576:, after some time the only response had been one that agreed with me. It seems to me that this speedy keep was precipitate at best. The template is frankly absurd; it offer virtually no advantages over creating a "see also" section manually, and simply places another obstacle in the way of casual or occasional editors (who are perfectly capable of adding a bulleted link to a section, but have no wish to look up the template in order to work out how to use it. It seems to me that there's a regrettable tendency in Knowledge (XXG) to replace simple editing methods with geeky ones. --
31:
394:
568:
I suggested this for deletion, and before the day was out the TfD had been removed, debate closed, as speedy keep. All this without giving me a chance to respond to some of those voting (who admitted that they didn't understand my point ā perhaps because, as editors hanging round the template pages,
1319:
Each has radically different parameters, as the way that TfD was Logged changed over time. I've just finished hand replacing all the remaining tfd-keep with valid tfd-kept (often searching for the log entry), but those are for 2004 and 2005 Logs. Oldtfd was probably subst'd, as it has no remaining
763:
The idea that any User can read every policy and guideline is absurd; I probably know more than most, but have barely scratched the surface. If you're going to wag your finger at good-faith editors, you should at least make sure that the most likely place that they look for guidance actually gives
300:
has been voting to speedy delete articles under T1 on the basis that argument on the template talk page "proves" that the template is "divisive". This seems preposterous to me, because it means that any time I want to get a template deleted, all I have to do is troll the talk page and the resulting
952:
It's vital to see beyond words to the heart of any matter. Here, the important value preserved is the collaborative nature of policy making and process. Let's say that someone wishes, perhaps, to alter the process of AfD. The proper place to do that is at Talk:AfD. That is where interested parties
1452:
I won't argue against it. I don't care which template is used to tag talk pages after closing so long as only one is used and it is mentioned in the TfD instructions. All other template names should rd to the preferred choice or be deleted. Failure to preview and pay attention to parameter use is
938:
is meant ongoing activities within the project; the obvious example at hand is TfD itself. TfD makes use of a number of templates, each one of which has a specific purpose in service of the TfD process. These templates are all immune from the TfD process itself -- as are similar templates used by
279:
This does seem a little bit weird to me. I suppose, from a maintenance point-of-view, the 'remedy' is to always orphan any redirects first so that you're actually looking for the name of the redirect rather than of the actual template. I imagine a bot not doing redirects-first would get confused.
991:
poorly written. This is not a result of incompetence on the part of its creators; rather it is due to the limitations of the transclusion machine. This has many shortcomings and they will likely be with us for a long time. It's not immediately clear what the best interim solution may be.
943:) are mere article namespace templates. They support the activity of editing, not the meta-activity of debating what edits can be made or which should be deleted. On the other hand, some templates may be created to support new and untested process; these also are exposed to TfD.
206:
indicates that Tim
Starling added a patch and reran the relevant script recently. This message is an advertisement for willing victims in the Holding cell, which is desirous of your ministrations. In exchange, you will find that your edit count goes up in a satisfying manner
355:
by wiping the page and replacing everything with the same thing from
AnarchismDildo/Def. I'm not sure what bureaucratic practice I'm supposed to follow in order to help put a stop to the disruptiveness, so I was wondering if any admins wanted to take a look at the situation
722:
and perhaps most important of all (related to the out of process nomination), you still show no evidence of having understood the relevant guideline for using this template! Really, that message at login that asks you to read the policies and guidelines isn't there for
1538:
They're redirects, that won't show up. There are no known references to them anymore, but they might show up in edit histories. I spent a fair amount of time converting them. They had different incompatibile parameters, so it took a lot more than just a redirect.
841:
The problem with that is that it's virtually impossible to go through every policy or guideline to see whether a template is part of one (and that's a pretty vague description anyway). Which policy or guideline is involved in this case?
328:
Hey guys, why are like half the things being suggested for deletion, because wikipedia is no place for advertisements or whatnot? I mean come on, there have to be other, more important things to be worried about then
760:"it adds indentation and considerable HTML markup", all of which is unnecessary (and against Knowledge (XXG) guidelines that deprecate the use of HTML when formatting can be achieved perfectly well without).
387:
I removed my own nomination of three templates because I have changed my mind. These should be keep. Since I nominated them, I think removing it should be fine. The other votes were only keep. Sorry for the
231:, which is (was?) a tremendous wikipedian-hours resource hog. BTW I'm not interested in high edit counts (to the contrary - Re "recent changes spam" by my bot and accusations for running it too fast). --
167:
I can see why this is attractive, the problem is that if you do it, it will mean that with fewer 'normal' participants seeing it, the userbox fanatics will find it all the easier to block any deletions.
909:
for deletion just because they don't like AFD. While this template might be recommended for use at various guideline pages, that doesn't make it part of the functioning of any
Knowledge (XXG) process.
465:
596:"before the day was out" -- no, before 3 hours had passed. It was important to get the background template update process rolling before the US East Coast awoke and the servers were swamped.
863:
Oh yeah, and you missed the very first step: "If the page is heavily in use and/or protected, consider putting the notice on its talk page instead." That would mean you need to check WLH.
1399:
You seem confused. Templates that are deleted can on occaision have the talk page remain. The result parameter is required to describe any conditions. It defaults to "Keep", just like
97:
89:
84:
72:
67:
59:
313:"Divisive" in this context means that there are one or more admins willing to delete the item in question. T1 can only be applied to templates, however, not to articles. --
970:
appropriate to nominate the template for deletion at all, then the tag should be placed on the nominee's talk page. It's just too disruptive to tag on the template itself.
266:
Absolutely. I would also like to know why it is not possible to have links created through a transclusion shown as such, like those created through a REDIRECT. HTH HAND ā
757:), which makes no mention of any problem. Specifically, it doesn't say that templates that have been around for a long time or which are often used are immune to YfD.
250:
953:"hang out"; that is where the most informed comments will be seen. It wouldn't be right to undermine that process by nominating an AfD-related template for deletion
1429:
still had references to moving to the old log, so I updated it to match the current process, using this template. Note that the Talk discussion there has decided
119:
1012:
There's no misunderstanding. This template is explicitly part of the standard section markup. That is a guideline. NO guideline templates are eligible for TfD.
227:, of course. This is very good news. If I'm enough bored (and have time) I will continue to help at the holding cell. Sadly, I've been recently very busy in re
495:
1471:
793:
744:
47:
17:
417:
when proposing the deletion of userboxes. Just paste in {{tfd-inline|{{subst:PAGENAME}}}} into the body text and it will not break anyone's page.
202:
for templates appears to be fixed. I've come across several templates that have plainly had their links fixed between nomination and closure, and
680:
476:, and the deletion debate only happened a week or so ago and is directly relevant to discussions about userboxes on the main TFD page now. --
719:
the template does not add a "bullet", it adds indentation and considerable HTML markup (that matches the markup of other related templates).
899:
This template is not part of any policy or guideline...the point of the rule Mr. Simpson refers to is that people shouldn't nominate, say,
800:
151:
110:
131:
Since the closing is now on the daily log, and I've noticed that few are added to the /Log/Deleted, couldn't this step be eliminated?
122:, can be listed here for an admin to delete. Remove from this list when link indicates the page no longer exists. If these are to be
1475:
370:
03:51, 16 February 2006 Sarge Baldy blocked "AnarChrist (contribs)" with an expiry time of indefinite (sockpuppet of banned user) --
249:), the "Templates used on this page" shows a link to the redirect AND to the redirect target. Also, the article shows up twice in
154:
to deal with all that rubbish so that we can focus again on templates outside of userspace? No wonder there's a backlog here.
674:
1467:
1426:
913:
527:
1286:
I'm going to spend the evening fixing all the tfd-keep and tfd-kept. What should we do about oldtfd and oldtfdfull?
1543:
1482:
1437:
1413:
1373:
1291:
1029:
966:
Another point is that some templates are very heavily used. Tagging one for deletion is automatically wrong; if it
867:
826:
729:
136:
38:
1546:
1532:
1485:
1460:
1440:
1416:
1393:
1376:
1310:
1294:
1181:
1032:
999:
916:
893:
870:
853:
829:
775:
732:
587:
550:
521:
502:
480:
454:
397:
376:
364:
333:
317:
307:
286:
274:
260:
235:
217:
185:
176:
161:
139:
347:, has been banned for a month. Now, however, he is even more belligerent as an anonymous user and sockpuppet,
246:
1108:
1072:
987:
should be tagged only on its talk page. I have seen the template in question and it does appear to me to be
910:
704:
469:
352:
232:
118:
Templates for which consensus to delete has been reached, have been orphaned, and the discussion logged to
751:
686:
573:
271:
241:
Now if I could only get the dev's to fix the inaccurate (doubled) Whatlinkshere information I reported in
1305:
1301:
Merge and redirect them, that way you don't have to go through and update every single instance of them.
411:
925:
I feel very strongly about the exclusion of process-related templates so I feel compelled to explain it.
692:
640:
199:
172:
1507:
1363:
1099:
1063:
1025:
Sorry that you don't like it, the design required a great deal of discussion, and technical expertise.
620:
514:
1497:
1257:
1222:
1144:
887:
847:
769:
581:
451:
158:
1189:
1457:
1390:
1333:
1172:
996:
668:
374:
330:
305:
257:
1116:
1080:
979:
Given all this, it's clear that there has been some misunderstandings on all sides. This template
716:-- banned from the template namespace -- in the process of his 3rd or 4th Arbitration and banning.
301:
argument will make it speedyable under T1. Can we get a clarification of what "divisive" means? --
1526:
630:
361:
1386:
There's no point in having a template to affix to talk pages for templates about to be deleted.
794:
Knowledge (XXG):Templates for deletion/Header#What (and what not) to propose for deletion at TfD
1265:
1230:
1152:
610:
559:
267:
224:
242:
203:
1478:. And I've listed the obsolete templates for speedy deletion, pointing to this discussion.
807:, the template should be discussed where the discussion for that guideline is taking place."
572:
I suggested it for TfD in part because, after I'd posted a comment making the same point to
542:
491:
169:
393:
228:
123:
1517:
1403:
1353:
1349:. The former requires the date in 3 parameters, the latter a single parameter date (like
1343:
1248:
1213:
1135:
1048:
883:
843:
765:
577:
418:
389:
348:
155:
253:(once normally, and once through the redirect). This is nonintuitive, and redundant. --
1454:
1387:
993:
569:
they're so used to them that they don't understand the problems faced by other users).
499:
477:
371:
302:
254:
822:
Maybe it would be better to move that above the "How to" section. Consider it done.
343:
Remember the templates
AnarchismDildo and AnarchismDef? The user who created those,
903:
468:
exists, I can find absolutely nothing explaining or documenting the vote to delete
1302:
745:
Knowledge (XXG):Templates for deletion/Header#How to list templates for deletion
531:
344:
314:
281:
212:
182:
46:
If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the
464:
The archives seem to be incomplete, or at least muddled. For instance, though
518:
599:
the official process was violated (and noted in the speedy keep). This is a
297:
659:"the only response had been one that agreed with me" -- that would be
606:
there are something like 15-18 templates that redirect to this one --
1448:
I don't see much value in tagging talk pages of deleted templates
1279:(that is, just date and optional result, with bolding supplied).
662:
466:
Knowledge (XXG):Templates for deletion/Log/Deleted/January 2006
25:
1283:
At least for me, that will help for remembering the syntax.
1057:
There are a plethora of ending templates. I've found:
1273:
1269:
1261:
1253:
1238:
1234:
1226:
1218:
1197:
1193:
1185:
1177:
1160:
1156:
1148:
1140:
1124:
1120:
1112:
1104:
1088:
1084:
1076:
1068:
710:
698:
603:
template with considerable history and past discussion.
473:
357:
111:
Knowledge (XXG):Templates for deletion#Ready to delete
1204:(confusingly, different parameters than oldafdfull).
803:, the template cannot be listed for deletion on TfD
593:
So many problems, it's hard to know where to start:
120:Knowledge (XXG):Templates for deletion/Log/Deleted
799:"If a template is part of (the functioning of) a
652:before nominating anything for TfD, always check
251:Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:Infobox U.S. City
245:. On a page that uses a template redirect (like
743:My apologies for violating process; I followed
496:Knowledge (XXG):Deletion_review/Userbox_debates
1476:Knowledge (XXG):Templates for deletion/Closing
1472:Knowledge (XXG):Templates for deletion/Header
1095:(badly redirected with different parameters),
649:there are many hundreds (thousands?) of uses.
18:Knowledge (XXG) talk:Templates for discussion
8:
1453:punishable by ten lashes in public square.
939:CfD, AfD, and so forth. Templates (such as
486:Ah, I see. There's no link because there
1359:), and has a default result (keep, like
181:Indeed...That could be a serious issue.
1474:were diverging, so I merged this into
1433:to subst: the keep templates anymore.
474:not even any TfD page that links to it
223:Thanks for the message. And thanks to
152:Knowledge (XXG):Userboxes for deletion
146:Knowledge (XXG):Userboxes for deletion
44:Do not edit the contents of this page.
209:Note that this can be fatal as usual.
7:
801:Knowledge (XXG) policy or guideline
983:eligible for consideration at TfD
530:as nonsense. But I'm deleting it.
24:
1468:Knowledge (XXG):Deletion process
1427:Knowledge (XXG):Deletion process
392:
126:, please give a specific reason.
29:
528:Knowledge (XXG):Speedy deletion
1466:Well, of course! Anyway, the
124:candidates for speedy deletion
1:
455:14:15, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
398:16:18, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
377:05:20, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
365:04:54, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
334:01:17, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
308:18:04, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
198:The recent problems surround
1208:Meanwhile, I've developed:
383:Justification for my removal
287:16:37, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
275:16:22, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
261:08:40, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
236:08:15, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
218:00:13, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
177:19:43, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
162:19:40, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
140:20:44, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
1329:For new logs, it's down to
194:Whatlinkshere appears fixed
1565:
1547:01:10, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
1533:14:40, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
1486:18:00, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
1461:16:29, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
1441:16:12, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
1417:15:29, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
1394:12:14, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
1377:06:03, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
1311:01:28, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
1295:01:19, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
1033:23:30, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
1000:21:34, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
917:22:51, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
894:14:22, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
871:07:55, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
854:14:22, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
830:07:42, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
776:10:31, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
733:06:48, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
588:16:21, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
526:You should have put it on
492:User_talk:Improv#Userboxen
1369:) for the lazy among us.
1244:to match the practices of
792:after the one you cited:
551:16:34, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
522:11:40, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
503:14:51, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
481:14:35, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
351:. He recently vandalized
186:21:16, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
339:Request admin assistance
318:01:01, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
247:Template:US City infobox
1130:for 2004 and 2005 Logs,
353:Template:Primarysources
574:Template talk:See also
470:Template:User Lutheran
1544:William Allen Simpson
1483:William Allen Simpson
1438:William Allen Simpson
1414:William Allen Simpson
1374:William Allen Simpson
1292:William Allen Simpson
1030:William Allen Simpson
868:William Allen Simpson
827:William Allen Simpson
730:William Allen Simpson
200:Special:Whatlinkshere
137:William Allen Simpson
42:of past discussions.
490:no discussion. See
460:No archives for TFD?
1173:Template:Oldtfdfull
882:I considered it. --
747:(as linked to from
106:Ready to delete log
911:Christopher Parham
513:Could someone del
1530:
1523:? User:Ceyockey (
1425:Noticed that the
1100:Template:Tfd-kept
1064:Template:Tfd-keep
790:very next section
285:
216:
210:
174:
103:
102:
54:
53:
48:current talk page
1556:
1524:
1522:
1516:
1512:
1506:
1502:
1496:
1408:
1402:
1368:
1362:
1358:
1352:
1348:
1342:
1338:
1332:
1308:
1278:
1277:
1243:
1242:
1202:
1201:
1165:
1164:
1129:
1128:
1093:
1092:
1053:
1047:
908:
902:
890:
850:
788:It does, in the
772:
756:
750:
715:
714:
681:deletedĀ contribs
665:
645:
639:
635:
629:
625:
619:
615:
609:
584:
564:
558:
548:
545:
538:
535:
515:Template:Useless
509:Template:Useless
449:
446:
443:
440:
437:
434:
431:
428:
425:
422:
416:
410:
396:
284:
233:Adrian Buehlmann
215:
208:
173:
81:
56:
55:
33:
32:
26:
1564:
1563:
1559:
1558:
1557:
1555:
1554:
1553:
1520:
1514:
1510:
1504:
1500:
1494:
1406:
1400:
1366:
1360:
1356:
1350:
1346:
1340:
1336:
1330:
1306:
1251:
1249:Template:Cfdend
1247:
1216:
1214:Template:Tfdend
1212:
1175:
1171:
1138:
1136:Template:Oldtfd
1134:
1102:
1098:
1066:
1062:
1055:
1051:
1045:
906:
900:
888:
848:
770:
754:
748:
666:
661:
660:
654:What links here
643:
637:
633:
627:
623:
617:
613:
607:
582:
566:
562:
556:
546:
543:
536:
533:
511:
462:
447:
444:
441:
438:
435:
432:
429:
426:
423:
420:
414:
408:
405:
385:
349:User:AnarChrist
341:
326:
295:
196:
150:Should we make
148:
108:
77:
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
1562:
1560:
1552:
1551:
1550:
1549:
1503:be affixed to
1491:
1490:
1489:
1488:
1446:
1445:
1444:
1443:
1422:
1421:
1420:
1419:
1384:
1383:
1382:
1381:
1380:
1379:
1324:
1323:
1322:
1321:
1314:
1313:
1298:
1297:
1281:
1280:
1245:
1206:
1205:
1168:
1131:
1096:
1054:
1043:
1042:
1041:
1040:
1039:
1038:
1037:
1036:
1035:
1018:
1017:
1016:
1015:
1014:
1013:
1005:
1004:
1003:
1002:
974:
973:
972:
971:
961:
960:
959:
958:
947:
946:
945:
944:
929:
928:
927:
926:
920:
919:
880:
879:
878:
877:
876:
875:
874:
873:
839:
838:
837:
836:
835:
834:
833:
832:
815:
814:
813:
812:
811:
810:
809:
808:
781:
780:
779:
778:
761:
758:
738:
737:
736:
735:
725:
724:
720:
717:
657:
650:
647:
604:
597:
565:
554:
510:
507:
506:
505:
461:
458:
404:
401:
384:
381:
380:
379:
340:
337:
331:TheOneCalledA1
325:
322:
321:
320:
294:
291:
290:
289:
277:
239:
238:
195:
192:
191:
190:
189:
188:
147:
144:
143:
142:
129:
128:
107:
104:
101:
100:
95:
92:
87:
82:
75:
70:
65:
62:
52:
51:
34:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1561:
1548:
1545:
1541:
1540:
1537:
1536:
1535:
1534:
1529:
1528:
1519:
1509:
1499:
1487:
1484:
1480:
1479:
1477:
1473:
1469:
1465:
1464:
1463:
1462:
1459:
1456:
1451:
1442:
1439:
1435:
1434:
1432:
1428:
1424:
1423:
1418:
1415:
1411:
1410:
1405:
1398:
1397:
1396:
1395:
1392:
1389:
1378:
1375:
1371:
1370:
1365:
1355:
1345:
1335:
1328:
1327:
1326:
1325:
1318:
1317:
1316:
1315:
1312:
1309:
1304:
1300:
1299:
1296:
1293:
1289:
1288:
1287:
1284:
1275:
1271:
1267:
1263:
1259:
1255:
1250:
1246:
1240:
1236:
1232:
1228:
1224:
1220:
1215:
1211:
1210:
1209:
1203:
1199:
1195:
1191:
1187:
1183:
1179:
1174:
1169:
1166:
1162:
1158:
1154:
1150:
1146:
1142:
1137:
1132:
1126:
1122:
1118:
1114:
1110:
1106:
1101:
1097:
1094:
1090:
1086:
1082:
1078:
1074:
1070:
1065:
1060:
1059:
1058:
1050:
1044:
1034:
1031:
1027:
1026:
1024:
1023:
1022:
1021:
1020:
1019:
1011:
1010:
1009:
1008:
1007:
1006:
1001:
998:
995:
990:
986:
982:
978:
977:
976:
975:
969:
965:
964:
963:
962:
956:
951:
950:
949:
948:
942:
937:
933:
932:
931:
930:
924:
923:
922:
921:
918:
915:
912:
905:
898:
897:
896:
895:
891:
885:
872:
869:
865:
864:
862:
861:
860:
859:
858:
857:
856:
855:
851:
845:
831:
828:
824:
823:
821:
820:
819:
818:
817:
816:
806:
802:
798:
797:
795:
791:
787:
786:
785:
784:
783:
782:
777:
773:
767:
762:
759:
753:
752:Deletiontools
746:
742:
741:
740:
739:
734:
731:
727:
726:
721:
718:
712:
709:
706:
703:
700:
697:
694:
691:
688:
687:nukeĀ contribs
685:
682:
679:
676:
673:
670:
664:
658:
655:
651:
648:
642:
632:
622:
612:
605:
602:
601:long standing
598:
595:
594:
592:
591:
590:
589:
585:
579:
575:
570:
561:
555:
553:
552:
549:
540:
539:
529:
524:
523:
520:
519:J. D. Redding
516:
508:
504:
501:
497:
493:
489:
485:
484:
483:
482:
479:
475:
471:
467:
459:
457:
456:
453:
450:
413:
402:
400:
399:
395:
391:
382:
378:
375:
373:
369:
368:
367:
366:
363:
360:). Thanks! --
359:
354:
350:
346:
338:
336:
335:
332:
323:
319:
316:
312:
311:
310:
309:
306:
304:
299:
292:
288:
283:
278:
276:
273:
269:
265:
264:
263:
262:
259:
256:
252:
248:
244:
243:bugzilla:4428
237:
234:
230:
226:
222:
221:
220:
219:
214:
205:
204:bugzilla:4549
201:
193:
187:
184:
180:
179:
178:
175:
171:
166:
165:
164:
163:
160:
157:
153:
145:
141:
138:
134:
133:
132:
127:
125:
121:
116:
115:
114:
112:
105:
99:
96:
93:
91:
88:
86:
83:
80:
76:
74:
71:
69:
66:
63:
61:
58:
57:
49:
45:
41:
40:
35:
28:
27:
19:
1525:
1492:
1449:
1447:
1430:
1385:
1285:
1282:
1207:
1170:
1133:
1061:
1056:
988:
984:
980:
967:
954:
940:
935:
881:
840:
804:
789:
707:
701:
695:
689:
683:
677:
671:
653:
600:
571:
567:
532:
525:
512:
487:
463:
406:
386:
342:
327:
324:Seriously...
296:
240:
225:Tim Starling
197:
149:
130:
117:
109:
78:
43:
37:
1498:Tdeprecated
1320:inclusions.
723:decoration!
626:, ..., and
419:Dread Lord
407:Please use
293:Criteria T1
156:violet/riga
36:This is an
1527:talk to me
1334:oldtfdfull
889:ĪĪµĪ» ĪĻĪ·ĻĪ·Ļ
884:Mel Etitis
849:ĪĪµĪ» ĪĻĪ·ĻĪ·Ļ
844:Mel Etitis
805:separately
771:ĪĪµĪ» ĪĻĪ·ĻĪ·Ļ
766:Mel Etitis
705:blockĀ user
699:filterĀ log
583:ĪĪµĪ» ĪĻĪ·ĻĪ·Ļ
578:Mel Etitis
472:: there's
412:tfd-inline
403:tfd-inline
98:ArchiveĀ 10
711:blockĀ log
663:Netoholic
641:see also3
631:see also2
500:Saforrest
478:Saforrest
372:causa sui
329:this...--
303:causa sui
298:User:Angr
255:Netoholic
90:ArchiveĀ 8
85:ArchiveĀ 7
79:ArchiveĀ 6
73:ArchiveĀ 5
68:ArchiveĀ 4
60:ArchiveĀ 1
1508:tfd-keep
1470:and the
1364:tfd-kept
941:see also
675:contribs
621:seealso3
611:seealso2
560:See also
358:evidence
1493:Should
1262:history
1227:history
1186:history
1149:history
1113:history
1077:history
936:process
388:mess.--
183:Michael
39:archive
1518:oldtfd
1404:cfdend
1354:cfdend
1344:tfdend
1049:tfdend
914:(talk)
764:it. --
656:(WLH).
646:, ....
362:AaronS
345:Hogeye
315:Dschor
282:Splash
229:WP:AUM
213:Splash
1455:John
1388:John
1270:watch
1266:links
1235:watch
1231:links
1194:watch
1190:links
1167:, and
1157:watch
1153:links
1121:watch
1117:links
1085:watch
1081:links
994:John
544:ɹÉÉds
537:speer
113:says
16:<
1513:and
1458:Reid
1391:Reid
1303:Tito
1274:logs
1258:talk
1254:edit
1239:logs
1223:talk
1219:edit
1198:logs
1182:talk
1178:edit
1161:logs
1145:talk
1141:edit
1125:logs
1109:talk
1105:edit
1089:logs
1073:talk
1069:edit
997:Reid
989:very
955:here
693:logs
669:talk
498:. --
494:and
390:Adam
272:Talk
268:Phil
1450:but
1431:not
1339:or
985:but
934:By
904:afd
488:was
170:Doc
159:(t)
1542:--
1531:)
1521:}}
1515:{{
1511:}}
1505:{{
1501:}}
1495:{{
1481:--
1436:--
1412:--
1409:.
1407:}}
1401:{{
1372:--
1367:}}
1361:{{
1357:}}
1351:{{
1347:}}
1341:{{
1337:}}
1331:{{
1307:xd
1290:--
1272:|
1268:|
1264:|
1260:|
1256:|
1237:|
1233:|
1229:|
1225:|
1221:|
1196:|
1192:|
1188:|
1184:|
1180:|
1159:|
1155:|
1151:|
1147:|
1143:|
1123:|
1119:|
1115:|
1111:|
1107:|
1087:|
1083:|
1079:|
1075:|
1071:|
1052:}}
1046:{{
1028:--
981:is
968:is
907:}}
901:{{
892:)
866:--
852:)
842:--
825:--
796:.
774:)
755:}}
749:{{
728:--
644:}}
638:{{
636:,
634:}}
628:{{
624:}}
618:{{
616:,
614:}}
608:{{
586:)
563:}}
557:{{
547:ɹ
541:/
517:?
452:āā
415:}}
409:{{
270:|
168:--
135:--
94:ā
64:ā
1276:)
1252:(
1241:)
1217:(
1200:)
1176:(
1163:)
1139:(
1127:)
1103:(
1091:)
1067:(
957:.
886:(
846:(
768:(
713:)
708:Ā·
702:Ā·
696:Ā·
690:Ā·
684:Ā·
678:Ā·
672:Ā·
667:(
580:(
534:r
448:l
445:l
442:u
439:k
436:S
433:r
430:e
427:b
424:y
421:C
356:(
280:-
258:@
211:-
50:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.