434:. I have just begun sorting these out, but there are about 240 pages for ambiguous "Foo, New York" names, and so far about three fifths are two-link pages for a village or similar subsidiary unit contained entirely within a town of the same name. Collectively, these likely account for a few thousand currently ambiguous links. It shouldn't take more than a few days to check the entire list and separate out all pages falling into this pattern. However, I think we have enough information to decide what our policy should be as to these pages, and my opinion is that the encompassing unit should be treated as the primary topic.
1252:
searcher will make a first click to a page about the town which immediately mentions the village, and a second click to the village from there. I suppose we could make it even easier by putting a hatnote to the village in each article, which I wouldn't object to, but remember also that for those people searching for the town, or just looking for general information about the area (which is covered in the article on the town) they have already reached their destination on the first click.
1173:
be. We could, of course, jump arbitrarily to any level of precision, listing for example the various street addresses at which a notable person lived as a child, and indicating what quadrant of the house their bedroom was in, but we don't do this because too much precision clutters the article trivially, while sufficient detail to give the reader the big picture can almost always be found by merely identifying the general area where someone was born and raised.
159:
141:
1008:
areas of the encyclopedia up to and including helping bring articles from stubs to good article status. However, the lion's share of my edits, probably more than 100,000 of them, are in the area of disambiguation work. This includes simple disambig fixes, creating, moving, and fixing pages to match our policies, which these two-disambig pages do not, and prompting the creation of substantial subprojects (such as
259:
this type, this link should be fixed to point to the encompassing larger place. So long as we are referring to the
Village of Foo which is within the Town of Foo, then it is correct to say that someone "from Foo" is from the "Town of Foo", irrespective of whether they are from the village within the town. I don't know how many ambiguous links this will clear up, but it should be more than a handful. Cheers!
32:
169:
1045:
links that do intend to link to the town vs the village. Links to disambiguation pages are not "incorrect"; they are ambiguous. Ambiguous and incorrect are not the same. BD2412's plan is to wholesale convert ambiguous links into correct links and incorrect links, without knowing which ones are incorrect. This plan is contrary to the objectives of this WikiProject.
928:, and not to the "correct" page reflecting the subject's place of birth. Since, in every instance, the moved page will be accompanied by a hatnote pointing to the other page (and the other page is typically mentioned early in the article for the encompassing area), users will have the same notification that there is an encompassed jurisdiction of the same name.
81:
63:
1024:, in that we already have thousands of incorrect links to these improper disambig pages, which can be fixed with the set of actions I have proposed. Whether the articles from which these links arise should be included, or should contain data such as place of birth, is an entirely different matter, and is frankly not the concern of the WP:DPL project.
676:
people are open to increasing the amount of links requiring disambiguation (since most editors don't know which towns have identically-named locations with articles and thus won't fix the links where needed), then whatever, but I still think it's a bad idea. (Also, I don't see the point of moving the current dab pages to <location: -->
457:
likely to think of such things at all). In other cases, the town may be more densely populated overall and the village merely one population center among many. In such cases the town would be more likely to predominate. In any case, there are many editors working on New York places. It might be judicious to solicit their input.
1096:, who has agreed that his concern will be satisfied by the generation of the appropriate report. The discussion is therefore essentially over, consensus has been reached, and a late mystery objection does not belay the fact that this proposal will be implemented once the requested report has been set up. Cheers!
1358:
town, and is mentioned right there in the lede of that article. This discussion established a presumption that the encompassing geographic region was the primary topic of the entity name, and evidence is needed to overcome such a presumption. As you noted, there should also be a hatnote there, which I support.
820:
of articles that had such links at a given earlier date. (By the way, TMF, if you are relying on the stub link display to identify disambiguation pages, you are necessarily going to have both false positives and false negatives, since some disambig pages are long and some non-disambig articles are short.) --
967:
I plan to do this myself, being an editor with the type of experience you reference. As for the disambig pages potentially being expandable, I am not going to delete them, I am only going to move them to the "foo (disambiguation)" title, and move the page for the encompassing jurisdiction to the base
900:
The proposed convention would be convenient, but I am concerned that in the long term this convention may not be a good idea. Birthplace is of extreme importance to anyone researching family history, and for this purpose it may make a big difference whether someone is born in Town of X or
Village of
494:
directing them to this discussion. I suppose I could also drop a note on each disambig talk page. I finished going through the list last night, and found about 140 pages following the pattern of only two links, one for the town and the other for the village contained completely within the town. There
1357:
For one thing, the request for a page move is usually accompanied by some evidence in the form of page views or external links discussing the primacy of the subject that is claimed to be the primary topic of the title. For another, the "quaint historic village" is geographically contained within the
1007:
I'm afraid I really can't give much credence to your evaluation of the situation, as you appear to have drawn a conclusion about my expertise without doing any research on the question. As it happens, I have been on this project for over five years, and have over 200,000 edits to show for it, in all
853:
Re false positives: I'm well aware of that, but I've found that a good 80-90% of the highlighted links on New York road articles are/were dab pages. The long dab page issue never really came into play here since all of the NY location dab pages were short, which I guess led to this discussion in the
819:
I'm sure it can be done; the main issue is making sure that the task is specified unambiguously, so that the report that is generated is actually useful. It's not difficult at all to generate a list of articles that link to a given title, and only marginally more difficult to compare that to a list
700:
Leaving the disambig links so that their presence will prompt someone to fix them sounds good in theory, but if it actually worked in practice, then we wouldn't have the thousands of links to these disambig pages that will be solved by conforming them to our TWODABS guideline. However, I can offer a
560:
I'm somewhat indifferent to the proposal; however, I will say that it would make it more difficult to determine where disambiguation is needed. I currently find links to dab pages by using the "stub link threshold" preference, but this method won't work if the dab pages are changed to redirects. So,
456:
I'm not sure it's possible to make a general decision without considering context. In some cases the village is the primary populated urban center and the town a relatively less populated administrative region. I'd suspect people would likely think of the village before the town (so far as anyone is
1172:
the town. If you were to ask me where my couch is, I would say it is "in my living room"; I might be more specific and say it is in the northeast corner of my living room, but "in my living room" is a completely accurate response, and is as precise as any article that might link to it would need to
675:
Not in my opinion. Like I said above, at the present time I can tell that I've linked to a name that is used for both a town and a village or a hamlet, from where I can fix the link to point to the right location. If this is carried out, I won't be able to tell unless I actually follow the link. If
1044:
Again BD2412 argues (a) BD2412's plan is sound because (b) BD2412 has lots of edits. Alas, (a) does not follow from (b). Let's focus on the plan, okay? Correct, the ambiguity already exists, but the plan does not fix anything; the plan merely sweeps it under a rug, hiding ambiguous links among
952:
may apply now, but what about historically? I remain not comfortable with the premise that it is safe to edit incoming links to send them to the town article. What if the disambiguation page lists only town and village only because no one has yet expanded the list? It seems to me that an editor
627:
Well, I edit articles (roads) where the exact jurisdiction is an issue. While it is true that something in a village is also within a town, our road articles use the most specific jurisdiction. I'd be more open to this idea if people actively watched the incoming links to the "non-dabbed" form for
1059:
I'm not sure why you are raising concerns now, when the discussion is long concluded and consensus in favor of this proposal has been reached. I will note, however, that I never argued from my experience until you questioned whether I had sufficient experience to disambiguate these links, which I
878:
I'll work out the logistics over the next few days. Shouldn't be too difficult - get the automated new links report set up, move the current disambig pages to "foo (disambiguation) titles in case any intentional disambig links are necessary, and move the encompassing area to the main title with a
258:
Many links to such articles are merely references to someone having been born there or died there. It is rarely of any import that the subject was born in the village within the town, and not merely in the town. I propose that where an article references an event within an ambiguous place name of
1251:
was previously a disambig page, and is now the page for the town, but the village is linked right there in the lede. This is the case for every single one of these pages, so instead of making a first click to a page which lists town and village and a second click to the village from there, the
923:
is an example of a page that would not be addressed by this proposal, which is aimed solely at two-link disambig pages for which one disambig topic entirely physically encompasses the other. The concern about identifying correct birthplaces is not affected, as these links are already currently
585:
If we generally make the encompassing geographic unit the primary, this will not be an issue. The vast majority of articles linking to these pages only reference them for the purpose of a person being from a place, or a building or the like being located in a place. Someone who is "from"
705:, only about 150 pages, and we can easily generate a report (or a monthly report, or similar series of regular reports) of incoming links to each of those pages, so you won't even have to search through those pages looking for the ambiguous links. Would that resolve your concerns?
1009:
1321:
The question of whether we should have two-link disambiguation pages is settled. The question of which entity - the village or the town - is the primary topic of the term is subject to discussion, and that discussion should occur on the talk pages for the entities involved.
1013:
606:
encourages anyway). Absent specific evidence that the encompassed place should be considered the primary, the dab page will be moved to a "foo (disambiguation)" title and the page for the encompassing place will be moved to the current dab title.
854:
first place. Anyway, since it seems like it's possible to generate a report in the manner I inquired about above, I guess I'm no longer opposed to this proposal. I'm still not necessarily for it, but I won't be opposed to it taking place. –
1347:
opposed. You didn't give a reason; you just "opposed". What was your reasoning? Do you really think that people searching for
Skaneateles are more interested in the enormous rural township than they are in the quaint historic village?
1149:
It is better to have links to disambiguation pages than to have links to articles that can be incorrect. Accuracy is important. The disambiguation pages located under the ambiguous name help to increase accuracy and correctness.
1306:
702:
431:
1342:
Well maybe all you people should get on the same page about that, because Zyxw clearly didn't get the memo. He/She used "this is settled" as his/her entire argument against moving
Skaneateles. Another question is why
561:
in the long term, this proposal is going to create more work for those devoted to disambiguation because your typical editor (such as myself) will link to an ambiguous location, see nothing wrong, and move on. –
1199:
I have serious concerns about this move, and I'm sorry I didn't know about it sooner. In many cases, the village is much more notable than the surrounding town, so I don't see much justification for making the
829:
953:
with ample experience fixing links to disambiguation pages can determine when it is safe, but I am not comfortable with the premise that this is safe enough to do by a bot or an editor without experience.
1407:
Certainly, but that doesn't have to be via data. Universal agreement from those familiar with the topic is usually sufficient, as is a logical argument based on well-reasoned premises and conclusions.
988:
Oppose. This is a plan to create ambiguity and error for the sake of an editor's convenience. This plan will increase the need to disambiguate incoming links to articles. Also, I am not persuaded by
363:
that town, or the like, and we use that as a basis for pointing ambiguous links to the encompassing body, wouldn't that make the encompassing body the primary topic, where the article should sit?
1017:
511:). Conversely, there are about a hundred links on the list which do not follow this pattern, although some of those could arguably have a town as a primary topic among the options listed.
280:
I've noticed the same issue as an obstacle in clearing some dab pages with links. Sounds reasonable to use the town, as long as it is verified the village is in fact inside the town. --
1214:
To the extent that references to the town are intended to indicate the geographical origin of a person or thing, the town encompassing the village also encompasses that reference.
1387:
When you propose a move on
Knowledge, you must be prepared to demonstrate its necessity to people from all over the world, who may never even have heard of a village in New York.
495:
are a handful of other pages having just those two links plus a third option which would fall off significantly in terms of plausibly displacing a primary topic (for example,
1080:. The clear consensus among those participating in this discussion - reached more than ten days ago - is to address this problem as proposed, as evidenced by the comments by
968:
page name now occupied by the disambiguation page. If new information arises later indicating that there is another meaning, things can be moved back with little fuss.
1459:
1454:
1285:
I think that's a discussion to be had on the individual pages; although I continue to believe that if the town encompasses the village, it amounts to the same thing.
1305:
But now when I try to have a discussion on the individual pages, I'm told that "The issue of New York towns which contain villages of the same name was addressed at
17:
993:'s claim to possess sufficient expertise. The real issue here is the excessive inclusion of biographical information about people of borderline notability.
1378:
I didn't think it was necessary to provide evidence for something that should be painfully obvious to anyone with a passing familiarity with the village.
195:
602:. This proposal has evolved towards the position that the dab page won't be changed to a redirect at all, it will be changed to the primary topic (which
1449:
107:
1412:
1402:
1382:
1373:
1352:
1337:
1316:
1300:
1280:
1267:
1238:
1229:
1208:
1188:
1162:
1144:
1111:
1054:
1039:
1002:
983:
962:
943:
914:
894:
872:
814:
790:
767:
747:
720:
695:
670:
646:
622:
579:
546:
526:
485:
465:
449:
421:
401:
378:
347:
327:
307:
289:
274:
1060:
have demonstrated to the satisfaction of any reasonable person that I do. The point of this discussion is that the link to the encompassing area
901:
X. Also, the problem of place names in New York State goes beyond towns and villages: there are also cities and census designated places. See
182:
146:
103:
88:
68:
1046:
994:
954:
906:
1276:
applies, but I question the assignment of the town as primary in all cases. In some cases it might be; in others, it's probably not.
772:
Would it be possible to have the report separate newly-added links that are truly new from articles where the redirect was bypassed? –
867:
785:
742:
690:
641:
574:
537:, the largest of all NY villages, should be excepted, then it's one of the exceptional cases that can be handled case by case.
1077:
491:
332:
I agree that care must be taken. Usually it says in the disambig page whether the village is inside or adjacent to the town.
587:
534:
251:
1076:
of foo. This discussion was ongoing for weeks, and was made known on the talk page of every single affected page, and at
43:
1234:
Yes, I'm aware of that. The problem is all of the other use cases, such as searches, non-origin links, and the like.
655:
of a position having a link to an encompassing jurisdiction than you would be having a link to a disambiguation page.
388:. So it's possible the entire system of town/village NY dabs is contrary to our guidelines and should be taken out. --
799:, but so long as some algorithm can be generated by which a bot can parse those kinds of links, I don't see why not.
591:
315:
245:
1158:
93:
1050:
998:
958:
910:
879:
hatnote to the other, except where there is evidence that the encompassed jurisdiction is the primary topic.
542:
533:
Having seen that note, I too like the idea of town as primary in most cases. If someone says a few such as
174:
857:
775:
732:
680:
631:
564:
500:
323:
49:
1093:
862:
780:
737:
685:
636:
569:
729:
and start replacing ] with ] en masse. If that happens, the report pretty much becomes meaningless. –
1247:
situations, and the terms are always related. Suppose someone is looking for the village of
Palmyra.
1154:
504:
752:
We have the tools to deal with that too. For example, we can generate reports of newly added links.
237:
194:
on
Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
1089:
1064:
correct for all issues of where, for example, a subject was born. If the subject was born in the
538:
496:
1010:
Knowledge:Disambiguation pages with links/Disambiguation pages that link to disambiguation pages
825:
294:
I think people have been doing this in an unofficial capacity anyways. Full support from me. --
1273:
1248:
1244:
603:
508:
462:
385:
285:
1397:
1368:
1332:
1295:
1262:
1243:
This is still not a situation that requires disambiguation, because these are virtually all
1224:
1183:
1139:
1129:
Status update: This project is underway, and going slowly, but without any mishaps. Cheers!
1106:
1034:
978:
938:
889:
809:
762:
715:
665:
617:
521:
480:
444:
416:
373:
342:
319:
269:
191:
701:
much easier solution to your concern regarding the ability to catch those links. We have
406:
I'm rustling up a survey of these pages to get a grasp of just how big an issue this is.
1014:
Knowledge:Disambiguation pages with links/Questionable redirects to disambiguation pages
399:
305:
1443:
1409:
1379:
1349:
1313:
1277:
1235:
1205:
726:
1081:
821:
796:
458:
427:
281:
1168:
That is why this proposal was limited to pages for which the village is contained
628:
articles that should be pointing to the other entity, but I doubt they will be. –
1388:
1359:
1323:
1286:
1253:
1215:
1174:
1130:
1097:
1025:
990:
969:
929:
880:
800:
753:
706:
656:
608:
599:
595:
512:
471:
435:
407:
364:
333:
260:
158:
140:
187:
164:
1085:
920:
902:
389:
355:
Come to think of it, if we have an instance where "Foo, New York" is a town
295:
1307:
Knowledge:Disambiguation pages with links/New York villages within towns
1153:
Links to dab pages are less of a problem than links to incorrect pages.
432:
Knowledge:Disambiguation pages with links/New York disambiguation report
233:
We have dozens of disambig pages which essentially follow this pattern:
1072:
of foo, then it is correct to say that the subject was born within the
677:, New York (disambiguation) - who's actually going to use the page?) –
80:
62:
314:
Well, need to be careful when the village in not in one town like
25:
1018:
Knowledge:Disambiguation pages with links/from categories
186:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the
1310:
98:
106:, where you can join the project or contribute to the
1312:You guys can't have it both ways; that's not fair.
703:the complete list of pages to be fixed right here
384:Yerg, I hadn't thought of that. And don't forget
96:pages on Knowledge. If you wish to help, you can
18:Knowledge talk:Disambiguation pages with links
594:, in the same way that someone who is "from"
8:
1020:). The ambiguity which seems to concern you
470:That is an entirely reasonable suggestion.
92:, an attempt to structure and organize all
135:
57:
1068:of foo, which lies completely within the
102:attached to this talk page, or visit the
42:does not require a rating on Knowledge's
1460:NA-importance New York (state) articles
1455:Project-Class New York (state) articles
137:
59:
254:, located within the Town of Schoharie
204:Knowledge:WikiProject New York (state)
207:Template:WikiProject New York (state)
7:
116:Knowledge:WikiProject Disambiguation
31:
29:
119:Template:WikiProject Disambiguation
48:It is of interest to the following
24:
1092:. The only concern was raised by
725:It would if people don't violate
180:This page is within the scope of
86:This page is within the scope of
1450:WikiProject Disambiguation pages
167:
157:
139:
79:
61:
30:
1078:Knowledge:WikiProject New York
492:Knowledge:WikiProject New York
1:
1145:21:49, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
588:Schoharie (village), New York
535:Hempstead (village), New York
252:Schoharie (village), New York
248:, located in Schoharie County
198:and see a list of open tasks.
1301:20:58, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
1281:19:48, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
183:WikiProject New York (state)
1413:17:48, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
1403:04:03, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
1383:22:14, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
1374:23:02, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
1353:21:51, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
1338:03:23, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
1317:02:09, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
1268:17:36, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
1239:13:43, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
1230:00:59, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
1209:00:43, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
1112:02:40, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
1055:02:02, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
1040:00:12, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
1003:22:33, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
984:22:02, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
963:21:16, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
944:14:04, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
915:04:17, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
1476:
895:22:34, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
873:22:13, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
830:14:49, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
815:21:28, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
791:21:14, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
768:02:55, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
748:02:39, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
721:13:36, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
696:04:57, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
671:02:21, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
647:17:52, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
623:17:11, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
592:Schoharie (town), New York
580:16:50, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
547:21:38, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
527:17:19, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
486:00:11, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
466:23:21, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
450:13:39, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
422:13:18, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
402:12:49, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
379:11:54, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
316:Wappingers Falls, New York
246:Schoharie (town), New York
89:WikiProject Disambiguation
1189:14:04, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
1163:11:37, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
905:for one notable example.
590:is, in fact, also "from"
348:18:42, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
328:18:24, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
308:18:23, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
290:16:52, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
275:15:59, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
210:New York (state) articles
152:
74:
56:
175:New York (state) portal
122:Disambiguation articles
651:Surely you'd be in no
598:is necessarily "from"
507:also links New Yorker
501:New York City Marathon
1204:the primary topic.
926:disambiguation pages
505:Gouverneur, New York
490:I've left a note at
950:village within town
238:Schoharie, New York
1090:User:Jim.henderson
497:Marathon, New York
44:content assessment
1249:Palmyra, New York
1094:User:TwinsMetsFan
795:I'll have to ask
509:Gouverneur Morris
361:completely within
226:
225:
222:
221:
218:
217:
134:
133:
130:
129:
1467:
1395:
1366:
1330:
1293:
1260:
1222:
1181:
1137:
1104:
1032:
976:
936:
887:
871:
865:
860:
807:
789:
783:
778:
760:
746:
740:
735:
713:
694:
688:
683:
663:
645:
639:
634:
615:
578:
572:
567:
519:
478:
442:
414:
396:
393:
371:
340:
302:
299:
267:
212:
211:
208:
205:
202:
201:New York (state)
177:
172:
171:
170:
161:
154:
153:
147:New York (state)
143:
136:
124:
123:
120:
117:
114:
101:
83:
76:
75:
65:
58:
35:
34:
33:
26:
1475:
1474:
1470:
1469:
1468:
1466:
1465:
1464:
1440:
1439:
1389:
1360:
1324:
1287:
1254:
1216:
1197:
1195:Strong concerns
1175:
1155:Bogdan Nagachop
1131:
1098:
1026:
970:
948:The pattern of
930:
881:
863:
858:
855:
801:
781:
776:
773:
754:
738:
733:
730:
707:
686:
681:
678:
657:
637:
632:
629:
609:
570:
565:
562:
513:
499:also links the
472:
436:
408:
394:
391:
365:
334:
300:
297:
261:
231:
229:Opening heading
209:
206:
203:
200:
199:
173:
168:
166:
121:
118:
115:
112:
111:
97:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
1473:
1471:
1463:
1462:
1457:
1452:
1442:
1441:
1438:
1437:
1436:
1435:
1434:
1433:
1432:
1431:
1430:
1429:
1428:
1427:
1426:
1425:
1424:
1423:
1422:
1421:
1420:
1419:
1418:
1417:
1416:
1415:
1196:
1193:
1192:
1191:
1127:
1126:
1125:
1124:
1123:
1122:
1121:
1120:
1119:
1118:
1117:
1116:
1115:
1114:
1022:already exists
898:
897:
851:
850:
849:
848:
847:
846:
845:
844:
843:
842:
841:
840:
839:
838:
837:
836:
835:
834:
833:
832:
558:
557:
556:
555:
554:
553:
552:
551:
550:
549:
531:
530:
529:
488:
353:
352:
351:
350:
312:
311:
310:
256:
255:
249:
241:may refer to:
230:
227:
224:
223:
220:
219:
216:
215:
213:
196:the discussion
179:
178:
162:
150:
149:
144:
132:
131:
128:
127:
125:
113:Disambiguation
94:disambiguation
84:
72:
71:
69:Disambiguation
66:
54:
53:
47:
36:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1472:
1461:
1458:
1456:
1453:
1451:
1448:
1447:
1445:
1414:
1411:
1406:
1405:
1404:
1401:
1400:
1396:
1394:
1393:
1386:
1385:
1384:
1381:
1377:
1376:
1375:
1372:
1371:
1367:
1365:
1364:
1356:
1355:
1354:
1351:
1346:
1341:
1340:
1339:
1336:
1335:
1331:
1329:
1328:
1320:
1319:
1318:
1315:
1311:
1308:
1304:
1303:
1302:
1299:
1298:
1294:
1292:
1291:
1284:
1283:
1282:
1279:
1275:
1271:
1270:
1269:
1266:
1265:
1261:
1259:
1258:
1250:
1246:
1242:
1241:
1240:
1237:
1233:
1232:
1231:
1228:
1227:
1223:
1221:
1220:
1213:
1212:
1211:
1210:
1207:
1203:
1194:
1190:
1187:
1186:
1182:
1180:
1179:
1171:
1167:
1166:
1165:
1164:
1160:
1156:
1151:
1147:
1146:
1143:
1142:
1138:
1136:
1135:
1113:
1110:
1109:
1105:
1103:
1102:
1095:
1091:
1087:
1083:
1079:
1075:
1071:
1067:
1063:
1058:
1057:
1056:
1052:
1048:
1047:66.167.45.150
1043:
1042:
1041:
1038:
1037:
1033:
1031:
1030:
1023:
1019:
1015:
1011:
1006:
1005:
1004:
1000:
996:
995:66.167.45.150
992:
987:
986:
985:
982:
981:
977:
975:
974:
966:
965:
964:
960:
956:
955:66.167.45.150
951:
947:
946:
945:
942:
941:
937:
935:
934:
927:
922:
919:
918:
917:
916:
912:
908:
907:66.167.45.150
904:
896:
893:
892:
888:
886:
885:
877:
876:
875:
874:
870:
869:
866:
861:
831:
827:
823:
818:
817:
816:
813:
812:
808:
806:
805:
798:
794:
793:
792:
788:
787:
784:
779:
771:
770:
769:
766:
765:
761:
759:
758:
751:
750:
749:
745:
744:
741:
736:
728:
724:
723:
722:
719:
718:
714:
712:
711:
704:
699:
698:
697:
693:
692:
689:
684:
674:
673:
672:
669:
668:
664:
662:
661:
654:
650:
649:
648:
644:
643:
640:
635:
626:
625:
624:
621:
620:
616:
614:
613:
605:
601:
597:
593:
589:
584:
583:
582:
581:
577:
576:
573:
568:
548:
544:
540:
539:Jim.henderson
536:
532:
528:
525:
524:
520:
518:
517:
510:
506:
502:
498:
493:
489:
487:
484:
483:
479:
477:
476:
469:
468:
467:
464:
460:
455:
454:
453:
452:
451:
448:
447:
443:
441:
440:
433:
429:
425:
424:
423:
420:
419:
415:
413:
412:
405:
404:
403:
400:
398:
397:
387:
383:
382:
381:
380:
377:
376:
372:
370:
369:
362:
358:
349:
346:
345:
341:
339:
338:
331:
330:
329:
325:
321:
317:
313:
309:
306:
304:
303:
293:
292:
291:
287:
283:
279:
278:
277:
276:
273:
272:
268:
266:
265:
253:
250:
247:
244:
243:
242:
240:
239:
234:
228:
214:
197:
193:
189:
185:
184:
176:
165:
163:
160:
156:
155:
151:
148:
145:
142:
138:
126:
109:
105:
100:
99:edit the page
95:
91:
90:
85:
82:
78:
77:
73:
70:
67:
64:
60:
55:
51:
45:
41:
37:
28:
27:
19:
1398:
1391:
1390:
1369:
1362:
1361:
1344:
1333:
1326:
1325:
1296:
1289:
1288:
1263:
1256:
1255:
1225:
1218:
1217:
1201:
1198:
1184:
1177:
1176:
1169:
1152:
1148:
1140:
1133:
1132:
1128:
1107:
1100:
1099:
1082:User:Doncram
1073:
1069:
1065:
1061:
1035:
1028:
1027:
1021:
979:
972:
971:
949:
939:
932:
931:
925:
924:pointing to
899:
890:
883:
882:
856:
852:
810:
803:
802:
774:
763:
756:
755:
731:
716:
709:
708:
679:
666:
659:
658:
652:
630:
618:
611:
610:
563:
559:
522:
515:
514:
481:
474:
473:
445:
438:
437:
417:
410:
409:
390:
374:
367:
366:
360:
356:
354:
343:
336:
335:
296:
270:
263:
262:
257:
236:
235:
232:
181:
104:project page
87:
50:WikiProjects
40:project page
39:
600:Miami Beach
596:South Beach
320:Vegaswikian
1444:Categories
1274:WP:TWODABS
1245:WP:TWODABS
797:User:R'n'B
604:WP:TWODABS
430:, we have
428:User:R'n'B
426:Thanks to
386:WP:TWODABS
359:a village
188:U.S. state
108:discussion
1086:User:JaGa
921:Tonawanda
903:Tonawanda
1272:I agree
357:and also
192:New York
1066:village
826:call me
282:doncram
1410:Powers
1392:bd2412
1380:Powers
1363:bd2412
1350:Powers
1327:bd2412
1314:Powers
1290:bd2412
1278:Powers
1257:bd2412
1236:Powers
1219:bd2412
1206:Powers
1178:bd2412
1170:within
1134:bd2412
1101:bd2412
1088:, and
1029:bd2412
1016:, and
991:BD2412
973:bd2412
933:bd2412
884:bd2412
828:Russ)
804:bd2412
757:bd2412
727:WP:R2D
710:bd2412
660:bd2412
612:bd2412
516:bd2412
503:, and
475:bd2412
439:bd2412
411:bd2412
368:bd2412
337:bd2412
264:bd2412
46:scale.
822:R'n'B
653:worse
463:wiser
459:older
38:This
16:<
1202:town
1159:talk
1074:town
1070:town
1051:talk
1012:and
999:talk
959:talk
911:talk
543:talk
324:talk
286:talk
1345:you
1309:."
190:of
1446::
1161:)
1084:,
1062:is
1053:)
1001:)
961:)
913:)
545:)
461:≠
395:Ga
392:Ja
326:)
318:.
301:Ga
298:Ja
288:)
1399:T
1370:T
1334:T
1297:T
1264:T
1226:T
1185:T
1157:(
1141:T
1108:T
1049:(
1036:T
997:(
980:T
957:(
940:T
909:(
891:T
868:F
864:M
859:T
824:(
811:T
786:F
782:M
777:T
764:T
743:F
739:M
734:T
717:T
691:F
687:M
682:T
667:T
642:F
638:M
633:T
619:T
575:F
571:M
566:T
541:(
523:T
482:T
446:T
418:T
375:T
344:T
322:(
284:(
271:T
110:.
52::
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
