829:: Some user removed the {tfd} tag on the template claiming that this lengthy discussion didn't exist; I readded it. The creator also appears to have added some usage guidelilnes on the template page. Having read these guidelines, I think that the argument for its deletion is even stronger, and that users who voted keep thinking it was meant for other purposes should review their votes and see if they still agree. It currently states this template is to be used with EL that
1202:.Firstly, redirect pages do not have to adhere to naming conventions. In fact, they delibarately have incorrect names to guide the user unaware of Knowledge (XXG) naming conventions, which are not all that well-known outside of our community. Secondly, this is a question of how the template is coded, not a deletion criteria. Feel free to go ahead and modify the template so that it points to the correct name.
651:
have to recognize that you are making an invalid assumption that few will agree with or even understand what you are thinking. As you say "There is a global disclaimer that external links have not been verified by
Knowledge (XXG)..." That's it. We do not "verify" every link. We don't try to "verify" every link. Very bad, presumptuous template that accomplishes nothing positive and an awful lot negative.
1730:, but as it seems to be useful specifically only on that talkpage, perhaps it should become a talk subpage of that article. There's a problem with negative numbers which maybe should be sorted. Against the nom, the template itself is pretty specific; it appears to be used only for the display of 4x4 magic squares, which is why talkification should be considered. At least
478:. Totally inappropriate, preumptuous and frankly bizarre. It's an invitation for anyone who doesn't know anything about a topic, or who wants to troll, to slap an unthinking tag on almost any external links. External links should either be included or not, and it certainly is NOT a good idea to make it seem that any external links without this tag are verified!
509:. Even without presence of the tag on Knowledge (XXG), the general reader would assume that these sites have specific merit due to being selected as part of the article. So since the default reaction of the reader is to assume merit, we need to make effort to either ensure a high quality of external link, or explicitly mark those links which are unverified.
368:"The general disclaimer certainly covers any legal issues.". I really don't want to get into a long discussion of legal issues here, so I'll just give a short answer. No it doesn't. The idea, as I understand it, is to use this template specifically for external links that have a strong POV or contain "unverified original research" (quote from
804:
infantalising readers, well, after only being here a year, and despite my best faith in humanity, frankly, people are idiots. There will be someone who will open the link and claim wikipedia is biased, or that the link got them an F on their school report, or read it as fact. Hell, most people have trouble detecting the bias in FOX news. --
844:
rather than a tfd vote) or adding it selectively to a few articles where editors are angry over the inclusion of links which do meet our EL guildelines. As I've stated previously, this option is undesirable, because it implies that
Knowledge (XXG) does certify the content of sites that it links to as
497:
I think we have to recognise that
Knowledge (XXG) does have a problem in not discriminating between verified and unverified external links. There is a global disclaimer that external links have not been verified by Knowledge (XXG), but the vast majority of readers will not have read this, and inline
1146:
capitalizes the initial letter of a word in the middle of the pagename. Then you have to create a redirect page to the title with the incorrectly capitalized letter, thereby encouraging disregard of
Knowledge (XXG)'s capitalization conventions. Habitual adherence to those conventions by thousands
650:
Please don't muddy the water. The discussion is about this inappropriate template, not every other Wiki policy or template. Furthermore, you say "I think we have to recognise that
Knowledge (XXG) does have a problem in not discriminating between verified and unverified external links." I think we
540:
I suppose I should state the obvious here, that links in one particular contentious article can and should be dealt with regarding that article. Atemplate is not needed. It is fundementally foolish policy to make a tag that anyone could use because of a conflict over one article. And to state the
417:
policy which has been established by consensus. NPOV tags are temporary, this is not. This template may be useful in situations where there are ongoing disputes over external links (although such links should be moved to the talk page for the duration of such disputes instead) but its permanent use
383:
No one is going to sue us because we linked them to a biased site. If they did, they would lose, so much so that we could probably get them to cover our legal costs. Our general disclaimer protects us from providing biased content even within our own articles—the external link itself is part of the
309:
articles. Should be deleted as it is repetitive with our general content disclaimers. This template could literally be placed in every article because
Knowledge (XXG) never endorses or reviews the content of sites which are linked in the external links section. The presence of this template in some
514:
And an aditional general responce. As part of the mediation process, compromise was reached to allow inclusion of links to 'dubious' sites, so long as the link section was clearly marked. If this template is deleted, then this compromise position can not stand since it would be a special exception
906:
as
Knowledge (XXG). Whilst articles with links that are likely to be as polarised as those regarding the Near East may well merit a short sentence to that effect, it is the nature of external links that they'll have a different slant on things that the originating site; disclaiming that in such a
839:
but in essence, do not follow
Knowledge (XXG)'s NPOV policies ("claim point of view as fact"; "errors and omissions"). Very few sites on the internet would be in accordance with this template if the workds "point of view" are interpreted with the same latitude as they are on Knowledge (XXG). This
803:
POV and biased than usual, and have been included only because of there extreme usefulness. Arguments of POV pushing with the tag are silly, because there would already be an argument over the POV of the links anyway. At worst, you wouldn't be creating an argument, only moving its subject. As for
550:
I'm confused. Is your position that it's a bad template because it was created during a conflict? I'm not sure that's a valid position. Consider the template on it's merits independant of the mediation case please. For instance, is there any reason this template could not be used on a site about
1423:. The problem you describe is a relatively minor one that could be resolved by linking each entry to a generic "Wikify1" article, "Wikify2" article, etc., each of which would redirect to the appropriate article. Don't delete the template just because of a technical glitch.
498:
notification is important for the sites where not only has
Knowledge (XXG) not verified them but no one else has either. An ideal article would not link to these sites at all, but ideal articles do not need any of the other POV warning tags either. As evidenced in
316:
None of the authors, contributors, sponsors, administrators, sysops, or anyone else connected with
Knowledge (XXG) in any way whatsoever can be responsible for the appearance of any inaccurate or libelous information or for your use of the information contained
583:
external link. Furthermore, it infantalizes Wiki readers. I believe that it is unnecessary and inappropriate. Finally, I must disagree with the characterization above that this template was invented to label "dubious" sites, or that it was a
620:. Seems a violation of the policy on disclaimers (which has moved somewhere other than where any rational person could find it, now.) If "required" by the mediation, than the mediation has failed. Otherwise, a specific warning on
763:. Perhaps next we can have a template like, "Caution: the next word is spelled incorrectly." However, I'll continue to hope that people who see an inappropriate link will simply delete it rather than asking someone else to do so.
861:
778:
698:
601:
522:
499:
451:
677:
The template has had language added that makes it clear that these links should be replaced. I hope this clears up any disptute you had that it was 'just' a disclaimer and not also a recomendation to fix the problem.
687:
The curhttp://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Knowledge (XXG):Templates_for_deletion/Log/2006_July_30&action=edit§ion=2#rent wording is even worse. Deleting this bad template will clear up any dispute.
502:, there can be major disputes over the removal of these links. A specific warning in cases where the sites may be particularly misleading, or the external links list contains many unverified links, is warented.
395:
The tag is a direct invitation to POV conflicts over the tag itself. Instead of merely arguments over POV, now this tag would lead to arguments over the POV of alleged POV. What a can of worms.
359:
The general disclaimer certainly covers any legal issues. This template seems much less about informing, and much more about carrying pov-conflicts into the external link sections of articles.
494:
Use of the tag inapropriatly is not a bad mark against the tag it's self. Trolls can and have used the other POV tags inapropriatly, but this is not reason to remove the POV tags.
664:
asking for cleanup. That's more like the general disclaimer templates that have mostly been deleted on sight, than the POV templates, which ask for the article to be fixed. —
1541:
49:
44:
1435:. Create a Bugzilla suggestion to sort "What links here" results, as having User pages grouped together would make it easier for you to ignore such in your Belarus check. (
1383:
This template, placed on thousands of user pages, heavily litters "what links here" of articles listed in it. I was heavily annoyed when I tried to check which pages discuss
604:
The fact that the presence of this template is now being argued to label these links as "dubious" is strong evidence of the POV slant this template gives to
799:- I can see both sides here, but the objections, IMO, don't warrant deletion. Yes, it could apply to all links, but this template means the links below are
588:
part of the compromise mediation of this case -- the sites in question contain online publications and news service photographs from the frontlines of the
704:
If there is no current warning of the reader on links to external sites that are unverifiable, then there should be. To that aim I just created this, …
338:
Potentially useful in many articles. Knowledge (XXG) readers can't be expected to know about general content disclaimers. Knowledge (XXG) is about
781:, it's not always as simple as deleting the incorect links. This is the same as the other POV tags. And for your information, we have a template,
21:
1190:
it, not to delete it. The template is now fixed: the first letter in the linked article name is capitalized, and subsequent letters are not.--
454:, but is not solely of use for those pages. It should be used for any external links section which links to questionable sites. This template
541:
super obvious, a conflict over an article about a WAR should not lead to the creation of a tag that could be put on a needlepoint article.
1682:
Unused in the article namespace. No apparent purpose that wouldn't be better-served by non-templated tables or more specific templates.
17:
1165:
1154:
872:. One can only conclude that his opposition to these links has nothing to do with any violation of Wki policy, but the content of the
624:
external links may make some sense, but a general template saying the external link section has such links is worse than useless. —
551:
extreem sports that linked to a very popular extreem sports blog, and consensus supported keeping the link but warning the reader. --
1559:
840:
gives us the option of adding this ugly template to about 1,000,000 articles (which imho would require a proposed policy change to
1515:
894:
that most people are idiots (and I'd include myself in that statement) and whilst I agree that bias is often difficult to notice (
346:. Also, external websites may have content that's libelous. A specific disclaimer could protect Knowledge (XXG) from lawsuits. --
1568:
PS. This might be speedy material since no user pages link here, so it is unused. It is only linked to Templates for deletion.-
1523:
280:
311:
1727:
1506:
1465:
106:
288:
271:
220:
27:
1745:
1233:
767:
589:
306:
185:(it's his typical style, can't prove it without a checkuser though). Will I get in trouble if I say it made me laugh?
1773:
1613:
1587:
1481:
1455:
1311:
1292:
1077:
1051:
952:
926:
236:
207:
83:
1407:. No valid reason for deleting this. The fact that so many users have an easily accessible list of open tasks is a
1657:
1384:
996:
1628:
967:
641:
Can I ask if you belive that the other disclaimer templates, such as the POV warnings, should also be deleted? --
251:
1772:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a
1612:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a
1586:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a
1480:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a
1454:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a
1388:
1310:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a
1291:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a
1076:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a
1050:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a
951:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a
925:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a
310:
articles could also imply that external links in articles which lack this template have been verified. From the
235:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a
126:
1758:
1718:
1697:
1641:
1573:
1563:
1499:
1439:
1427:
1415:
1398:
1335:
1277:
1263:
1206:
1194:
1177:
1101:
1037:
980:
911:
880:
849:
820:
808:
789:
770:
743:
692:
682:
672:
655:
645:
632:
612:
555:
545:
535:
482:
470:
430:
408:
399:
388:
376:
363:
350:
329:
264:
206:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
192:
173:
155:
110:
82:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
1648:
1597:
987:
936:
1117:
764:
1665:
1004:
117:
67:
1637:
1358:
976:
669:
629:
260:
1219:
1215:
182:
1553:
1026:
785:, for sections that contain spelling mistakes. Do you suggest we should delete that template as well? --
816:- It is as useful as a "spoiler warning" is. Proper usage should be defined, probably in Talk page. (
134:
1690:
1328:
1094:
1218:}} which doesn't capitalize the initial letter. If the template is deleted, please hist-merge it to
1412:
1030:
1022:
189:
1366:
1186:. Michael was absolutely correct about the flaw in this template, but the correct response was to
1147:
of users helps avoid lots of confusion and extra work. Example: At the top of the article titled
1125:
735:, or encourage editors to delete these same links? Either way, the template is not compliant with
1395:
1332:
1324:
1253:
1174:
1148:
1098:
1090:
373:
347:
102:
1606:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below.
1474:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below.
1304:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below.
1070:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below.
945:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below.
229:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below.
1633:
1625:
1349:
1341:
1243:
1108:
1061:
972:
964:
782:
665:
625:
256:
248:
76:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
903:
414:
1742:
1569:
1548:
1230:
908:
168:
731:
Which is it? Are you attempting to warn readers of links that are clearly acceptable under
1755:
1683:
877:
740:
609:
873:
869:
868:
has not cited or explained a single conflict with these links and Knowledge (XXG) policy
841:
836:
736:
732:
605:
593:
572:
526:
516:
459:
423:
419:
369:
1706:
Looks like an excersise in bad Wiki formatting. Fredil Yupigo 19:21, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
1260:
1191:
521:
I would like to ask those who vote Delete to recomend an alternative to this template,
186:
1726:
Have you seen what its single use is for? This template seems to work pretty well in
1392:
1034:
865:
786:
679:
642:
552:
532:
467:
405:
152:
97:
404:
The same applies to all other POV tags. Do you argue those should be deleted too? --
1495:
1436:
1424:
1274:
891:
857:
846:
817:
805:
427:
385:
360:
326:
1163:
is incorrectly capitalized; the actual name of the article is (as it ought to be)
902:
users and remind them, at every juncture, that the rest of the Internet isn't as
898:
being a prime case in point), I don't think it's the place of an encyclopædia to
571:. No such template is called for anywhere in the Wiki policy for external links,
505:
That other articles include unverified external links is, to me, an argument for
1739:
1735:
1715:
1227:
1223:
1203:
899:
165:
592:, every single one satisfying the exceptions to the policy clearly laid out in
525:
that this arose from, or discuss any changes they belive should be made to the
862:
Knowledge (XXG):Mediation_Cabal/Cases/2006-07-25_2006_Israel-Lebanon_conflict
779:
Knowledge (XXG):Mediation_Cabal/Cases/2006-07-25_2006_Israel-Lebanon_conflict
500:
Knowledge (XXG):Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-07-25 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict
452:
Knowledge (XXG):Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-07-25 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict
689:
652:
542:
479:
396:
845:
being npov, which is something which is entirely outside of our capacity.
422:
is an attempt to circumvent current policy. You should propose changes to
895:
426:
instead rather than unilaterally creating such an unsightly disclaimer.
466:
be placed on all articles that link to potentialy misleading sites. --
1766:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
1580:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
1448:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
1285:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
1044:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
919:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
660:
This seems to me to be saying "this section may have bad links"
200:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
907:
prominent fashion just looks unprofessional, to my opinion. —
342:. We should therefore take any reasonable precaution to avoid
890:. All other websites have their own PoV. Whilst I agree with
519:
standards are applied more strictly this tag has it's place.
450:
This template was created as part of the mediation process -
1411:
thing; we do want those articles to get fixed, after all.
1153:
For a non-technical introduction to the topic, please see
28:
Knowledge (XXG):Templates for discussion/Log/2006 July 30
1673:
1669:
1661:
1653:
1531:
1527:
1519:
1511:
1374:
1370:
1362:
1354:
1133:
1129:
1121:
1113:
1012:
1008:
1000:
992:
600:
any such template. This is discussed explicitly in the
296:
292:
284:
276:
142:
138:
130:
122:
1391:
and put links to this page on user's pages instead. `'
372:). The purpose would thus be to avoid pov-conflicts.--
1249:. Please delete your alternate version by adding the
1616:). No further edits should be made to this page.
1484:). No further edits should be made to this page.
1314:). No further edits should be made to this page.
1080:). No further edits should be made to this page.
955:). No further edits should be made to this page.
239:). No further edits should be made to this page.
86:). No further edits should be made to this page.
697:That appears to be a direct contradiction of your
575:, and could in fact be argued to be necessary for
860:here. One need only read the mediated dispute at
1776:). No further edits should be made to this page.
1590:). No further edits should be made to this page.
1458:). No further edits should be made to this page.
1295:). No further edits should be made to this page.
1054:). No further edits should be made to this page.
929:). No further edits should be made to this page.
210:). No further edits should be made to this page.
418:alongside links which meet the guidelines of
8:
164:because I would be too tempted to use it.
1214:. I've created an alternate version at {{
1021:Template is little-used and redundant to
777:As evidenced in the above comments, and
596:and therefore appropriate for inclusion
1507:Template:User Doctor Who Cushing Doctor
1466:Template:User Doctor Who Cushing Doctor
1169:, with a correctly lower-case initial
18:Knowledge (XXG):Templates for deletion
151:Not a useful or helpful template. --
7:
1151:, this tempmlate creates this text:
701:for this template, as a disclaimer:
413:POV tags are in accordance with the
272:Template:Unverifiable-external-links
221:Template:Unverifiable-external-links
1166:introduction to general relativity
1155:introduction to General relativity
35:
1754:or make talk subpage per ais523.
515:for a single article. Unless the
93:what do you think? Speedy delete.
1387:. I suggest to replace it by a
835:meet the inclusion criteria of
507:using the tag on those articles
491:Adressing each of your points,
1728:Talk:Most-perfect magic square
1621:The result of the debate was
1489:The result of the debate was
1319:The result of the debate was
1085:The result of the debate was
960:The result of the debate was
523:engage into the mediation case
458:dilutes the existing policies
305:Apparently created for use in
244:The result of the debate was
1:
876:-compliant links themselves.
37:
1142:This template automatically
590:2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict
307:2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict
1734:if this will be deleted. --
1239:I merged your changes into
1793:
1759:00:37, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
1719:07:17, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
1642:03:50, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
1440:15:03, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
1428:00:14, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
1389:Knowledge (XXG) open tasks
1385:National emblem of Belarus
1336:16:40, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
1278:00:09, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
1264:01:16, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
1195:01:16, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
1102:16:40, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
981:03:47, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
912:17:24, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
881:16:41, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
850:18:12, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
821:14:58, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
809:22:03, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
790:14:59, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
771:05:31, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
556:10:35, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
546:02:27, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
431:18:04, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
389:18:15, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
265:03:47, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
193:02:08, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
174:02:06, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
156:01:46, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
111:09:01, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
1698:05:48, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
1574:06:14, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
1564:05:34, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
1500:16:32, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
1416:18:09, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
1399:17:56, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
1207:12:42, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
1178:21:58, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
1038:22:42, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
744:22:07, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
693:21:51, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
683:20:36, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
673:20:25, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
656:19:37, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
646:19:16, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
633:18:39, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
613:13:10, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
536:11:25, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
527:external link style guide
483:09:27, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
471:09:08, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
409:18:36, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
400:09:31, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
377:07:43, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
364:02:12, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
351:23:31, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
330:23:08, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
1769:Please do not modify it.
1649:Template:4x4 type square
1609:Please do not modify it.
1598:Template:4x4 type square
1583:Please do not modify it.
1477:Please do not modify it.
1451:Please do not modify it.
1307:Please do not modify it.
1288:Please do not modify it.
1073:Please do not modify it.
1047:Please do not modify it.
988:Template:CHL Arena Guide
948:Please do not modify it.
937:Template:CHL Arena Guide
922:Please do not modify it.
232:Please do not modify it.
203:Please do not modify it.
79:Please do not modify it.
856:I strongly concur with
739:and should be deleted.
1738:10:02, 3 August 2006 (
706:
1638:(The people rejoice!)
1226:12:56, 31 July 2006 (
1027:Template:QMJHL Arenas
977:(The people rejoice!)
702:
261:(The people rejoice!)
183:North Carolina vandal
118:Template:Pile of Crap
68:Template:Pile of Crap
1222:for GFDL reasons. --
462:, and in my view it
1220:Template:Seeintrolc
1031:Template:WHL Arenas
1023:Template:OHL Arenas
962:try again, no votes
1149:general relativity
765:Christopher Parham
699:original rationale
312:general disclaimer
1640:
1350:Template:Opentask
1342:Template:Opentask
1109:Template:Seeintro
1062:Template:Seeintro
979:
783:Template:Copyedit
263:
181:, created by the
58:
57:
26:(Redirected from
1784:
1771:
1695:
1694:
1688:
1687:
1678:
1677:
1636:
1631:
1623:subst and d'lete
1611:
1585:
1562:
1556:
1536:
1535:
1479:
1453:
1379:
1378:
1309:
1290:
1258:
1252:
1248:
1242:
1138:
1137:
1075:
1049:
1017:
1016:
975:
970:
950:
924:
301:
300:
259:
254:
234:
205:
171:
147:
146:
81:
54:
43:
38:
31:
1792:
1791:
1787:
1786:
1785:
1783:
1782:
1781:
1780:
1774:deletion review
1767:
1756:Septentrionalis
1724:Keep or talkify
1692:
1691:
1685:
1684:
1651:
1647:
1629:
1614:deletion review
1607:
1601:
1594:
1588:deletion review
1581:
1558:
1552:
1509:
1505:
1482:deletion review
1475:
1469:
1462:
1456:deletion review
1449:
1352:
1348:
1345:
1312:deletion review
1305:
1299:
1293:deletion review
1286:
1256:
1250:
1246:
1240:
1111:
1107:
1078:deletion review
1071:
1065:
1058:
1052:deletion review
1045:
990:
986:
968:
953:deletion review
946:
940:
933:
927:deletion review
920:
323:these web pages
274:
270:
252:
237:deletion review
230:
224:
214:
208:deletion review
201:
169:
120:
116:
91:The result was
84:deletion review
77:
71:
64:
59:
52:
41:
33:
32:
25:
24:
12:
11:
5:
1790:
1788:
1779:
1778:
1762:
1761:
1749:
1721:
1708:
1707:
1680:
1679:
1619:
1618:
1602:
1600:
1595:
1593:
1592:
1545:
1538:
1537:
1487:
1486:
1470:
1468:
1463:
1461:
1460:
1444:
1443:
1430:
1418:
1413:Kirill Lokshin
1381:
1380:
1344:
1339:
1317:
1316:
1300:
1298:
1297:
1281:
1280:
1273:, per Loom91.
1268:
1267:
1266:
1209:
1197:
1140:
1139:
1083:
1082:
1066:
1064:
1059:
1057:
1056:
1019:
1018:
958:
957:
941:
939:
934:
932:
931:
915:
914:
884:
883:
853:
852:
824:
811:
793:
792:
774:
773:
757:
756:
755:
754:
753:
752:
751:
750:
749:
748:
747:
746:
718:
717:
716:
715:
714:
713:
712:
711:
710:
709:
708:
707:
695:
636:
635:
615:
606:external links
602:mediation case
565:
564:
563:
562:
561:
560:
559:
558:
512:
511:
510:
503:
495:
486:
485:
473:
444:
443:
442:
441:
440:
439:
438:
437:
436:
435:
434:
433:
393:
392:
391:
354:
353:
320:or linked from
303:
302:
242:
241:
225:
223:
218:
216:
213:
212:
196:
195:
176:
149:
148:
89:
88:
72:
70:
65:
63:
60:
56:
55:
47:
36:
34:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1789:
1777:
1775:
1770:
1764:
1763:
1760:
1757:
1753:
1750:
1747:
1744:
1741:
1737:
1733:
1729:
1725:
1722:
1720:
1717:
1713:
1710:
1709:
1705:
1702:
1701:
1700:
1699:
1696:
1689:
1675:
1671:
1667:
1663:
1659:
1655:
1650:
1646:
1645:
1644:
1643:
1639:
1635:
1632:
1627:
1624:
1617:
1615:
1610:
1604:
1603:
1599:
1596:
1591:
1589:
1584:
1578:
1577:
1576:
1575:
1571:
1566:
1565:
1561:
1555:
1551:
1550:
1543:
1533:
1529:
1525:
1521:
1517:
1513:
1508:
1504:
1503:
1502:
1501:
1498:
1497:
1492:
1485:
1483:
1478:
1472:
1471:
1467:
1464:
1459:
1457:
1452:
1446:
1445:
1441:
1438:
1434:
1431:
1429:
1426:
1422:
1419:
1417:
1414:
1410:
1406:
1403:
1402:
1401:
1400:
1397:
1394:
1390:
1386:
1376:
1372:
1368:
1364:
1360:
1356:
1351:
1347:
1346:
1343:
1340:
1338:
1337:
1334:
1331:
1330:
1326:
1322:
1315:
1313:
1308:
1302:
1301:
1296:
1294:
1289:
1283:
1282:
1279:
1276:
1272:
1269:
1265:
1262:
1255:
1245:
1238:
1237:
1235:
1232:
1229:
1225:
1221:
1217:
1213:
1210:
1208:
1205:
1201:
1198:
1196:
1193:
1189:
1185:
1182:
1181:
1180:
1179:
1176:
1175:Michael Hardy
1172:
1168:
1167:
1162:
1158:
1156:
1150:
1145:
1135:
1131:
1127:
1123:
1119:
1115:
1110:
1106:
1105:
1104:
1103:
1100:
1097:
1096:
1092:
1088:
1081:
1079:
1074:
1068:
1067:
1063:
1060:
1055:
1053:
1048:
1042:
1041:
1040:
1039:
1036:
1032:
1028:
1024:
1014:
1010:
1006:
1002:
998:
994:
989:
985:
984:
983:
982:
978:
974:
971:
966:
963:
956:
954:
949:
943:
942:
938:
935:
930:
928:
923:
917:
916:
913:
910:
905:
901:
897:
893:
889:
888:Strong delete
886:
885:
882:
879:
875:
871:
867:
863:
859:
855:
854:
851:
848:
843:
838:
834:
833:
828:
825:
822:
819:
815:
812:
810:
807:
802:
798:
795:
794:
791:
788:
784:
780:
776:
775:
772:
769:
766:
762:
759:
758:
745:
742:
738:
734:
730:
729:
728:
727:
726:
725:
724:
723:
722:
721:
720:
719:
705:
700:
696:
694:
691:
686:
685:
684:
681:
676:
675:
674:
671:
667:
663:
659:
658:
657:
654:
649:
648:
647:
644:
640:
639:
638:
637:
634:
631:
627:
623:
619:
618:Strong Delete
616:
614:
611:
607:
603:
599:
595:
591:
587:
582:
578:
574:
570:
569:Strong Delete
567:
566:
557:
554:
549:
548:
547:
544:
539:
538:
537:
534:
530:
528:
524:
518:
513:
508:
504:
501:
496:
493:
492:
490:
489:
488:
487:
484:
481:
477:
476:Strong Delete
474:
472:
469:
465:
461:
457:
453:
449:
446:
445:
432:
429:
425:
421:
416:
412:
411:
410:
407:
403:
402:
401:
398:
394:
390:
387:
382:
381:
380:
379:
378:
375:
374:Denis Diderot
371:
367:
366:
365:
362:
358:
357:
356:
355:
352:
349:
348:Denis Diderot
345:
341:
337:
334:
333:
332:
331:
328:
324:
321:
318:
313:
308:
298:
294:
290:
286:
282:
278:
273:
269:
268:
267:
266:
262:
258:
255:
250:
247:
246:no consensus.
240:
238:
233:
227:
226:
222:
219:
217:
211:
209:
204:
198:
197:
194:
191:
188:
184:
180:
179:Speedy delete
177:
175:
172:
167:
163:
160:
159:
158:
157:
154:
144:
140:
136:
132:
128:
124:
119:
115:
114:
113:
112:
108:
104:
100:
99:
94:
87:
85:
80:
74:
73:
69:
66:
61:
51:
48:
46:
40:
39:
29:
23:
19:
1768:
1765:
1751:
1731:
1723:
1711:
1703:
1681:
1622:
1620:
1608:
1605:
1582:
1579:
1567:
1547:
1539:
1494:
1490:
1488:
1476:
1473:
1450:
1447:
1432:
1420:
1408:
1404:
1382:
1327:
1320:
1318:
1306:
1303:
1287:
1284:
1270:
1211:
1199:
1187:
1183:
1170:
1164:
1160:
1159:The initial
1152:
1143:
1141:
1093:
1086:
1084:
1072:
1069:
1046:
1043:
1020:
961:
959:
947:
944:
921:
918:
892:User:Iorek85
887:
864:to see that
831:
830:
826:
813:
800:
796:
760:
703:
666:Arthur Rubin
661:
626:Arthur Rubin
621:
617:
597:
585:
580:
576:
568:
520:
506:
475:
463:
455:
447:
344:disinforming
343:
339:
335:
322:
319:
315:
304:
245:
243:
231:
228:
215:
202:
199:
178:
161:
150:
96:
92:
90:
78:
75:
1549:Lady Aleena
1405:Strong keep
1184:Speedy keep
1144:incorrectly
909:OwenBlacker
448:Strong Keep
336:Strong Keep
1325:Mailer Dia
1216:Seeintrolc
1091:Mailer Dia
878:AdamKesher
741:AdamKesher
622:individual
610:AdamKesher
187:Antandrus
1714:per nom.
1261:Srleffler
1254:db-author
1192:Srleffler
586:necessary
456:in no way
384:article.
340:informing
1560:contribs
1542:this TfD
1540:Same as
1244:seeintro
1035:BoojiBoy
896:Fox News
866:Barberio
787:Barberio
680:Barberio
643:Barberio
553:Barberio
533:Barberio
468:Barberio
406:Barberio
153:Longhair
20: |
1716:Michael
1662:history
1520:history
1437:SEWilco
1425:Neil916
1363:history
1275:Neil916
1122:history
1001:history
858:savidan
847:savidan
818:SEWilco
806:Iorek85
662:without
598:without
428:savidan
415:WP:NPOV
386:savidan
361:savidan
327:savidan
285:history
131:history
62:July 30
50:July 31
45:July 29
1736:ais523
1712:Delete
1704:Delete
1693:Merlin
1634:rbil10
1491:delete
1259:tag.--
1224:ais523
1204:Loom91
973:rbil10
827:Update
768:(talk)
761:Delete
670:(talk)
630:(talk)
464:should
257:rbil10
190:(talk)
170:(talk)
162:Delete
1752:Subst
1732:subst
1670:watch
1666:links
1626:RyanG
1528:watch
1524:links
1393:mikka
1371:watch
1367:links
1130:watch
1126:links
1009:watch
1005:links
965:RyanG
900:nanny
874:WP:EL
870:WP:EL
842:WP:EL
837:WP:EL
737:WP:EL
733:WP:EL
594:WP:EL
581:every
573:WP:EL
517:WP:EL
460:WP:EL
424:WP:EL
420:WP:EL
370:WP:EL
293:watch
289:links
249:RyanG
139:watch
135:links
53:: -->
16:<
1686:Neon
1674:logs
1658:talk
1654:edit
1554:talk
1532:logs
1516:talk
1512:edit
1496:Will
1493:. –
1433:Keep
1421:Keep
1409:good
1375:logs
1359:talk
1355:edit
1323:. -
1321:keep
1271:Keep
1212:Keep
1200:Keep
1134:logs
1118:talk
1114:edit
1089:. -
1087:keep
1029:and
1013:logs
997:talk
993:edit
904:NPOV
814:Keep
801:more
797:Keep
690:2005
653:2005
579:and
543:2005
480:2005
397:2005
297:logs
281:talk
277:edit
143:logs
127:talk
123:edit
42:<
1396:(t)
1188:fix
1173:.
668:|
628:|
608:.
577:any
325:."
314:: "
166:Mak
95:~~
22:Log
1672:|
1668:|
1664:|
1660:|
1656:|
1572:@
1570:LA
1530:|
1526:|
1522:|
1518:|
1514:|
1373:|
1369:|
1365:|
1361:|
1357:|
1333:lo
1257:}}
1251:{{
1247:}}
1241:{{
1236:)
1132:|
1128:|
1124:|
1120:|
1116:|
1099:lo
1033:.
1025:,
1011:|
1007:|
1003:|
999:|
995:|
832:do
678:--
531:--
317:in
295:|
291:|
287:|
283:|
279:|
141:|
137:|
133:|
129:|
125:|
109:)
1748:)
1746:C
1743:T
1740:U
1676:)
1652:(
1630:e
1557:/
1546:—
1544:.
1534:)
1510:(
1442:)
1377:)
1353:(
1329:b
1234:C
1231:T
1228:U
1171:g
1161:G
1157:.
1136:)
1112:(
1095:b
1015:)
991:(
969:e
823:)
529:.
299:)
275:(
253:e
145:)
121:(
107:c
105:/
103:t
101:(
98:N
30:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.