:

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?

2435: 887: 92:. He also appears to have fully subscribed to Knowledge (XXG) philosophy. I've seen him take a strong, but very civil and constructive, stand in favor of 2453: 930: 1766:, sorry. Flow of contributions too scarce and unsteady. Knowledge (XXG) space count is too low. Some vandalfight, but no current need for the tools.-- 178:, so I am not unfamiliar with POV arguments. IMHO it would be totally inappropriate for me to use any administrative abilities in any related issues. 1337:, looks sensible enough, and nothing leads me to believe that he'd use (and perhaps accidentally misuse) the tools in areas he's unexperienced with. 900:

welcome people and help newbies figure things out. In many cases, I've had to learn how to do it first, and then help the person who asked for help.

2180:

I realize he uploaded it six months ago, but the policy-based criteria for "fair use" for non-free content have not changed significantly between

1852:

David should be ignored, as above. Limited project space experience is not irrelevant at all, so David is wrong here again. 0 for 2 so far.

1557:, Strong contributor, always uses good judgement. Extensive experience with AfD, etc. should not be a must. Bill will not misuse the tools. - 198:

contributions have been more keeping the article clean (reverting vandalism, fixing formatting issues, etc.) than lots of original content.

1242:- A good contributer who gave sensible and honest answers to the questions, also seems to be able to communicate with other users well. 659:

Excellent questions. If you don't mind, I will also answer this in two phases. Hopefully I will remember to sign these responses. ;^)

1541:. Long-standing and level-headed contributor, risks of enmopping seem very small. BTW, I think the number of supporting editors from 33: 17: 1882:

Does every admin have to have an interest in tackling backlogs? If he blocks one vandal a week, that in and of itself is a service. --

85: 446: 441: 436: 2341:

It is serious. Please see my talk page for further discussion (and please do not derail this or any other RFA for that purpose).

89: 2096:

Exactly. So you are, in effect, edit warring to keep text on a user talk page that the user has read but doesn't want there.

1154:- While they don't seem to have a great need for the tools, they seem very level-headed and unlikely to abuse them as well. 883: 1572: 762:

If you can come up with a good case that the spirit of a rule can best be served by ignoring the letter of the rule, them

1401: 1207: 1186: 942: 401: 81: 1123:

Tough call here. The candidate's experience is not superlative, but given his positive, candid attitude, it's enough.

1351:

Nothing in this user's contrib history makes me assume he would abuse the tools inadvertently, let alone on purpose. —

1164: 595: 342: 191:

Of your articles or contributions to Knowledge (XXG), are there any with which you are particularly pleased, and why?

88:, and has been active in reverting and preventing vandalism, and issuing warning messages. He is also a member of the 1793:

with the tools; a statement "no need for the tools" is an irrelevant opposition criteria and should be disregarded -

405: 1300:. I like the answers to the questions - honesty and thoughtfulness go a long way, as does being a quality editor. 469:

already booked Tues-Fri of this week.) I will give you a brief answer now and a more detailed answer later tonight.

1280: 255:

In addition to articles, I get a great deal of satisfaction stamping out vandalism. ;^) I created a section on my

1461:

I see absolutely no reason why this longstanding editor with a wealth of tech experience shouldn't have the mop.

1373:. Absolutely no sign this user will abuse the extra tools granted to admins. Great editors make great admins. - 84:) - wrp103 (Bill Pringle) has been a trustworthy editor since 2004. He's made over 4000 edits (see edit summary 2405: 1734:, showing honesty is a good sign. Shows knowledge of some policy. Edits are evenly spread. Reasonable answers. 1438: 953:

Way to go, Bill ... impress them with how savy you are here. (I shouldn't try to do this in quick bursts. ;^)

479: 219: 1273: 1019:

be some things that you aren't interested in, and doing them anyway is harmful, both to you and the project. -

637:

My guess is that I gave you waay too much information, but hopefully it will help you understand how I think.

2188:. Unfortunately, neither has Bill's understanding of the policy and the reasons for it. Our goal is a 💕, in 1412:. Excellent answers; head is well-mounted on shoulders. I trust in this candidate's good sense and judgment. 2199: 2151: 1968: 1659: 1500:

Well thought-out answers show he will make sound decisions even in areas he's not currently familiar with. –

1398: 1141: 457: 607:. People can find references to "prove" both sides of the argument, so what is the correct interpretation? 2346: 2313: 2192:. Please take a camera to the next show you attend. Knowledge (XXG) will thank you for it — I know I will 1722: 1455: 1259: 927:

I just noticed this question (sorry about that). I've answered it other places, but to reiterate: "yes".

773: 599: 232: 2376: 1821: 1773: 1632: 1384: 1356: 1068: 1052: 429:

article, which has seen 58 edits, half of them by you, in the three years since you created the article.

2434:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the talk page of either

1584: 1177:- Sensible, enough experience, shows no signs of going nuts with the tools, that's good enough here. 1124: 2189: 1930:- would suggest you try again in 6-8 weeks after participating more fully in the deletion process. 1631:

Been about a bit and not caused any problems, unlikely to start causing them if armed with a mop.--

1514: 1434: 1353: 2418: 2408: 2393: 2379: 2360: 2350: 2336: 2327: 2317: 2292: 2282: 2267: 2240: 2218: 2202: 2175: 2154: 2132: 2120: 2091: 2075: 2041: 2028: 2008: 1994: 1970: 1957: 1947: 1934: 1914: 1904: 1886: 1877: 1856: 1847: 1838: 1824: 1807: 1797: 1784: 1758: 1738: 1726: 1709: 1695: 1674: 1662: 1647: 1635: 1626: 1614: 1598: 1587: 1575: 1561: 1549: 1533: 1519: 1504: 1492: 1480: 1468: 1458: 1450: 1442: 1424: 1404: 1389: 1365: 1361: 1346: 1329: 1317: 1304: 1292: 1263: 1246: 1232: 1223: 1211: 1190: 1169: 1146: 1127: 1115: 1082: 1070: 1056: 1028: 1005: 974: 957: 946: 920: 864: 848: 826: 807: 752: 722: 697: 681: 663: 641: 504: 460: 367: 125: 112: 2215: 2097: 2052: 1964: 1656: 1525: 1136: 385:

examined that image, which tagged as "fair use" which appears to simply convey the likeness of

2342: 2309: 2278: 2236: 2023: 2019: 1944: 1844: 1794: 1735: 1718: 1566: 1465: 1464:

His first paragraph explaining the application of "Ignore all rules" is the best I've seen. --

1255: 1024: 917: 742: 690: 678: 300: 296: 1397:, appears level-headed and unlikely to abuse tools, opposition raises no significant issues. 1288: 93: 2130: 2089: 2038: 1893: 1778: 1596: 1375: 1182: 1065: 971: 938: 862: 846: 804: 478:

First, some minor points. I have actually uploaded two images: The K&R book cover (see

397: 75: 1542: 790: 763: 738: 621: 574: 353: 175: 153: 1501: 1489: 1477: 1342: 1326: 1199: 487: 591: 261: 1704: 1692: 1301: 604: 490:

are more likely to be considered conflict of interest since I am an employee of Unisys.

426: 386: 212: 673:

Of your articles and contributions to Knowledge (XXG), are there any of which you are

207:

Having said that, there are some articles that are representative of my edit history:

2447: 1644: 1623: 1243: 1910:

of the nomination process than anything else. This answer helps settle my concerns.

2274: 2248: 2232: 2172: 1991: 1954: 1911: 1892:

becoming an admin. I also started reading the various admin guides. When I asked

1874: 1853: 1804: 1684: 1558: 1447: 1413: 1314: 1220: 1020: 313: 292: 352:

What conditions must be present for an IP user to be blocked based on a report to

1691:

is fair-minded and certainly has the requisite maturity to be an administrator.--

2415: 2390: 2385: 2357: 2324: 2289: 2252: 2127: 2086: 2035: 2005: 1931: 1901: 1835: 1830: 1768: 1688: 1593: 1229: 1203: 1178: 1095: 990: 968: 954: 934: 879: 859: 843: 801: 719: 694: 660: 638: 532: 501: 393: 364: 256: 243: 122: 97: 71: 2018:

I must say though that I approved of your follow-up to the point being made by

2333: 1883: 1755: 1338: 1156: 1091: 1079: 786: 334: 2428:

The above adminship discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion.

2051:). That implies that Wrp's understanding of policy is significantly lacking. 1870:"The honest answer is that I'm not totally sure what I would do as an admin." 2048:

This user believes that removing warnings from your talk page is vandalism (

1671: 1610: 1546: 823: 226: 707:

What other activities do you hope to help out with if you become an admin?

61: 2150:

due to his misunderstanding of a policy with real-world implications. —

517:

Okay - I have more time ... let me answer your questions in more detail.

2164:

Knowledge (XXG):Elimination of Fair Use Rationale in Promotional Photos

2080:

To clarify, what I said was that removing warnings from your talk page

1325:

I see nothing that leads me to believe he would abuse the admin tools.

2214:

too little project-space experience. Nevertheless, a sound candidate.

2144:"The fair use description certainly fit her, so I uploaded the image." 1135:

Nothing amazing, but I think this user can be trusted with the tools.

2438:

or the nominated user). No further edits should be made to this page.

483: 171: 1789:

As adminship is (by declaration of Jimbo) No Big Deal, the issue is

1513:

proper neutrality should be trusted with the extra responsibility --

2194: 2332:

Is the thing about WikiProject endorsement a joke or serious? --

782: 64: 1829:

The acceptance snaffu was the result of some confusion between

772:

For example, as I mentioned earlier the issue of citations for

741:? Explicitly? Are there times when it should not be invoked? 410:({{Promotional}} - Uploaded by ~~~, who runs Cheryl's web site) 1592:

Well, I am 62, but I would have preferred long standing. ;^)

119:

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:

794:

those aren't enough examples, let me know and I could go on.

713:

I think I am giving people the wrong impression. There are

1963:

for the main page. Doesn't mean I don't know the policy. -

1219:

Changing !vote, see below for rationale. Good luck, Bill.

325:

If anyone is interested, I can dig out some more examples.

29:

The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a

1583:. Very old and respectable editor. My support to him. -- 2185: 2181: 2171:

at one time I thought this was considered "fair use". -

2049: 55: 2247:

I appreciate your concern for the fairness of voting,

291:

The most recent edit conflict was concerned with the

1943:to have the tools, oppose should be disregarded - 146:What sysop chores do you anticipate helping with? 1545:rises to the level of a de facto endorsement... 2146:No, it didn't fit then, and it doesn't fit now. 1939:Irrelevant to question of whether candidate is 596:Talk:Final Fantasy (series)#Citations, Take Two 312:I was caught in the middle of an AfD issue for 906:Please keep criticism constructive and polite. 229:is another stub that I worked into an article. 96:. In all, I think he would make a good admin. 1683:. Although we have hardly seen eye-to-eye on 8: 2384:Yes, I accepted the nomination. I had asked 737:When is it appropriate to implicitly invoke 1843:Invalid opposition criterion, per above - 1476:I'm glad to see this finally happening. - 1011:OMG ONLY 4000 EDITS U GOTZ NO EXPERIENCE 1488:Trustworthy, seems like an asset to WP. 425:But then I looked at the history of the 246:of more articles and what I contributed. 216:since added most of the current content. 18:Knowledge (XXG):Requests for adminship 1228:Thanks! I appreciate your comments. 1202:, and he seems experienced enough.-- 447:Knowledge (XXG):Ownership of articles 7: 729:Optional question from Naconkantari: 652:Optional questions from Simply south 442:Knowledge (XXG):No original research 437:Knowledge (XXG):Conflict of interest 356:for vandalism? Please be specific. 1608:. Excellent answers to questions. — 295:article. Discussions can be found 90:Knowledge (XXG):Welcoming committee 1717:, experienced and well-rounded. -- 590:The next topic you asked about is 60:(45/9/4); Scheduled to end 20:44, 24: 2454:Successful requests for adminship 781:Another example I've seen is for 2193: 406:Image:Web CherylStmtofIntent.jpg 1990:. Sorry if that seems harsh. -- 1868:Per below, the nominee stated 886:. For the edit count, see the 1: 2000:probably look into once this 1015:. Just understand that there 1271:. Adminship is no big deal. 916:Are you accepting your RFA? 814:Optional question from Iuio: 176:List of controversial issues 882:'s edit summary usage with 174:, which is included in the 135:Questions for the candidate 2470: 2419:03:01, 11 April 2007 (UTC) 2409:21:51, 10 April 2007 (UTC) 2394:03:01, 11 April 2007 (UTC) 2380:21:46, 10 April 2007 (UTC) 2361:13:23, 12 April 2007 (UTC) 2351:21:31, 11 April 2007 (UTC) 2337:03:19, 11 April 2007 (UTC) 2328:03:01, 11 April 2007 (UTC) 2318:21:09, 10 April 2007 (UTC) 2293:03:01, 11 April 2007 (UTC) 2283:00:10, 11 April 2007 (UTC) 2268:22:34, 10 April 2007 (UTC) 2241:21:00, 10 April 2007 (UTC) 2219:16:22, 17 April 2007 (UTC) 2203:12:40, 17 April 2007 (UTC) 2176:04:23, 17 April 2007 (UTC) 2155:20:11, 16 April 2007 (UTC) 2133:15:05, 16 April 2007 (UTC) 2121:13:04, 16 April 2007 (UTC) 2092:12:25, 16 April 2007 (UTC) 2076:09:53, 16 April 2007 (UTC) 2042:00:22, 13 April 2007 (UTC) 2029:23:30, 12 April 2007 (UTC) 2009:16:30, 11 April 2007 (UTC) 1995:15:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC) 1971:20:35, 17 April 2007 (UTC) 1958:18:39, 17 April 2007 (UTC) 1948:16:04, 17 April 2007 (UTC) 1935:10:55, 11 April 2007 (UTC) 1915:14:49, 11 April 2007 (UTC) 1905:07:09, 11 April 2007 (UTC) 1887:04:42, 11 April 2007 (UTC) 1878:04:24, 11 April 2007 (UTC) 1857:18:39, 17 April 2007 (UTC) 1848:16:04, 17 April 2007 (UTC) 1839:03:01, 11 April 2007 (UTC) 1825:00:06, 11 April 2007 (UTC) 1808:18:36, 17 April 2007 (UTC) 1798:16:04, 17 April 2007 (UTC) 1785:23:25, 10 April 2007 (UTC) 1759:23:05, 10 April 2007 (UTC) 1739:19:38, 17 April 2007 (UTC) 1727:16:51, 17 April 2007 (UTC) 1710:01:36, 17 April 2007 (UTC) 1696:00:24, 17 April 2007 (UTC) 1675:23:18, 16 April 2007 (UTC) 1663:21:19, 16 April 2007 (UTC) 1648:17:48, 16 April 2007 (UTC) 1643:Will not abuse the tools. 1636:09:41, 16 April 2007 (UTC) 1627:21:40, 15 April 2007 (UTC) 1615:10:13, 15 April 2007 (UTC) 1599:11:57, 15 April 2007 (UTC) 1588:10:04, 15 April 2007 (UTC) 1576:08:44, 15 April 2007 (UTC) 1562:06:02, 15 April 2007 (UTC) 1550:00:13, 15 April 2007 (UTC) 1534:17:30, 14 April 2007 (UTC) 1520:10:40, 14 April 2007 (UTC) 1505:07:23, 14 April 2007 (UTC) 1493:02:21, 14 April 2007 (UTC) 1481:21:30, 13 April 2007 (UTC) 1469:18:40, 13 April 2007 (UTC) 1459:18:34, 13 April 2007 (UTC) 1451:15:19, 13 April 2007 (UTC) 1443:13:01, 13 April 2007 (UTC) 1425:12:11, 13 April 2007 (UTC) 1405:23:52, 12 April 2007 (UTC) 1390:23:12, 12 April 2007 (UTC) 1366:22:02, 12 April 2007 (UTC) 1347:09:14, 12 April 2007 (UTC) 1330:02:49, 12 April 2007 (UTC) 1318:02:46, 12 April 2007 (UTC) 1305:21:08, 11 April 2007 (UTC) 1293:19:38, 11 April 2007 (UTC) 1264:19:26, 11 April 2007 (UTC) 1247:15:48, 11 April 2007 (UTC) 1233:14:56, 11 April 2007 (UTC) 1224:14:49, 11 April 2007 (UTC) 1212:14:00, 11 April 2007 (UTC) 1191:09:59, 11 April 2007 (UTC) 1170:03:17, 11 April 2007 (UTC) 1147:02:09, 11 April 2007 (UTC) 1128:01:50, 11 April 2007 (UTC) 1116:01:12, 11 April 2007 (UTC) 1083:00:40, 11 April 2007 (UTC) 1071:21:17, 10 April 2007 (UTC) 1057:20:57, 10 April 2007 (UTC) 1029:20:51, 10 April 2007 (UTC) 1006:20:45, 10 April 2007 (UTC) 975:13:13, 13 April 2007 (UTC) 958:18:48, 11 April 2007 (UTC) 947:18:19, 11 April 2007 (UTC) 921:23:18, 10 April 2007 (UTC) 865:11:57, 15 April 2007 (UTC) 849:05:09, 15 April 2007 (UTC) 827:04:42, 15 April 2007 (UTC) 808:17:58, 13 April 2007 (UTC) 753:17:23, 13 April 2007 (UTC) 723:19:30, 11 April 2007 (UTC) 698:19:30, 11 April 2007 (UTC) 682:18:48, 11 April 2007 (UTC) 664:19:30, 11 April 2007 (UTC) 642:04:06, 12 April 2007 (UTC) 505:14:53, 11 April 2007 (UTC) 461:12:04, 11 April 2007 (UTC) 368:03:01, 11 April 2007 (UTC) 126:01:35, 11 April 2007 (UTC) 121:I accept the nomination. 113:17:26, 9 April 2007 (UTC) 2431:Please do not modify it. 1791:clear and present danger 480:C (programming language) 392:14:09, October 23, 2006 220:Mormons and Christianity 2190:every sense of the word 332:Optional question from 39:Please do not modify it 1986:do, not just what you 1179:Matthew Brown (Morven) 774:Final Fantasy (series) 600:Final Fantasy (series) 242:There is a list on my 233:Final Fantasy (series) 2416:wrp103 (Bill Pringle) 2391:wrp103 (Bill Pringle) 2358:wrp103 (Bill Pringle) 2325:wrp103 (Bill Pringle) 2290:wrp103 (Bill Pringle) 2128:wrp103 (Bill Pringle) 2087:wrp103 (Bill Pringle) 2036:wrp103 (Bill Pringle) 2006:wrp103 (Bill Pringle) 2004:process is over. ;^) 1902:wrp103 (Bill Pringle) 1836:wrp103 (Bill Pringle) 1689:wrp103 (Bill Pringle) 1594:wrp103 (Bill Pringle) 1230:wrp103 (Bill Pringle) 969:wrp103 (Bill Pringle) 955:wrp103 (Bill Pringle) 933:comment was added by 860:wrp103 (Bill Pringle) 844:wrp103 (Bill Pringle) 802:wrp103 (Bill Pringle) 720:wrp103 (Bill Pringle) 695:wrp103 (Bill Pringle) 661:wrp103 (Bill Pringle) 639:wrp103 (Bill Pringle) 502:wrp103 (Bill Pringle) 365:wrp103 (Bill Pringle) 123:wrp103 (Bill Pringle) 49:wrp103 (Bill Pringle) 34:request for adminship 262:Wiki Syntax Project 2026: 1783: 1399:Christopher Parham 1050:- Good Answers..-- 989:as per nomination 56:Voice your opinion 2281: 2264: 2239: 2024: 1767: 1387: 1290: 1262: 1027: 1002: 950: 691:Singer-songwriter 109: 2461: 2433: 2377:The Rambling Man 2277: 2263: 2260: 2257: 2256: 2235: 2197: 2117: 2115: 2113: 2111: 2109: 2072: 2070: 2068: 2066: 2064: 1822:Anthony.bradbury 1781: 1776: 1771: 1707: 1670:. A noble aim. ( 1532:this message! - 1517: 1421: 1417: 1385: 1381: 1378: 1291: 1287: 1285: 1278: 1258: 1244:Camaron1 | Chris 1168: 1161: 1144: 1139: 1113: 1110: 1107: 1104: 1101: 1098: 1055: 1023: 1001: 998: 995: 994: 928: 873:General comments 750: 745: 346: 339: 108: 105: 102: 101: 41: 2469: 2468: 2464: 2463: 2462: 2460: 2459: 2458: 2444: 2443: 2442: 2436:this nomination 2429: 2261: 2258: 2254: 2107: 2105: 2103: 2101: 2099: 2062: 2060: 2058: 2056: 2054: 1779: 1774: 1769: 1705: 1703:, looks good.-- 1515: 1419: 1415: 1379: 1376: 1281: 1274: 1272: 1260:(Упражнение В!) 1210: 1167: 1157: 1155: 1142: 1137: 1111: 1108: 1105: 1102: 1099: 1096: 1051: 999: 996: 992: 929:—The preceding 746: 743: 677:proud of? Why? 345: 335: 333: 106: 103: 99: 52: 37: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 2467: 2465: 2457: 2456: 2446: 2445: 2441: 2440: 2424: 2423: 2422: 2421: 2406:(aeropagitica) 2398: 2397: 2396: 2369: 2368: 2367: 2366: 2365: 2364: 2363: 2330: 2303: 2302: 2301: 2300: 2299: 2298: 2297: 2296: 2295: 2222: 2221: 2209: 2208: 2207: 2206: 2205: 2141: 2140: 2139: 2138: 2137: 2136: 2135: 2046: 2045: 2044: 2013: 2012: 2011: 1977: 1976: 1975: 1974: 1973: 1950: 1925: 1924: 1923: 1922: 1921: 1920: 1919: 1918: 1917: 1897: 1861: 1860: 1859: 1841: 1814: 1813: 1812: 1811: 1810: 1761: 1742: 1741: 1729: 1712: 1698: 1678: 1665: 1650: 1638: 1629: 1617: 1603: 1602: 1601: 1578: 1564: 1552: 1536: 1522: 1507: 1495: 1483: 1471: 1462: 1453: 1445: 1428: 1407: 1392: 1368: 1349: 1332: 1320: 1307: 1295: 1266: 1249: 1237: 1236: 1235: 1214: 1206: 1193: 1172: 1163: 1149: 1130: 1118: 1085: 1073: 1059: 1045: 1044: 1043: 1042: 1041: 978: 977: 963: 962: 961: 960: 924: 923: 903: 902: 901: 896: 895: 891: 884:mathbot's tool 875: 874: 870: 869: 868: 867: 852: 851: 838: 837: 830: 811: 810: 796: 795: 778: 777: 769: 768: 756: 755: 726: 725: 708: 701: 700: 689:Quick answer: 684: 668: 667: 666: 649: 648: 647: 646: 645: 644: 630: 629: 628: 627: 626: 625: 613: 612: 611: 610: 609: 608: 605:Anti-Mormonism 583: 582: 581: 580: 579: 578: 566: 565: 564: 563: 562: 561: 552: 551: 550: 549: 548: 547: 543: 542: 541: 523: 522: 521: 520: 519: 518: 510: 509: 508: 507: 494: 493: 492: 491: 473: 472: 471: 470: 454: 453: 452: 449: 444: 439: 430: 427:Cheryl Wheeler 423: 414: 413: 412: 387:Cheryl Wheeler 379: 377: 376:Charlotte says 373: 372: 371: 370: 347: 341: 329: 328: 327: 326: 320: 319: 318: 317: 307: 306: 305: 304: 286: 285: 284: 283: 269: 268: 267: 266: 250: 249: 248: 247: 240: 239: 238: 237: 236: 230: 224: 217: 213:Cheryl Wheeler 202: 201: 200: 199: 184: 182: 181: 180: 179: 160: 159: 158: 157: 137: 136: 131: 129: 128: 51: 46: 45: 44: 25: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 2466: 2455: 2452: 2451: 2449: 2439: 2437: 2432: 2426: 2425: 2420: 2417: 2412: 2411: 2410: 2407: 2402: 2399: 2395: 2392: 2387: 2383: 2382: 2381: 2378: 2373: 2370: 2362: 2359: 2354: 2353: 2352: 2348: 2344: 2340: 2339: 2338: 2335: 2331: 2329: 2326: 2321: 2320: 2319: 2315: 2311: 2307: 2304: 2294: 2291: 2286: 2285: 2284: 2280: 2276: 2271: 2270: 2269: 2266: 2265: 2250: 2246: 2245: 2244: 2243: 2242: 2238: 2234: 2229: 2228: 2227: 2226: 2220: 2217: 2216:Pascal.Tesson 2213: 2210: 2204: 2201: 2200:CharlotteWebb 2196: 2191: 2187: 2183: 2179: 2178: 2177: 2174: 2169: 2165: 2161: 2158: 2157: 2156: 2153: 2152:CharlotteWebb 2149: 2145: 2142: 2134: 2131: 2129: 2124: 2123: 2122: 2119: 2118: 2095: 2094: 2093: 2090: 2088: 2083: 2079: 2078: 2077: 2074: 2073: 2050: 2047: 2043: 2040: 2037: 2032: 2031: 2030: 2027: 2021: 2017: 2014: 2010: 2007: 2003: 1998: 1997: 1996: 1993: 1989: 1985: 1981: 1978: 1972: 1969: 1966: 1961: 1960: 1959: 1956: 1951: 1949: 1946: 1942: 1938: 1937: 1936: 1933: 1929: 1926: 1916: 1913: 1908: 1907: 1906: 1903: 1898: 1895: 1890: 1889: 1888: 1885: 1881: 1880: 1879: 1876: 1871: 1867: 1866: 1862: 1858: 1855: 1851: 1850: 1849: 1846: 1842: 1840: 1837: 1832: 1828: 1827: 1826: 1823: 1818: 1815: 1809: 1806: 1801: 1800: 1799: 1796: 1792: 1788: 1787: 1786: 1782: 1777: 1772: 1765: 1762: 1760: 1757: 1752: 1749: 1748: 1747: 1746: 1740: 1737: 1733: 1730: 1728: 1724: 1720: 1716: 1713: 1711: 1708: 1702: 1699: 1697: 1694: 1690: 1686: 1682: 1679: 1676: 1673: 1669: 1666: 1664: 1661: 1658: 1657:Mike Christie 1654: 1651: 1649: 1646: 1642: 1639: 1637: 1634: 1630: 1628: 1625: 1621: 1618: 1616: 1613: 1612: 1607: 1604: 1600: 1597: 1595: 1591: 1590: 1589: 1586: 1582: 1579: 1577: 1574: 1571: 1569: 1565: 1563: 1560: 1556: 1553: 1551: 1548: 1544: 1540: 1537: 1535: 1531: 1527: 1526:Mailer Diablo 1523: 1521: 1518: 1511: 1508: 1506: 1503: 1499: 1496: 1494: 1491: 1487: 1484: 1482: 1479: 1475: 1472: 1470: 1467: 1463: 1460: 1457: 1454: 1452: 1449: 1446: 1444: 1441: 1440: 1436: 1432: 1429: 1427: 1426: 1422: 1418: 1411: 1408: 1406: 1403: 1400: 1396: 1393: 1391: 1388: 1383: 1382: 1372: 1369: 1367: 1364: 1363: 1359: 1358: 1355: 1350: 1348: 1344: 1340: 1336: 1333: 1331: 1328: 1324: 1321: 1319: 1316: 1311: 1308: 1306: 1303: 1299: 1296: 1294: 1289: 1286: 1284: 1279: 1277: 1270: 1267: 1265: 1261: 1257: 1253: 1250: 1248: 1245: 1241: 1238: 1234: 1231: 1227: 1226: 1225: 1222: 1218: 1215: 1213: 1209: 1205: 1201: 1197: 1194: 1192: 1188: 1184: 1180: 1176: 1173: 1171: 1166: 1162: 1160: 1153: 1150: 1148: 1145: 1140: 1134: 1131: 1129: 1126: 1122: 1119: 1117: 1114: 1093: 1089: 1086: 1084: 1081: 1077: 1074: 1072: 1069: 1067: 1063: 1060: 1058: 1054: 1049: 1046: 1040: 1038: 1033: 1032: 1031: 1030: 1026: 1022: 1018: 1014: 1009: 1008: 1007: 1004: 1003: 988: 985: 984: 983: 982: 976: 973: 970: 965: 964: 959: 956: 952: 951: 948: 944: 940: 936: 932: 926: 925: 922: 919: 915: 914: 913: 912: 908: 907: 898: 897: 892: 889: 885: 881: 877: 876: 872: 871: 866: 863: 861: 856: 855: 854: 853: 850: 847: 845: 840: 839: 834: 831: 828: 825: 821: 818: 817: 816: 815: 809: 806: 803: 798: 797: 792: 788: 784: 780: 779: 775: 771: 770: 765: 761: 758: 757: 754: 751: 749: 740: 736: 733: 732: 731: 730: 724: 721: 716: 712: 709: 706: 703: 702: 699: 696: 692: 688: 685: 683: 680: 676: 672: 669: 665: 662: 658: 657: 656: 655: 654: 653: 643: 640: 636: 635: 634: 633: 632: 631: 623: 620:The last was 619: 618: 617: 616: 615: 614: 606: 601: 597: 593: 589: 588: 587: 586: 585: 584: 576: 572: 571: 570: 569: 568: 567: 558: 557: 556: 555: 554: 553: 544: 540: 537: 536: 533: 529: 528: 527: 526: 525: 524: 516: 515: 514: 513: 512: 511: 506: 503: 498: 497: 496: 495: 489: 485: 481: 477: 476: 475: 474: 467: 464: 463: 462: 459: 458:CharlotteWebb 455: 450: 448: 445: 443: 440: 438: 435: 434: 431: 428: 424: 420: 415: 411: 407: 403: 399: 395: 391: 390: 388: 383: 380: 378: 375: 374: 369: 366: 361: 358: 357: 355: 351: 348: 344: 340: 338: 331: 330: 324: 323: 322: 321: 315: 311: 310: 309: 308: 302: 298: 294: 290: 289: 288: 287: 280: 277: 276: 274: 271: 270: 263: 258: 254: 253: 252: 251: 245: 241: 234: 231: 228: 225: 221: 218: 214: 211: 210: 209: 208: 206: 205: 204: 203: 196: 193: 192: 190: 187: 186: 185: 177: 173: 168: 164: 163: 162: 161: 155: 151: 148: 147: 145: 142: 141: 140: 134: 133: 132: 127: 124: 120: 117: 116: 115: 114: 111: 110: 95: 91: 87: 83: 80: 77: 73: 69: 68: 66: 63: 58: 57: 50: 47: 43: 40: 35: 32: 27: 26: 19: 2430: 2427: 2400: 2371: 2343:Kelly Martin 2310:Kelly Martin 2305: 2253: 2224: 2223: 2211: 2167: 2159: 2147: 2143: 2098: 2081: 2053: 2020:Kelly Martin 2015: 2001: 1987: 1983: 1979: 1945:David Gerard 1940: 1927: 1869: 1864: 1863: 1845:David Gerard 1816: 1795:David Gerard 1790: 1763: 1750: 1744: 1743: 1736:Simply south 1731: 1719:Mus Musculus 1714: 1700: 1687:, I believe 1685:First Vision 1680: 1667: 1652: 1640: 1619: 1609: 1605: 1580: 1567: 1554: 1538: 1529: 1509: 1497: 1485: 1473: 1466:Michael Snow 1456:Tony Sidaway 1437: 1430: 1423: 1414: 1409: 1394: 1374: 1370: 1362:user:Kncyu38 1360: 1352: 1334: 1322: 1310:Weak Support 1309: 1297: 1282: 1275: 1268: 1256:RyanGerbil10 1254:Looks good. 1251: 1239: 1216: 1195: 1174: 1158: 1151: 1132: 1120: 1087: 1075: 1061: 1047: 1036: 1035:(changed to 1034: 1016: 1012: 1010: 991: 986: 980: 979: 918:Simply south 910: 909: 905: 904: 832: 819: 813: 812: 759: 747: 734: 728: 727: 714: 710: 704: 686: 679:Simply south 674: 670: 651: 650: 538: 465: 418: 409: 404:) uploaded " 381: 359: 349: 336: 314:Jeff Lindsay 293:First Vision 278: 272: 194: 188: 183: 166: 149: 143: 138: 130: 118: 98: 78: 70: 59: 54: 53: 48: 38: 30: 28: 2386:User:COGDEN 2212:Weak oppose 1831:User:COGDEN 1066:Storm Rider 1053:Cometstyles 789:articles. 767:reason. ;^) 2273:anyway). - 1585:Masterbobo 1490:KnightLago 1478:Visorstuff 1125:YechielMan 911:Discussion 787:Folk Dance 456:Thanks. — 165:What I do 31:successful 1706:Wizardman 1693:John Foxe 1435:Cool Hand 1302:Coemgenus 1198:meets my 888:talk page 422:license?" 257:user page 244:user page 227:Debugging 2448:Category 2160:comment: 1820:works.-- 1645:Davewild 1624:WBardwin 1252:Support. 1200:criteria 943:contribs 931:unsigned 451:(t.b.d.) 402:contribs 223:article. 82:contribs 62:17 April 2401:Neutral 2372:Neutral 2306:Neutral 2275:Amarkov 2249:Amarkov 2233:Amarkov 2225:Neutral 2173:MrFizyx 1992:Dweller 1955:GRBerry 1912:Caknuck 1875:Caknuck 1854:GRBerry 1805:GRBerry 1732:Support 1715:Support 1701:Support 1681:Support 1668:Support 1653:Support 1641:Support 1620:Support 1606:Support 1581:Support 1559:MrFizyx 1555:Support 1539:Support 1530:approve 1510:Support 1498:Support 1486:Support 1474:Support 1448:Terence 1431:Support 1410:Support 1395:Support 1371:Support 1335:Support 1323:Support 1315:JoshuaZ 1298:Support 1269:Support 1240:Support 1221:Caknuck 1217:Support 1196:Support 1175:Support 1152:Support 1138:Captain 1133:Support 1121:Support 1088:Support 1076:Support 1062:Support 1048:Support 1037:neutral 1021:Amarkov 1013:Support 987:Support 981:Support 748:kantari 573:As for 94:WP:NPOV 2166:.) I 2148:Oppose 2085:that. 2039:(Talk) 2016:Oppose 2002:ordeal 1980:Oppose 1932:Addhoc 1928:Oppose 1894:COGDEN 1865:Oppose 1817:Oppose 1764:Oppose 1751:Oppose 1745:Oppose 1660:(talk) 1543:WP:LDS 1528:and I 1516:Trödel 1402:(talk) 1377:auburn 1204:danntm 1159:—dgies 1090:. Per 972:(Talk) 935:Wrp103 880:wrp103 805:(Talk) 791:WP:NOT 764:WP:IAR 739:WP:IAR 622:WP:OWN 575:WP:COI 484:Unisys 394:Wrp103 354:WP:AIV 337:—dgies 265:about. 172:Mormon 154:WP:AIV 72:wrp103 2334:BigDT 2100:: --> 2055:: --> 1988:won't 1884:BigDT 1756:Xoloz 1502:Pomte 1420:Train 1380:pilot 1339:Kusma 1327:Frise 1143:panda 1092:BigDT 1080:BigDT 744:Nacon 592:WP:OR 546:same. 67:(UTC) 16:< 2347:talk 2314:talk 2279:moo! 2237:moo! 2198:. — 2184:and 2182:then 2168:have 2116:< 2071:< 1984:will 1941:safe 1723:talk 1672:Iuio 1611:Mira 1573:ceNT 1547:Alai 1524:I'm 1439:Luke 1386:talk 1357:Baer 1354:Alde 1343:talk 1025:moo! 1017:will 939:talk 878:See 824:Iuio 785:and 783:Knot 488:3DVE 486:and 398:Talk 301:here 299:and 297:here 86:here 76:talk 65:2007 2186:now 2082:can 1965:Mgm 1770:Hús 1655:. 1633:Doc 1283:ton 1276:Wal 1094:. - 675:not 167:not 2450:: 2349:) 2316:) 2262:EN 2259:GD 2255:CO 2025:VS 1780:nd 1725:) 1570:ea 1345:) 1189:) 1000:EN 997:GD 993:CO 945:) 941:• 820:9. 735:8. 715:no 466:A: 419:or 408:" 400:| 382:5. 360:A: 350:4. 279:A: 273:3. 195:A: 189:2. 150:A: 144:1. 107:EN 104:GD 100:CO 36:. 2345:( 2312:( 2231:- 2114:t 2112:n 2110:a 2108:i 2106:d 2104:a 2102:R 2069:t 2067:n 2065:a 2063:i 2061:d 2059:a 2057:R 1967:| 1775:ö 1721:( 1677:) 1568:P 1416:A 1341:( 1208:C 1187:C 1185:: 1183:T 1181:( 1165:c 1112:l 1109:e 1106:h 1103:c 1100:s 1097:M 1039:) 949:. 937:( 890:. 833:A 829:) 760:A 711:A 705:7 687:A 671:6 396:( 343:c 156:. 79:· 74:( 42:.

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

Knowledge (XXG)

:Requests for adminship/Wrp103 - Knowledge (XXG)

Index