777:. Episode screenshots have a place in Knowledge (XXG) in accordance with reasoning in opposition of the proposal above. Also, I believe episode screenshots, when used properly, still hold up to most of the arguments in favor of this proposal. Proper usage of a screenshot occurs under the condition that every episode screenshot appears no more than twice on all of Knowledge (XXG) (once beside it's entry on the episode list page, and once on the article dedicated to that episode). Any other instances of the screenshot is outside the definition of fair-use. On top of this, I have seen too much abuse from administrators who will enforce their opinion on non-fair-use despite any agreements made by discussions such as these (eg. remove images, lock the pages, etc.). I believe admins who violate the consensus reached here and/or re-open the issue (this is perhaps the third time!) should be subject to
806:- At the very least this proposal is woefully inadequate in dealing with "exceptions to the rule" and so forth, and attempts to lump a huge and broad category of Knowledge (XXG) articles into one small, narrowly written rule. Additionally the suggestion that "Each... cannot have its own dedicated image" is, to be blunt, complete and utter crap. While debate will continue on (in perpetuity) over the use in things like episode lists, identification of discreet objects, characters, or other entities in a list would be drastically impeded by an artificial restriction on the use of identifying photographs or images. In short, this is a horrible proposal and would have a drastic, negative effect on Knowledge (XXG) were it to be accepted. --
652:. I am most disturbed by the assertion "almost all agree that images mainly serve decorative function". In a University affiliation list, images of famous people are placed next to the person's entry, which consists not only of the person's name, but also a sort of mini-bio of that person's educational background and professional teaching and research in relation to the university, as applicable. The purpose of the image is not primarily to decorate the page. It is to
39:
636:
covers of the band look like, and can also help to show, for instance, a progression. And if the images are all at the individual page, anyway, there's no additional fair use problem from having them on the list article, as far as I understand fair use law (which is, I will admit, not terribly far - but can you say much more?)
1274:
Do you see an artificial limit? "The amount of copyrighted work used should be as little as possible. Low-resolution images should be used instead of high-resolution images (especially images that are so high-resolution that they could be used for piracy). Do not use multiple images or media clips if
1031:
Okay this page has (yet again) become inactive, There is an immense amount of opposition to the changes proposed, I move to dismiss this proposal and archive it; furthermore as consensus has proven so far fair use images in lists are acceptable and they do pass the FUC so I also move to reinstate the
1102:
proposed back in the end of
October has certainly been rejected. But that replaced much previous discussion, which I thought might have eventually got somewhere. What I suggested several times was that where there is little or no text accompanying the images, which is the case for most of the lists,
445:
of getting support. When we say "use as little as possible" we mean use only what the article needs, and you cannot generically assign a number to that. Fair use images in lists do not fail number 3, as this proposal suggests, by numbers alone. Even if I were against fair-use images in lists I would
606:
I really wish
Knowledge (XXG) would realize that its information is that of an encyclopedia but its appearance is that of a newspaper/magazine article. The FAIR USE images are there to appeal to the overall appearance of the ARTICLES. If anything, most the time these images help to promote the show
82:
I have archived the (long) discussion page since it's been dead for quite some time. As discussions seem to go in rounds and rounds and lead nowhere I have decided to be bold and finalize the debates. Two times editors voted, and it seems we have a pretty good consensus, so let's try one more time.
635:
When does an image ever "only make the page look nicer"? Any picture that actually pertains to the topic is involved in providing information as well as making the article look nicer. On a list of albums, for instance, using images of the album cover is informative in that it shows what the album
498:
Sorry, no dice. For an episode list, the minimum is one per episode since each episode is individually copyrighted and the copyright status of one (or an image there from) does not affect the copyright status of another. Specifying a non-relative limit for articles that are relative doesn't make
1334:
That editor didn't use FUC#3 as his argument, which is what your question was about. You probably want to consider the way the images are being used in the list, and if they are actually serving that purpose. If one image per episode is not the best way to present the information then perhaps you
1001:
I see a lot of people opposing because they think it is too "light". What do you propose? Ban images from lists completely? That is not going to fly any time soon. Since this proposal is doomed, then what's the outcome? The lists will be flooded with excesive fair use images for months to come. I
672:
the person's name). That is not decoration, and I don't understand how editors here can keep saying it is. Those who would like to see a reasonable proposal for limiting fair use images in lists should recognize this important function of images and stop claiming they are purely - or mainly - for
1116:
I think the best course of action would be to continue discussion along that path, which is likely to produce a result that will satisfy everyone, improving the quality of the lists while allaying concerns about the gratuitous use of images. The alternatives would, I think, be less pleasant.
1147:
It would be great if we could settle this. Maybe we could switch the argument to how much text is required for an image. I know WP doesn't like hard number minimums, but if we could decide how much text is required per screenshot, it would give us an easy way to decide delete/keep. -
915:, for example. Certainly, each image would be acceptable on an individual character's page. There's no legal difference between having all those pics on separate pages, or having them on one page, and I can't see a logical or ethical difference either. Certainly the
987:
I'm going to agree with Angr on this. As long as people are making there reasons clear rather than simply saying support or oppose, it shouldn't really matter, and certain things can be dealt with. We obviously have too diverse a group to cater to everyone though.
1074:
proposal has indeed been shot down, but unfortunately the general concerns about screen shots in LOEs has not been settled. Keep in mind I am in favor of including them, but if we wish to include them then it's up to us to convince others to do the same. --
596:
Given how unlikely it is that any uploader would actually be willing to defend this usage, we shouldn't be setting an example that encourages people to waste time fiddling around with them. Also sets a bad example for trivial usage of unfree material.
1275:
one will serve the purpose adequately." - One per episode is as little as possible; One per character is as little as possible; Two or more images of the same character/episode (unless it is really needed) would be excessive and a violation of the FUC.
290:
A casual user will have a hard time recognizing an episode by seeing one frame out of 67,500 frames (45 minutes * 60 seconds * 25 frames per second). DVD covers do not illustrate a particular episode/character and therefore don't serve identification
616:
That should not be your argument. Using unfree images only to make the page look nicer is definitely not allowed. That's why the other opposers have been talking about the necessity of visualizing the topic rather than making the page look nice.
919:
article is improved by having such images. If this were to pass, the list would not have images, but would have links to individual articles which did have images, and I don't see how that is more in line with FUC#3 or U.S. copyright law.
704:
That's only true if the image cannot be replaced by a free image. The argument arose with the episode guides because those images never have a free alternative. Living people usually have a free alternative, especially if they are famous.
450:
lists of episodes when those screenshots are able to provide unique episode identification. I'd repeat all the reasons why I support fair use images in lists, but I don't think this proposal will get anywhere with it's current wording. --
256:
to the article (e.g. identify the subject of an article, or specifically illustrate relevant points or sections within the text) and must not serve a purely decorative purpose. → almost all agree that images mainly serve decorative
587:- Per “Against the proposal section” above, particularly point number five. To be even more particular, I find the idea that “List of characters…” type articles can’t have a picture for each character, quite frankly, absurd.--
793:
per bare minimum policy. Borderline sickening that someone is THAT anti-image. I have no problems with fair use image, it's clear that most people don't, so why not let lists have images so long as they help the article.
948:(both featured lists) would have to be removed. Etc, etc. I think this proposal is a good-faith attempt to solve the real problem of FUC#3 violations in lists, but it would also prevent what I see as valid fair uses. –
844:
Yes, numbers are arbitrary, but seem to be "common sense" of "as little as possible." I wanted to provide a more concrete guideline to avoid "a bare minimum is one screenshot per episode" arguments. Also numbers are
723:
If the image can be replaced by a free one then it violates FUC#1 and the results of this discussion will have no effect on this. In this discussion FUC#'s 3, 6, and 8 are the only ones that could matter. See
1084:
I'm with Ned. It might be helpful to include guidelines about how to use the images "right", such as how to write fair use rationales. That way the argument that we do it "wrong" doesn't hold as much water.
924:
is an auto-generated page that contains hundreds of fair use images, and it's not a problem. It wouldn't be covered by this proposal, but I'm using the example to illustrate that there's nothing wrong
196:- a section (usually separated by ==Heading==) in a Knowledge (XXG) article (not a list as defined above) that has a table or bullets points listing something. Lists within articles usually lack prose.
1298:
This has been brought up several times before, we've never reached consensus or a reasonable compromise, in terms of FUC#3. I don't see any flaw in
Matthew's interpretation, and I agree with him.
728:, Knowledge (XXG) policy is stricter than the law. Also the free alternative does not have to currently exist if it is reasonably obtainable, meaning a picture could be taken and released freely.
878:
I also think it would be fair to add that if a dedicated page could be reasonably created, otherwise we'll have people refusing to make episode pages so they can use images in the episode guide.
858:
I can't get behind this because of the arbitrary numbers. But the no dedicated page thing is probably a good idea. Being prepared to defend a "large" number is also something I would expect.
481:, the proposal doesn't seem to propose much of anything other than a ban on one image per episode. (which I also disagree with for the same reasons I disagree with an exact number limit) --
294:
Some images might have, besides being a decoration, other functions (e.g. identification or commentary), but such function is secondary and is not enough to justify multiple fair use images.
1103:
the images either be removed or the text expanded so that it refers to the image and does so for the purpose of making critical commentary on the episode. I even tried giving an example at
284:
Knowledge (XXG)'s fair use requirements are higher than just the law. In other words, these are all fair use images, but are they fair use images that are acceptable on
Knowledge (XXG).
1307:
Curiously, another editor told me to get rid of all of them. I see this is a contentious issue, and I won't proceed until there's an agreement here. Although this TV series is aired
333:
The purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes → Knowledge (XXG) is both non-profit and educational
1359:
apply because each individual episode is individually copyrighted. This means the copyrights are not linked and you cannot aggregate the number of images used. The minimum is one
664:
those people, many of whom are more easily recognized from the person's picture than from the person's name (a still larger number are more easily recognized from a
353:
Screenshots are carefully chosen to depict the most defining moments of the show and therefore help to identify the episode and better understand its plot summary.
206:) are provided so that everyone is "on the same page" and understands how much can be the "maximum" and realizes the general guideline of "as little as possible":
517:
Oppose. Knowledge (XXG) shouldn't be allowing any nonfree images in any articles at all under any circumstances. "Fair-use" is just a euphemism for "stolen". —
57:
464:! What I wanted to achieve is no further discussions as per old talk: "as little as possible is one screenshot per episode." And the thing wrong with your "
1311:, so having a screenshot on every episode seems to be too much. I'd rather have one screenshot per week or even one screenshot on one major story arc. --
368:
Most if not all images comply with the current fair use criteria, are tagged with relevant templates and provide a rationale on their description page.
309:
Free, redistributable content is great and the more we rely on U.S. "fair use" provision, the more problematic redistribution outside the U.S. becomes.
750:. I don't really think program owner would mind, it can't harm him in any way and it is very important to the layout and the encyclopedia in general.
395:
Partially. I can't back arbitrary numbers, but the dedicated page idea I will fully support, the duplication of the images is probably not necessary.
399:
02:39, 28 October 2006 (UTC) Ok, what I said before didn't really make sense. I can accept the principle, and I'm mostly tired of arguing about it.
187:
405:
I have to switch to neutral on this issue. After rereading the proposal I don't like it, but something needs to be done to stop all the arguing.
339:
amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole → Wikiepdia displays one screenshot out of thousands
468:
lists of episodes when those screenshots are able to provide unique episode identification" is that it's so hard to determine what's unique...
1367:
and declare everything public domain. See, it doesn't work like that. Episode 101 of a TV show is no more bound or linked to episode 102 or
911:
Reasons for my weak oppose: This guideline is not strictly required by FUC#3 in my opinion, and it isn't required by U.S. copyright law. Take
778:
1318:
1258:
1195:
183:
297:
As per Jimbo's key speech at
Wikimania (August, 2006) Knowledge (XXG) should not use fair use images when it does not absolutely have to.
1288:
1233:
1213:
1182:
1049:
1135:? It has much meatier summaries than most of the lists. That could help us out a lot if it's an example of what you're talking about.
342:
the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work → one screenshot has no effects on sales of DVD's
301:
249:
Number 3: The amount of copyrighted work used should be as little as possible. → Lists display dozens and hundreds of fair use images.
1002:
just have to repeat someone's thoughts on WP:FU talk page... no definite answers and issues requiring attention are dragged forever.
781:. I would implore an admin to volunteer handling complaints about admin abuse and reverting such "power trip" edits of this nature.--
17:
971:
Why? Opposition is opposition. Should we also split out support (this is exactly right) and support (this is better than nothing)? —
763:
215:
If the total number of fair use images exceed 5, the editor need to be prepared to have a good argument and rationale why he or she
167:
835:
I speed read the entire discussion and tried to pick out most prominent arguments. If you have more - please add, just keep brief.
533:
Are you saying that US law condones theft? Please read up US copyright law before issuing sweeping pronouncements like that. --
916:
912:
279:
critical commentary on the station ID or program and its contents → List identify, but do not critically comment the programs.
945:
1132:
680:
287:
Episodes in lists are already identified by the following: title, number, and short description. Images are not necessary.
1375:
1339:
1329:
1302:
1293:
1269:
1238:
1206:
1172:
1162:
1152:
1139:
1126:
1089:
1079:
1064:
1054:
1006:
992:
982:
966:
952:
937:
900:
891:
882:
871:
862:
853:
839:
830:
810:
798:
785:
769:
732:
718:
709:
699:
640:
630:
621:
611:
601:
591:
579:
563:
549:
528:
512:
503:
485:
472:
455:
418:
409:
389:
87:
929:
23:
71:
477:
We all agree on using a limited number, but part of the debate is what that means. Since you've changed the wording
1247:(criteria #3), making me wonder if they're fairly used. (I actually realize this is the wrong page to ask this but
1104:
1323:
1263:
1200:
106:
Subsequent comments should be made in the discussion section. No further edits should be made to this section.
67:
921:
1285:
1230:
1046:
122:
The use of fair use images on lists and lists within articles should be limited to a bare minimum (or as per
163:
1158:
Well if we could express it as a format with an example rather than say a number, it would probably be ok.
957:
I think perhaps the oppose (this is too strong) and oppose (this isn't strong enough) should be split out.
933:
266:
1188:
Currently these articles have loads of FU images. Can somebody tell me on how to minimize/remove them? --
537:
1282:
1227:
1043:
1033:
757:
415:
1313:
1253:
1190:
1149:
1061:
627:
608:
576:
546:
1248:
1122:
1217:
1178:
1109:
73:
685:
442:
1364:
962:
751:
715:
637:
560:
69:
38:
1363:
not article. If we can just start linking works together then I hereby bind everything to
1244:
823:
725:
559:
general efforts to gut any use of fair use defenses for use of unfree images on wikipedia.
243:
123:
1368:
807:
542:
534:
130:). Each individual episode / character / album / DVD / etc. cannot have a dedicated image.
446:
not support this proposal for those reasons. Again, I stand beside images being used in
1118:
1076:
977:
795:
523:
482:
452:
209:
The number of fair use images should not exceed 1-2 per 2nd level heading (==Heading==)
330:
Fair use images comply with U.S. copyright law which states four factors to consider:
1372:
1336:
1299:
1169:
1159:
1136:
1086:
989:
897:
879:
859:
729:
706:
618:
588:
500:
406:
400:
396:
1099:
1003:
949:
941:
888:
868:
850:
836:
827:
690:
675:
509:
469:
386:
336:
the nature of the copyrighted work → screenshot can be interpreted as "promotional"
84:
1355:
As I've explained in this very debate (fair use in lists) many times: FUC#3 does
887:
Dedicated page? Huh? I wrote about dedicated image (i.e. one image per episode).
958:
782:
598:
940:(a featured list) could not use the coats of arms. Most of the book covers on
113:
This poll was carried out from
October to December 2006. The proposal failed.
972:
518:
936:, both of which would have to have text descriptions under this proposal.
350:
Images contribute significantly to the quality and visual appeal of lists.
347:
Owners of a TV series have not complained about the images used in a list.
1216:
have fair use rationales and so there would be no reason to remove them.
362:
Images assist the user in finding the information they want more quickly.
1212:
It is perfectly acceptable to use fair use within a list, the images on
202:- the less the better. The goal should be none. The following numbers (
925:
849:
an example to make sure everyone gets the same idea on the proposal.
365:
Many lists, including featured lists, currently use fair use images.
1020:
Subsequent comments should be made in the discussion section below.
212:
The total number of fair use images should not exceed 5 per article
100:
The following discussion is an archived poll on the above topics.
222:
The total number of fair use images cannot exceed 10 per article
359:
Both "encyclopedic" and "decoration" are very subjective terms.
182:- a page in Knowledge (XXG) namespace that would be brought to
928:
with having many fair use images in one place.) Consider also
74:
32:
312:
Such images are against the
Knowledge (XXG)’s goal to be the
233:
This is summary of various arguments on archived talk page.
147:. However it will be also applicable to other lists such as
356:
TV shows are visual and no amount of text can replace that.
867:
Ok, I put the numbers to make clear that's example only.
162:
If successful, it could also apply to other lists, e.g.
658:
the famous people in the (usually long) list, and to
24:
Knowledge (XXG) talk:Fair use/Fair use images in lists
1014:
This poll is preserved as an archive of the debate.
1131:Do you have an opinion on the recently promoted
300:Lists are perfectly useful without images (e.g.
414:Support. This has been needed for a long time.
8:
508:Weak oppose. My reasoning is in comments. –
496:Each ... cannot not have a dedicated image.
188:Knowledge (XXG):Featured article candidates
184:Knowledge (XXG):Featured list candidates
252:Number 8: The material must contribute
1098:The particular, specific wording that
143:The proposal primarily is targeted at
441:. Blanket policy like this has about
18:Knowledge (XXG) talk:Non-free content
7:
1214:List of Maging Sino Ka Man episodes
1183:List of Maging Sino Ka Man episodes
822:In a nutshell: this is the same as
302:List of All in the Family episodes
31:
168:List of Cornell University people
37:
1371:. It just doesn't make sense!
917:Characters from The Office (US)
913:Characters from The Office (US)
1251:is taking forever to load.) --
946:List of Presidents of Portugal
826:#3, just clarified for lists.
479:while I was typing my response
1:
1340:07:14, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
1330:04:44, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
1303:19:02, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
1294:18:29, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
1270:16:42, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
1239:16:27, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
1207:16:15, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
1173:01:19, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
1133:List of The Sopranos episodes
1065:17:50, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
1055:13:43, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
811:23:10, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
799:17:52, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
166:(no images as of Oct. 27) or
1376:03:37, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
1168:Yup, absolutely dismiss it.
1163:05:05, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
1153:04:23, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
1140:04:16, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
1127:04:04, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
1107:with respect to the episode
1090:03:56, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
1080:03:43, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
1007:21:43, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
993:20:03, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
983:08:47, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
967:09:17, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
953:06:06, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
938:Provinces of the Philippines
901:03:56, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
892:02:48, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
883:02:28, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
872:02:55, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
863:02:22, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
854:02:06, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
840:02:06, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
831:03:37, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
786:18:20, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
770:11:54, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
733:21:32, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
719:12:55, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
710:04:31, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
700:04:24, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
641:12:55, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
631:21:18, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
622:21:08, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
612:20:54, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
602:21:46, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
592:21:41, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
580:19:12, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
564:18:57, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
550:12:44, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
529:07:56, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
513:05:36, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
504:03:28, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
486:04:04, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
473:03:13, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
456:03:01, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
419:06:20, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
410:21:03, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
403:03:58, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
390:02:06, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
242:Use of fair use images fail
119:
88:02:06, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
930:List of motifs on banknotes
746:per points two and five in
443:a snowball's chance in hell
1391:
1335:should reduce the number.
1105:Talk:List of Lost episodes
437:I completely and totally
1245:there's too many of them
1017:Please do not modify it.
922:Category:fair use images
668:of the person's picture
103:Please do not modify it.
626:What's the difference?
164:List of Google products
896:Yeah, I got confused.
494:Still not palatable.
460:Numbers are examples,
149:List of ... characters
1034:List of Lost episodes
934:List of Olympic logos
194:Lists within articles
128:as little as possible
1361:per copyrighted work
748:Against the proposal
573:Against the proposal
325:Against the proposal
237:In favor of proposal
145:List of ... episodes
1032:screen captures on
714:That is not true.
431:Sign your comments.
379:Sign your comments.
275:For identification
246:in these respects:
1243:But the thing is,
1218:Maging Sino Ka Man
1179:Maging Sino Ka Man
157:Discography of ...
153:List of ... albums
1309:five times a week
1292:
1237:
1220:also looks fine.
1053:
944:and portraits at
135:
134:
80:
79:
22:(Redirected from
1382:
1365:Romeo and Juliet
1326:
1321:
1316:
1291:
1276:
1266:
1261:
1256:
1236:
1221:
1203:
1198:
1193:
1052:
1037:
1019:
817:Further comments
696:
688:
683:
678:
575:and CBurnett. -
540:
271:
265:
118:
117:
105:
75:
41:
33:
27:
1390:
1389:
1385:
1384:
1383:
1381:
1380:
1379:
1369:The Brady Bunch
1324:
1319:
1314:
1289:52278 Alpha 771
1283:Fenton, Matthew
1277:
1264:
1259:
1254:
1234:52278 Alpha 771
1228:Fenton, Matthew
1222:
1201:
1196:
1191:
1186:
1150:Peregrinefisher
1062:Peregrinefisher
1060:Sounds good. -
1050:52278 Alpha 771
1044:Fenton, Matthew
1038:
1029:
1027:Move to dismiss
1024:
1015:
819:
691:
686:
681:
676:
577:Peregrinefisher
538:
427:
375:
327:
269:
263:
262:They also fail
239:
231:
219:use more images
101:
95:
76:
70:
46:
29:
28:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
1388:
1386:
1353:
1352:
1351:
1350:
1349:
1348:
1347:
1346:
1345:
1344:
1343:
1342:
1185:
1176:
1166:
1165:
1145:
1144:
1143:
1142:
1114:
1095:
1094:
1093:
1092:
1068:
1067:
1028:
1025:
1023:
1022:
1010:
1009:
999:
998:
997:
996:
995:
955:
909:
908:
907:
906:
905:
904:
903:
876:
875:
874:
842:
833:
818:
815:
814:
813:
801:
788:
772:
741:
740:
739:
738:
737:
736:
735:
647:
646:
645:
644:
643:
633:
604:
594:
582:
566:
554:
553:
552:
515:
506:
492:
491:
490:
489:
488:
434:
433:
426:
423:
422:
421:
412:
392:
382:
381:
374:
371:
370:
369:
366:
363:
360:
357:
354:
351:
348:
345:
344:
343:
340:
337:
334:
326:
323:
322:
321:
310:
307:
306:
305:
295:
292:
288:
285:
282:
281:
280:
260:
259:
258:
250:
238:
235:
230:
227:
226:
225:
224:
223:
220:
213:
210:
197:
191:
176:
175:
171:
170:
160:
140:
139:
133:
132:
109:
108:
96:
94:
91:
78:
77:
72:
68:
66:
63:
62:
61:
60:
52:
51:
48:
47:
42:
36:
30:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1387:
1378:
1377:
1374:
1370:
1366:
1362:
1358:
1341:
1338:
1333:
1332:
1331:
1328:
1327:
1322:
1317:
1310:
1306:
1305:
1304:
1301:
1297:
1296:
1295:
1290:
1287:
1284:
1280:
1273:
1272:
1271:
1268:
1267:
1262:
1257:
1250:
1246:
1242:
1241:
1240:
1235:
1232:
1229:
1225:
1219:
1215:
1211:
1210:
1209:
1208:
1205:
1204:
1199:
1194:
1184:
1180:
1177:
1175:
1174:
1171:
1164:
1161:
1157:
1156:
1155:
1154:
1151:
1141:
1138:
1134:
1130:
1129:
1128:
1124:
1120:
1115:
1112:
1111:
1106:
1101:
1097:
1096:
1091:
1088:
1083:
1082:
1081:
1078:
1073:
1070:
1069:
1066:
1063:
1059:
1058:
1057:
1056:
1051:
1048:
1045:
1041:
1035:
1026:
1021:
1018:
1012:
1011:
1008:
1005:
1000:
994:
991:
986:
985:
984:
981:
980:
976:
975:
970:
969:
968:
964:
960:
956:
954:
951:
947:
943:
939:
935:
931:
927:
923:
918:
914:
910:
902:
899:
895:
894:
893:
890:
886:
885:
884:
881:
877:
873:
870:
866:
865:
864:
861:
857:
856:
855:
852:
848:
843:
841:
838:
834:
832:
829:
825:
821:
820:
816:
812:
809:
805:
802:
800:
797:
792:
789:
787:
784:
780:
776:
773:
771:
767:
766:
761:
760:
755:
754:
749:
745:
742:
734:
731:
727:
722:
721:
720:
717:
713:
712:
711:
708:
703:
702:
701:
698:
697:
695:
689:
684:
679:
673:decoration. -
671:
667:
663:
662:
657:
656:
651:
648:
642:
639:
634:
632:
629:
625:
624:
623:
620:
615:
614:
613:
610:
607:or whatever.
605:
603:
600:
595:
593:
590:
586:
583:
581:
578:
574:
570:
567:
565:
562:
558:
555:
551:
548:
544:
541:
536:
532:
531:
530:
527:
526:
522:
521:
516:
514:
511:
507:
505:
502:
497:
493:
487:
484:
480:
476:
475:
474:
471:
467:
463:
459:
458:
457:
454:
449:
444:
440:
436:
435:
432:
429:
428:
424:
420:
417:
416:Andrew Levine
413:
411:
408:
404:
402:
398:
393:
391:
388:
384:
383:
380:
377:
376:
372:
367:
364:
361:
358:
355:
352:
349:
346:
341:
338:
335:
332:
331:
329:
328:
324:
320:encyclopedia.
319:
315:
311:
308:
303:
299:
298:
296:
293:
289:
286:
283:
278:
274:
273:
272:description:
268:
267:Tv-screenshot
261:
255:
254:significantly
251:
248:
247:
245:
241:
240:
236:
234:
228:
221:
218:
214:
211:
208:
207:
205:
204:just examples
201:
198:
195:
192:
189:
185:
181:
178:
177:
173:
172:
169:
165:
161:
158:
154:
150:
146:
142:
141:
137:
136:
131:
129:
125:
120:
116:
115:
114:
107:
104:
98:
97:
92:
90:
89:
86:
65:
64:
59:
56:
55:
54:
53:
50:
49:
45:
40:
35:
34:
25:
19:
1360:
1356:
1354:
1312:
1308:
1278:
1252:
1223:
1189:
1187:
1167:
1146:
1108:
1071:
1039:
1030:
1016:
1013:
978:
973:
942:The Oz books
846:
808:Y|yukichigai
803:
790:
779:de-adminship
774:
764:
758:
752:
747:
743:
693:
674:
669:
665:
660:
659:
654:
653:
649:
584:
572:
568:
556:
524:
519:
495:
478:
465:
461:
447:
438:
430:
394:
378:
317:
316:and not the
313:
276:
253:
232:
216:
203:
200:Bare minimum
199:
193:
179:
156:
152:
148:
144:
127:
121:
112:
111:
110:
102:
99:
81:
43:
1110:Orientation
753:Michaelas10
666:combination
186:and not to
174:Definitions
1286:Lexic Dark
1231:Lexic Dark
1047:Lexic Dark
385:Strongly.
58:/Archive 1
1077:Ned Scott
796:Wizardman
483:Ned Scott
453:Ned Scott
291:function.
257:function;
1373:Cburnett
1337:Jay32183
1300:Jay32183
1170:Cburnett
1160:Jay32183
1137:Jay32183
1087:Jay32183
990:Jay32183
898:Jay32183
880:Jay32183
860:Jay32183
730:Jay32183
707:Jay32183
661:identify
619:Jay32183
589:Fyre2387
501:Cburnett
407:Jay32183
401:Jay32183
397:Jay32183
93:Proposal
44:Archives
1100:Renata3
950:Quadell
510:Quadell
499:sense.
373:Support
229:Summary
1315:Howard
1279:thanks
1255:Howard
1224:thanks
1192:Howard
1119:bainer
1040:thanks
1004:Renata
959:Stifle
926:per se
889:Renata
869:Renata
851:Renata
837:Renata
828:Renata
824:WP:FUC
804:Oppose
791:Oppose
783:Will2k
775:Oppose
744:Oppose
726:WP:FUC
716:john k
650:Oppose
638:john k
599:Jkelly
585:Oppose
569:Oppose
561:john k
557:Oppose
470:Renata
439:oppose
425:Oppose
387:Renata
318:pretty
244:WP:FUC
159:, etc.
124:WP:FUC
85:Renata
1249:WT:FU
932:, or
543:Welsh
180:Lists
138:Scope
16:<
1325:Duck
1265:Duck
1202:Duck
1181:and
1123:talk
1072:This
963:talk
847:only
655:find
571:per
547:ταλκ
466:some
462:only
448:some
314:free
217:must
126:#3:
1357:not
1320:the
1260:the
1197:the
670:and
628:H2P
609:H2P
535:Run
277:and
1125:)
1117:--
1036:.
979:gr
974:An
965:)
794:--
768:)
692:or
677:Do
545:|
525:gr
520:An
270:}}
264:{{
155:,
151:,
1281:/
1226:/
1121:(
1113:.
1042:/
961:(
920:(
765:C
762:|
759:T
756:(
694:W
687:t
682:c
539:e
304:)
190:.
26:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
