Talk:Aramaic alphabet

2265:

of a script to a particular language. The JSTOR etc. numbers aren't particularly relevant, because the phrases mean different things in our convention. (We can of course change that convention, but that should be a centralized discussion, not something to decide here.) In cases where a script is used primarily for a single language, there isn't much to differentiate the two choices, but if this article is primarily about the script as it was used for Aramaic, then it belongs at 'Aramaic alphabet'. If it is about the script itself, rather than its use for any particular language, then it belongs at 'Aramaic script'. This article is kind of a muddle somewhere in between. The lead addresses the script as a whole, but the section "Languages using the alphabet " says very little about use of the Aramaic script for various languages; rather, it focuses on Aramaic-related languages using related scripts, which is somewhat off topic. The Imperial Aramaic script was used for a large number of languages, so this article could certainly be about the script as a whole, and probably it should be, but that aspect is currently underdeveloped. So the choice should ideally depend on what we want the article to be about. If there's only a single, unified article on any script, then it should normally be at 'script' and cover everything; 'X alphabet' could then be split off if that section becomes sufficiently well developed to stand on its own.

1313:

some similarities to the script being discussed" - and I should have stated that the top parent be a parent /script/ that still shares some similarities, a statement I disagree is 'arbitrary at best' - since these systems do have traceable derivatives, its not just you and I looking at the characters and saying "Oh that one looks more like Phoenician aleph than Greek alpha." Those similarities should also speak to the function of a script, the most important similarity being that the system is still primarily alphabetic. Thus once you go to the article that appears at the top of the infobox, the parent for alphabets, currently the Proto-Canaanite article, you can then further read on and find out all of the same information you are insisting on anyway, mainly that most scholars find alphabetic writing in Sinai/Canaan to be somehow connected to hieroglyphs. At any rate, if hieroglyphs do end up as the top parent of any one particular alphabet, they would logically need to be on top of just about every alphabet out there, a change that might not find consensus all around Knowledge.

538: 517: 731: 548: 243: 1280:

one symbol or group of symbols. Even if the symbol M was pronounced differently by the early Egyptians it remains the same symbol. The Chinese script family accommodates dozens of extant languages, too, and like the hieroglyph derivatives also has one history tree with a branching pattern full of additions and deletions of its component symbols. The Basque language uses the Latin script apparently without consideration of its linguistic origin.

222: 2286:. We don't have a similar distinction for Hebrew, even though there are Hebrew, Yiddish, Ladino etc. alphabets, all of which are Hebrew script. For consistency, 'Hebrew script' would be about the writing system as a whole, or as a unitary article, and 'Hebrew alphabet' would be about the script as it is used to write Hebrew. But our coverage of the different Hebrew (and also Greek) alphabets is mostly covered at other articles (e.g. follow 346: 2078: 635: 449: 614: 428: 1260:

the way to the, as far as I can tell, accepted root also is also a more consistent, encyclopedic approach. It does then also show the Knowledge user to which script family or subfamily a particular script belongs, directly! Stopping at an arbitrarily chosen point like "Proto-Canaanite", in an overview like the Infobox, is a bad idea if the oldest known ancestor is a mere two steps away.

2055:--"Abjad" in this meaning is a neologism which didn't exist until the 1990s. For centuries before that, and still often after that, people spoke of a "consonantal alphabet" if any greater precision was needed. If the titles of the "Arabic alphabet" and "Hebrew alphabet" articles don't change, then the title of this article should not change. There's some discussion of this issue at 645: 336: 315: 191: 1084:

like these have been mostly reverted. Rosenthal, the source of the letter shapes, uses the Masoretic spelling of the letter names; this is not surprising as he is dealing with Masoretic texts. I think the information given in the article is rather slim, so the best answer may be to expand on the history of Aramaic script to demonstrate the diversity of language. —

2086:. We have an in-house convention that uses "script" for basic writing systems as sign inventories with distinct letter shapes (independent of language), and "alphabet" for the application of such a script to individual languages (including slight variation by means of diacritics etc.). This is why we have "Latin script" vs. "German alphabet", 1873:, and their edit summaries suggest that they didn't take the supposedly Aramaic forms of names from any source, but arrived at them through their own original research, whose accuracy I see no reason to be confident in. I think the names ought to be sourced properly or replaced with something sourced.-- 1400:

Yes, I do think the Egyptian hieroglyphs should be "on top of just about every alphabet out there", as long as it is the precursor to all other scripts in the group and there is an 'acceptable' degree of evidence for it. Why would anyone from Rabat, Reykjavik, Ulan Bator, or Yangon object to that? If

1369:

However, it is time consuming to draw a little bird or a snake every time you wish to write a letter or a word! So, parallel to that process there was, in Egypt, already the orthographic simplification of the illustrative hieroglyphs - the easily writable hieratic. That is how the process has been in

1259:

Selecting a "top parent in the infobox be a parent language that still shares some similarities to the script being discussed" is if anything arbitrary at its best; the Latin letters A and M still share more than "some similarities" with their precursors all the way back to the hieroglyphs. Going all

1141:

I was being as minimally editorially invasive as I could manage, not knowing if there was anyone who had a strong sense of overriding responsibility for the article. I felt that increasing the historiographic precision on that one point made enough sense to be worth the effort without redisposing the

1083:

They are a sample of Imperial Aramaic names, some of which, unfortunately, are reconstructed. I shall try to recover the source that they can be referenced correctly. I think the names have been changed a little over time by editors, usually to adapt them to Classical/Modern Hebrew spelling. It looks

2201:

I have taken a look at a sample of those 850+ articles, and I can't see that authors refer to anything but the topic of this article: the Phoenician-derived writing system with letters of a distinct recognizable (or rather: classifiable) shape that primarily was used to write Aramaic, but also a few

1289:

My point is that the script tree will differ from the language tree and trying to link them, in Knowledge's layout, will do no good. Ideally, I think these infoboxes should have their script precursors indicated for all scripts in Knowledge, as far as possible. Looking forward to hear you arguments.

881:

I would guess Aleph(?)-Nun-Daleth-Rsh-Yodh, but I am no expert on semitic languages, it seems probable it would be written the same (with the equivalent letters/sounds) in Hebrew or Arabic, so you might be better off, asking at that talk page, and then using the Aramaic alphabet instead. Please note

832:

Why is there more Syriac script than Aramaic script in this article? Syriac script is based on Aramaic script BUT this article is about the Aramaic script. Why is the first picture of this article a picture of the Syriac alphabet? Shouldn't the first picture be a picture of one of the first forms of

2264:

Abjads are alphabets, so I agree with AnonMoos that that's irrelevant. (Although we do use Daniels & Bright terminology for classification, we don't use it for article titles.) WP convention of the past decade or so has been to use 'script' for the writing system and 'alphabet' for the adaption

1475:

I believe that this script should be classified as "High" importance, rather than "Top". While it is an important middle-ground between Phoenecian and many modern scripts, I do not believe it is so central to an understanding of the subject of writing systems as a whole as Phonecian, Arabic, Greek,

1312:

Since all of these languages and their alphabets have seperate articles, I don't necessarily see how language and script are being inappropriately tied in the article. Some of the confusion simply may be in how I phrased the sentence "top parent in the infobox be a parent language that still shares

1279:

Please, differentiate between the script symbols per se and the language they represent. They don't necessarily go hand in hand even if, of course, intimately tied. Both phonetic and semantic shifts are common between and within in most European languages, despite that a sound may be represented by

1269:

Since the oldest scripts probably are less than 10,000 years old and often lasted for a long time (let us say a thousand years on average) it would not be necessarily be burdensome to the layout either. Can we really expect more than ten hierarchal levels anywhere in this context? Probably not. The

1155:

I have wanted to rewrite this article for a long time, but it's a difficult task. The main problem is that there isn't really any one Aramaic alphabet, but many related forms: this article tends to concentrate on Imperial Aramaic script. Phoenician is clearly the source of Aramaic script, which, in

1378:

script is a few millennia younger but evidently quickly had a greater popularity among the people. I have not seen any actual reason for the switch from hieratic to demotic, even if I believe writing simplicity may have been a reason; in any case it probably was the poor mans hieratic that came to

763:

Someone wrote this, "Aramaic is also considered to be the most likely source of the Brahmi script, ancestor of the Brahmi family of scripts, which includes Devanagari". But how can it be true? Brahmi script is found in Indus valley. Fully mature Indus valley civilization (Harappa, Mohenjo daro) is

1220:

It really has nothing to do with arguing that those systems aren't derivative of Egyptian hieroglyphs, rather, it is more useful in an encyclopedia to have the top parent in the infobox be a parent language that still shares some similarities to the script being discussed in the article. In this

1116:

If the "Aramaic alphabet ... developed out of the Phoenician alphabet", any later alphabet that can be traced back to the Aramaic one, can be traced further back to the Phoenician. It is therefore not "the Aramaic alphabet is historically significant since virtually all modern Indian and Middle

1211:

had removed all links in the Infobox WS that describe the Parent system all the way back to the Egyptian hieroglyphs, for the Arameic script and other scripts. I don't understand the reason for that. It surely cannot be controversial that the Aramaic, Phoenician, Greek, and Proto-Canaanite (and

1156:

turn, is the source of Hebrew square script. However, the amount of borrowing from South Arabian scripts for Arabic is unclear, and Aramaic's influence of the Brahmi family of scripts is tough. Syriac, Mandaean, Pahlavi, Uyghur and Mongolian, though, are clearly derived from Aramaic scripts. —

1864:

I see that the letter names given originally were basically the standard Masoretic Hebrew versions of the names, which are often used conventionally to refer to the genetically corresponding letters in abjads. The current forms appear to be the product of interplay between the modifications

1585:

The Imperial Aramaic and Phoenician text displays OK on my Windows 11 system using the Segoe UI History font (seguihis.ttf). That font comes with Windows 11 (and I've read Windows 10 but can't verify that). You might find seguihis.ttf elsewhere too if you search for it. I doubt Chrome can

811:

Additionally, there are no accepted archaeological reports of Brahmi script in IVC contexts (don't confuse "Indus valley" with "Indus Valley Civilization contexts"). The earliest dateable examples of Brahmi are 4th or 5th century BCE and they were nowhere near the Indus valley.

1062:

You're right, they aren't sourced. I know that both Gareth and I can simply rattle them off from memory (much like someone would do their ABC's, and how do you source that? :-) ), but it would be a good idea to get a source to back them with. Let me fiddle with things.

1131:

Well, simply replacing 'Aramaic' with 'Phoenician' at the beginning of the second paragraph does not make any sense. Either we have to preface it with the information linking the two scripts, or move the entire paragraph to a point after Phoenician is mentioned. —

2138:

I don't really see how Google word-counts can resolve anything, since "Aramaic alphabet" and "Aramaic script" could be often used with different meanings. And this article should keep its current name if similar articles also do (Phoenician alphabet, etc).

790:

from that civilization. For comparison: the fact that the Arabic script is used in Egypt doesn't mean that it goes back the ancient Pharaos. As for the Brahmi script, the minority hypothesis of a connection to the Indus script faces many challenges: see

2369:"Among the descendant scripts in modern use, the Jewish Hebrew alphabet bears the closest relation to the Imperial Aramaic script of the 5th century BC, with an identical letter inventory and, for the most part, nearly identical letter shapes." 2182:

Austronesier -- You're basically missing my point. If the phrase "Aramaic alphabet" is often used with a different meaning than "Aramaic script", then mechanical search results by their nature simply won't be too useful here...

1351:

finally deciphered the hieroglyphs, by accepting that they were a mixture of logographic and acrophonic/phonetic alphabet symbols. The function you refer to may then be predated by more than fifteen centuries, by the Egyptian

2119:

In any case, this is different from the rationale of the OP which is based on the nature of the script type. The typological classification of the writing system (alphabet, abjad, abugida) is not really decisive here.

2197:

I often make the same argument as you do in move discussions when I see (and not just assume) that the search results contain a significant amount of false positives. So I do see the point, but until now it's missing

1270:

only dilemma I can think of are the weakly supported relations between scripts, and how to best indicate that. For some Brahmi scripts this has been noted with linked numbers, even if it should not be necessary here.

1824:

Why /alap/ and not /alaf/, when final /t/ and /d/ are 'th' and 'dh' in Dālath and Yodh? Andreas Schuele in "Introduction to Biblical Aramaic" (2012: 10) states that the spirantisation after vowels applied to all of

153: 1905:

this happens with both firefox and with chrome, so i don't think it is a browser issue. i have already checked the browser configuration and the possibility to download missing fonts automatically is

1566:

this happens with both firefox and with chrome, so i don't think it is a browser issue. i have already checked the browser configuration and the possibility to download missing fonts automatically is

1427:

May I note that the Georgian alphabet is not an offspring of the Aramaic alphabet, but rather a free - although surely inspired - invention of its inventor, as is the case with the Armenian alphabet?

1221:

case, by clicking Proto-Canaanite, they are immediately taken to a page on that script, which has its own infobox, with its own parent systems, including Egyptian hieroglyphs as the ultimate source.

565:, a collaborative effort to improve Knowledge's coverage of Phoenicia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. 2313:, abjad is only a modern linguistic classification term that refers to a special type of alphabets. Also oppose that "ideosyncratic naming convention", because trying to find a difference between 955:

It split into several forms, including Hebrew, Syriac, and Mandaic. No one seems to have wanted to encode the original, since it can be treated as a font variation of one of the descendants. -

1916: 998:

Some people find it helpful if these suggestions are shown on this talk page, rather than on another page. To do this, just add {{User:LinkBot/suggestions/Aramaic_alphabet}} to this page. —

2110:. This hierarchical (and quite ideosyncratic) naming convention is of course still open for debate, and I can remember having seen people were banging heads over it somewhere (was it 2204:"The libraries at Susa, Persepolis, Ekbatana, and other provincial administrative centers contained documents in Aramaic as well as Old Persian written in the Aramaic alphabet" 2294:, both Hebrew and Greek should probably be at 'script', but since they're intermediate in content between script articles and alphabet articles, the difference isn't crucial. 2424: 499: 489: 147: 2429: 2414: 1370:

China, too, with the oldest scripts being readily interpretable as illustrations and later styled into their purely symbolic value. The fact that the oldest Egyptian

410: 400: 1981: 1678: 1674: 1660: 1031: 465: 2419: 1030:). As that template is being reviewed at the moment, it seems inappropriate to make the article consistent with it. The article in BCE is consistent with 2439: 1216:. It would be interesting to see the argument, as those relations between scripts are manifested throughout Knowledge as well as elsewhere, since years. 596: 586: 376: 79: 2399: 990: 975: 287: 2409: 297: 44: 2444: 456: 433: 1347:

writing did not commence with the Proto-Canaanite as you imply by saying it was "primarily alphabetic". Unless I misunderstood it, that is how

259: 2454: 2404: 1374:

scripts occurs at the same time as the more logographic hieroglyphs may be an artifact; they both are after all many thousands of years. The

709: 699: 372: 359: 320: 85: 764:

3500 BC old . Aramaic script is only 800 BC old. So definitely Brahmi script is older than Aramaic and probably source of Aramaic script.

2350: 1874: 1845: 1830: 1571: 1177: 1966:

Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a

2434: 771: 1514:

What happened to the "Aramaic script" column? It is now renamed to "Hebrew script". Now there are two different columns saying Hebrew.

2459: 2394: 667: 1920: 1170:

Unless evidence is provided to show the Brahmi Script originating from the Aramaic Script, i am removing the line from the article.

1093:

I am working on encoding Imperial Aramaic in the UCS and I guess I will have to follow Rosenthal and Driver, who agree at least. --

2080: 1239:

Please talk about major changes first. Please provide supporting evidence. Please don't respond by putting your edits back in. —

745: 671: 561: 522: 168: 99: 30: 2449: 2002: 1495:

I assume Aramaic was usually written right-to-left, like Phoenician and Hebrew? If so, this should be stated in the article.

135: 104: 20: 963:

There is an old (1999) draft for separately encoding Aramaic and there is still a block reserved in the roadmap to the SMP

2340:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

675: 263: 250: 227: 74: 1755:

Where does your association between Brahmi and North Semitic scripts come from? Because in the Brahmi script article at:

1759:

the Aramaic semkath is 𑀱, Sādhē is 𑀘 and Shin is 𑀰, citing Bühler 1898, p. 82-83 and Salomon 1998, p. 25 as source.

1721: 1348: 786:

That a script is found in a region where an ancient civilization happens to have existed does not automatically mean it

202: 2103: 1626: 65: 2162: 2212:"Inscribed on both thighs, Greek on the left; Parthian on the right in a variation of the eastern Aramaic alphabet" 2157: 658: 619: 464:

related articles on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join

129: 1957: 737: 2202:

other ancient languages, whether it's called "script" or "alphabet" in the sources (some quotes for the latter:

1677:

to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the

1522:

I am no expert but my guess is that this edit was a misstake? Not sure though, therefore I'm asking here first.

2111: 1878: 1849: 1834: 1575: 2354: 1181: 1027: 125: 1899: 1736:

Isn't the name of the article incorrect? The Aramaic writing system is an abjad and not an alphabet, right?

1712: 1618: 1562: 775: 109: 2223: 2173: 2125: 2026: 1939: 2299: 2291: 2083: 1967: 1741: 1696:

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with

1684: 1460: 1406: 1295: 1065: 1023: 1022:

in two places. This article is wholly consistent in itself in this usage, but it is not consistent with

859: 850: 364: 208: 175: 1617:. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit 877:

Hy. My name is Andrei and I would, please, like to know how do you write my name in aramaic.Thank you.

2208:"the Brahmi script was derived for commercial use in the eighth century B.C. from an Aramaic alphabet" 2376: 2074: 2059:, where a move for that article was basically rejected (though not a formal proposal with template). 2056: 1651: 1591: 1213: 1173: 891:

I was wondering if anyone could tell me how to spell my daughters name in aramaic. Her name is ZOE.

800: 767: 1915:

Since then, seemingly nothing has happened. This issue remains unsolved. And my question is ‐ why?--

1773: 1760: 190: 2041: 1970:

after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

1898:

hello, i am not able to display some of the characters on this page. you can see an example here :

1777: 1764: 1561:

hello, i am not able to display some of the characters on this page. you can see an example here :

1500: 1318: 1226: 161: 55: 1383:; but not Phoenician which had had the time to mature on the foundations of its direct precursor). 2188: 2144: 2091: 2064: 1997: 1481: 1379:

live its own life in the markets and elsewhere (quite likely the same may have been true for the

1098: 1053: 70: 1809: 1681:

before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template

1034:

and is appropriate to the content. I do not feel that there is sufficient merit to change it. --

1697: 537: 516: 2219: 2169: 2121: 2022: 1935: 1343:

system towards an essentially alphabetic system has been in leaps as well as gradual. But the

1147: 1122: 1117:

Eastern writing systems use a script that can be traced back to it", it is the Phoenician. --

817: 461: 141: 51: 2326: 2295: 2287: 2107: 2012: 1737: 1610: 1546: 1527: 1456: 1402: 1291: 1069: 1011: 986: 926: 856:

Sorry, it's my IE5.5 somehow does not show png pictures anymore. It works fine in Netscape.

553: 24: 1704: 2372: 2275: 2250: 2099: 2087: 1587: 1538: 1380: 1244: 930: 922: 903: 899: 796: 345: 1196:

how can i write my name.."giorgos" (ie in english language meaning george) in aramaic ?

2318: 2283: 2037: 1798: 1663:, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by 1496: 1314: 1222: 914: 741: 368: 367:

interested in improving the encyclopaedic coverage and content of articles relating to

351: 1703:

If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with

242: 221: 2388: 2271: 2245:

partially per Austronesier, but I do not like our "ideosyncratic naming convention".

2184: 2140: 2095: 2060: 1992: 1477: 1094: 1049: 956: 929:, most names are in the emphatic state, so it would translate as חיתא (ħayθâ), or in 792: 1627:

https://web.archive.org/web/20110511124600/http://judaea.chimehost.net/main/text.pdf

2314: 2279: 1517: 1143: 1118: 999: 982: 967: 834: 813: 1844:

Never mind, fixed that, since I saw that this had been introduced by OR in 2014.--

2322: 1670: 1542: 1523: 1019: 866: 662:, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles related to 650: 547: 2246: 1826: 1669:. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than 1344: 1240: 1205: 1157: 1133: 1085: 1035: 1015: 938: 640: 543: 341: 1630: 1340: 448: 427: 2380: 2371:

This needs to be removed, but I didn't know how to reword the paragraph.

2358: 2330: 2303: 2270:

As for the comments on Arabic and Hebrew, we do have separate articles on

2254: 2227: 2192: 2177: 2148: 2129: 2045: 2006: 1943: 1924: 1882: 1853: 1838: 1781: 1768: 1745: 1726: 1595: 1579: 1550: 1531: 1504: 1485: 1464: 1410: 1322: 1299: 1248: 1230: 1208: 1185: 1160: 1150: 1136: 1125: 1101: 1088: 1074: 1056: 1038: 865:

You knowledgable folks may want to vet changes made by User 134.76.165.76

837: 821: 804: 779: 634: 613: 1900:

http://i1222.photobucket.com/albums/dd496/frabjousday123/Untitled-1_3.jpg

1563:

http://i1222.photobucket.com/albums/dd496/frabjousday123/Untitled-1_3.jpg

1371: 371:

on Knowledge. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by

1375: 964: 933:ܚܝܬܐ. However, the obvious choice would be the biblical חוה (ħawwâ, or 255: 335: 314: 1570:. does anyone have an idea how i can see these missing characters ? 1909:. does anyone have an idea how i can see these missing characters ? 1401:

it is the precursor to all other scripts in its group, so be it. -

663: 1142:

article, and look forward to seeing where it will be taken. --

934: 882:

that Semitic languages generally don't really use real vowels.

725: 184: 15: 1810:

https://books.google.at/books?id=XYrG07qQDxkC&redir_esc=y

1756: 1636:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the

833:

the Aramaic alphabet? Maybe, for example, Imperial Aramaic?

1621:

for additional information. I made the following changes:

2321:

is problematic as those articles have the same content.

1048:

What is the source for the letter-names we use here? --

736:

On 13 August 2022, it was proposed that this article be

2017: 1870: 1866: 1614: 666:

on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please

160: 1820:

Source for non-spirantisation of /p/ in letter names?

262:. If you would like to participate, please visit the 1799:

https://archive.org/details/onoriginofindian00bhuoft

460:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 1934:Change title to Aramaic script it isnt an alphabet 1673:using the archive tool instructions below. Editors 1471:

WikiProject Writing Systems importance reassessment

966:but AFAIK no one is pushing this in the moment. -- 2349:Can you add image to the top to show the script? 1732:Aramaic writing system is not an alphabet right? 985:has some possible wiki link suggestions for the 898:Hmmm, Zayin-Waw-Yodh, maybe? =S Also, check out 254:, which aims to improve Knowledge's coverage of 33:for general discussion of the article's subject. 1892:Six years ago a User has posted this message: 1659:This message was posted before February 2018. 174: 8: 847:Where happened with all the letter images? 1956:The following is a closed discussion of a 1609:I have just modified one external link on 1537:This script is called Aramaic even in the 793:Brahmi_script#Indigenous_origin_hypothesis 765: 608: 511: 422: 309: 216: 2425:Low-importance Ancient Near East articles 1631:http://judaea.chimehost.net/main/text.pdf 952:Aramaic alphabet isn't part of Unicode?? 2430:Ancient Near East articles by assessment 2214:). By our naming conventions, this is a 1757:https://en.m.wikipedia.org/Brahmi_script 559:This article is within the scope of the 248:This article is within the scope of the 2415:High-importance Writing system articles 1860:Source for the letter names in general? 1791: 1751:Source For Equivalent Letters In Brahmi 610: 513: 474:Knowledge:WikiProject Ancient Near East 424: 357:This article falls within the scope of 311: 218: 188: 2211: 2207: 2203: 989:article, and they have been placed on 477:Template:WikiProject Ancient Near East 2278:, which follow our convention -- cf. 1917:2003:CF:3F07:9F7E:AC10:AE30:96C9:7999 1648:to let others know (documentation at 1212:others) scripts all emanate from the 385:Knowledge:WikiProject Writing systems 7: 1975:The result of the move request was: 656:This article is within the scope of 454:This article is within the scope of 388:Template:WikiProject Writing systems 759:Brahmi script is older than Aramaic 207:It is of interest to the following 23:for discussing improvements to the 2420:C-Class Ancient Near East articles 2364:Boldly inaccurate similarity claim 983:automated Knowledge link suggester 14: 2440:Low-importance Phoenicia articles 1865:introduced by two users in 2006, 1613:. Please take a moment to review 2400:Top-importance Assyrian articles 2336:The discussion above is closed. 2021:– Its an abjad not an alphabet. 1829:, just as in Masoretic Hebrew.-- 925:, it could be זו(א)י (zô'ê). In 729: 670:where you can contribute to the 643: 633: 612: 546: 536: 515: 447: 426: 344: 334: 313: 241: 220: 189: 45:Click here to start a new topic. 2410:C-Class Writing system articles 1431:First table has something wrong 704:This article has been rated as 591:This article has been rated as 571:Knowledge:WikiProject Phoenicia 494:This article has been rated as 405:This article has been rated as 292:This article has been rated as 2445:WikiProject Phoenicia articles 2029:) 08:40, 13 August 2022 (UTC) 1982:closed by non-admin page mover 574:Template:WikiProject Phoenicia 1: 2381:23:45, 4 September 2024 (UTC) 1949:Requested move 13 August 2022 1586:"automatically" download it. 1186:01:03, 21 February 2010 (UTC) 468:and see a list of open tasks. 457:WikiProject Ancient Near East 272:Knowledge:WikiProject Assyria 42:Put new text under old text. 2455:Low-importance Iran articles 2405:WikiProject Assyria articles 2161:Aramaic alphabet: 137 counts 1727:00:20, 17 October 2016 (UTC) 1551:16:46, 19 January 2015 (UTC) 1532:16:43, 19 January 2015 (UTC) 1411:06:49, 5 February 2008 (UTC) 1323:17:07, 4 February 2008 (UTC) 1300:13:55, 4 February 2008 (UTC) 1249:18:46, 1 February 2008 (UTC) 1231:17:50, 1 February 2008 (UTC) 1209:23:00, 31 January 2008 (UTC) 838:19:27, 29 January 2015 (UTC) 275:Template:WikiProject Assyria 2359:12:11, 21 August 2023 (UTC) 2331:22:16, 23 August 2022 (UTC) 2304:10:23, 21 August 2022 (UTC) 2255:16:12, 20 August 2022 (UTC) 2228:13:59, 24 August 2022 (UTC) 2193:22:05, 23 August 2022 (UTC) 2178:16:37, 20 August 2022 (UTC) 2149:22:06, 15 August 2022 (UTC) 2130:08:57, 14 August 2022 (UTC) 2046:17:41, 20 August 2022 (UTC) 2007:19:47, 27 August 2022 (UTC) 1988:Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung 1580:17:01, 23 August 2016 (UTC) 913:To start with, the name is 822:00:00, 25 August 2016 (UTC) 805:21:45, 13 August 2016 (UTC) 780:08:13, 13 August 2016 (UTC) 360:WikiProject Writing systems 50:New to Knowledge? Welcome! 2476: 2435:C-Class Phoenicia articles 2156:Aramaic script: 725 counts 1925:21:27, 22 March 2022 (UTC) 1782:09:10, 28 March 2018 (UTC) 1769:09:10, 28 March 2018 (UTC) 1690:(last update: 5 June 2024) 1606:Hello fellow Wikipedians, 1596:23:11, 22 March 2022 (UTC) 1505:12:39, 1 August 2011 (UTC) 1018:era convention instead of 710:project's importance scale 684:Knowledge:WikiProject Iran 597:project's importance scale 500:project's importance scale 480:Ancient Near East articles 411:project's importance scale 298:project's importance scale 2460:WikiProject Iran articles 2395:C-Class Assyrian articles 1883:22:34, 28 July 2021 (UTC) 1854:22:25, 28 July 2021 (UTC) 1839:22:17, 27 July 2021 (UTC) 1746:08:07, 4 March 2017 (UTC) 1486:07:20, 28 June 2011 (UTC) 1339:The process going from a 1161:21:31, 11 July 2007 (UTC) 1151:17:39, 11 July 2007 (UTC) 1137:17:23, 11 July 2007 (UTC) 1126:17:13, 11 July 2007 (UTC) 1039:20:51, 24 July 2005 (UTC) 1002:10:40, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC) 869:16:45, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC) 703: 687:Template:WikiProject Iran 628: 590: 531: 493: 442: 404: 329: 291: 236: 215: 80:Be welcoming to newcomers 2338:Please do not modify it. 1963:Please do not modify it. 1944:10:28, 24 May 2022 (UTC) 1465:11:57, 16 May 2009 (UTC) 1441:Proto-Canaanite alphabet 1102:08:49, 3 July 2007 (UTC) 1089:16:25, 2 July 2007 (UTC) 1075:15:39, 2 July 2007 (UTC) 1057:12:17, 2 July 2007 (UTC) 959:12:29, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC) 375:and/or leave a query at 2104:Bengali–Assamese script 2067:) 22:06, 13 August 2022 1602:External links modified 970:13:22, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC) 941:16:22, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC) 391:Writing system articles 377:the project’s talk page 1888:Missing fonts (Repeat) 197:This article is rated 75:avoid personal attacks 2450:C-Class Iran articles 2345:No illustrative image 1444:→ Phoenician alphabet 1010:For consistency with 993:for your convenience. 860:User:Vassili_Nikolaev 851:User:Vassili_Nikolaev 562:WikiProject Phoenicia 100:Neutral point of view 2057:Talk:Arabic alphabet 1671:regular verification 1451:{{{name}}} appears! 1214:Egyptian hieroglyphs 873:How do you write...? 105:No original research 1661:After February 2018 1640:parameter below to 1200:Hieroglyph ancestry 1006:Era and consistency 251:WikiProject Assyria 2092:Bulgarian language 1715:InternetArchiveBot 1666:InternetArchiveBot 1024:Template:Alphabets 1014:this article uses 674:and help with our 577:Phoenicia articles 203:content assessment 86:dispute resolution 47: 2048: 1985: 1691: 1423:Georgian alphabet 1176:comment added by 1112:Phoenician source 1068: 894:Blue Skies Frank 782: 770:comment added by 756: 755: 724: 723: 720: 719: 716: 715: 607: 606: 603: 602: 510: 509: 506: 505: 471:Ancient Near East 462:Ancient Near East 434:Ancient Near East 421: 420: 417: 416: 308: 307: 304: 303: 278:Assyrian articles 183: 182: 66:Assume good faith 43: 2467: 2288:Yiddish alphabet 2108:Bengali alphabet 2030: 2020: 2013:Aramaic alphabet 1979: 1965: 1812: 1807: 1801: 1796: 1725: 1716: 1689: 1688: 1667: 1655: 1611:Aramaic alphabet 1521: 1188: 1064: 1012:Aramaic language 987:Aramaic_alphabet 976:Link suggestions 744:. The result of 733: 732: 726: 692: 691: 688: 685: 682: 668:join the project 659:WikiProject Iran 653: 648: 647: 646: 637: 630: 629: 624: 616: 609: 579: 578: 575: 572: 569: 556: 554:Phoenicia portal 551: 550: 540: 533: 532: 527: 519: 512: 482: 481: 478: 475: 472: 451: 444: 443: 438: 430: 423: 393: 392: 389: 386: 383: 373:the project page 354: 349: 348: 338: 331: 330: 325: 317: 310: 280: 279: 276: 273: 270: 245: 238: 237: 232: 224: 217: 200: 194: 193: 185: 179: 178: 164: 95:Article policies 25:Aramaic alphabet 16: 2475: 2474: 2470: 2469: 2468: 2466: 2465: 2464: 2385: 2384: 2366: 2347: 2342: 2341: 2276:Arabic alphabet 2100:Arabic alphabet 2088:Cyrillic script 2082:) and also per 2053:STRONGLY OPPOSE 2016: 1961: 1951: 1932: 1890: 1862: 1822: 1817: 1816: 1815: 1808: 1804: 1797: 1793: 1784: 1753: 1748: 1734: 1719: 1714: 1682: 1675:have permission 1665: 1649: 1619:this simple FaQ 1604: 1559: 1539:Hebrew alphabet 1515: 1512: 1493: 1473: 1433: 1425: 1381:Proto-Canaanite 1202: 1194: 1171: 1114: 1046: 1032:Manual of Style 1026:(see my remark 1008: 979: 950: 923:transliteration 904:Arabic language 900:Hebrew language 889: 875: 845: 830: 828:Syriac scripts? 761: 730: 689: 686: 683: 680: 679: 649: 644: 642: 622: 576: 573: 570: 567: 566: 552: 545: 525: 479: 476: 473: 470: 469: 436: 407:High-importance 390: 387: 384: 382:Writing systems 381: 380: 369:writing systems 350: 343: 324:High‑importance 323: 321:Writing systems 277: 274: 271: 268: 267: 230: 201:on Knowledge's 198: 121: 116: 115: 114: 91: 61: 12: 11: 5: 2473: 2471: 2463: 2462: 2457: 2452: 2447: 2442: 2437: 2432: 2427: 2422: 2417: 2412: 2407: 2402: 2397: 2387: 2386: 2365: 2362: 2351:102.44.243.243 2346: 2343: 2335: 2334: 2333: 2319:Latin alphabet 2307: 2306: 2292:WP:CONSISTENCY 2284:Latin alphabet 2267: 2266: 2258: 2257: 2239: 2238: 2237: 2236: 2235: 2234: 2233: 2232: 2231: 2230: 2199: 2166: 2165: 2164: 2159: 2133: 2132: 2116: 2115: 2084:WP:CONSISTENCY 2068: 2018:Aramaic script 2010: 1973: 1972: 1958:requested move 1952: 1950: 1947: 1931: 1930:Aramaic script 1928: 1913: 1912: 1911: 1910: 1904: 1902: 1889: 1886: 1875:79.100.149.219 1861: 1858: 1857: 1856: 1846:79.100.149.219 1831:79.100.149.219 1821: 1818: 1814: 1813: 1802: 1790: 1789: 1785: 1772: 1752: 1749: 1735: 1733: 1730: 1709: 1708: 1701: 1634: 1633: 1625:Added archive 1603: 1600: 1599: 1598: 1572:76.168.103.217 1565: 1558: 1555: 1554: 1553: 1511: 1510:Aramaic script 1508: 1492: 1491:Right-to-left? 1489: 1472: 1469: 1468: 1467: 1449: 1448: 1445: 1442: 1438: 1437: 1436:Parent systems 1432: 1429: 1424: 1421: 1420: 1419: 1418: 1417: 1416: 1415: 1414: 1413: 1391: 1390: 1389: 1388: 1387: 1386: 1385: 1384: 1360: 1359: 1358: 1357: 1356: 1355: 1354: 1353: 1330: 1329: 1328: 1327: 1326: 1325: 1305: 1304: 1303: 1302: 1284: 1283: 1282: 1281: 1274: 1273: 1272: 1271: 1264: 1263: 1262: 1261: 1254: 1253: 1252: 1251: 1234: 1233: 1201: 1198: 1193: 1190: 1178:86.181.206.125 1168: 1167: 1166: 1165: 1164: 1163: 1113: 1110: 1109: 1108: 1107: 1106: 1105: 1104: 1078: 1077: 1045: 1042: 1007: 1004: 994: 978: 973: 972: 971: 949: 946: 945: 944: 943: 942: 908: 907: 888: 885: 884: 883: 874: 871: 844: 841: 829: 826: 825: 824: 808: 807: 760: 757: 754: 753: 746:the discussion 742:Aramaic script 734: 722: 721: 718: 717: 714: 713: 706:Low-importance 702: 696: 695: 693: 655: 654: 638: 626: 625: 623:Low‑importance 617: 605: 604: 601: 600: 593:Low-importance 589: 583: 582: 580: 558: 557: 541: 529: 528: 526:Low‑importance 520: 508: 507: 504: 503: 496:Low-importance 492: 486: 485: 483: 466:the discussion 452: 440: 439: 437:Low‑importance 431: 419: 418: 415: 414: 403: 397: 396: 394: 356: 355: 352:Writing portal 339: 327: 326: 318: 306: 305: 302: 301: 294:Top-importance 290: 284: 283: 281: 260:related topics 246: 234: 233: 231:Top‑importance 225: 213: 212: 206: 195: 181: 180: 118: 117: 113: 112: 107: 102: 93: 92: 90: 89: 82: 77: 68: 62: 60: 59: 48: 39: 38: 35: 34: 28: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 2472: 2461: 2458: 2456: 2453: 2451: 2448: 2446: 2443: 2441: 2438: 2436: 2433: 2431: 2428: 2426: 2423: 2421: 2418: 2416: 2413: 2411: 2408: 2406: 2403: 2401: 2398: 2396: 2393: 2392: 2390: 2383: 2382: 2378: 2374: 2370: 2363: 2361: 2360: 2356: 2352: 2344: 2339: 2332: 2328: 2324: 2320: 2316: 2312: 2309: 2308: 2305: 2301: 2297: 2293: 2289: 2285: 2281: 2277: 2273: 2272:Arabic script 2269: 2268: 2263: 2260: 2259: 2256: 2252: 2248: 2244: 2241: 2240: 2229: 2225: 2221: 2217: 2213: 2209: 2205: 2200: 2196: 2195: 2194: 2190: 2186: 2181: 2180: 2179: 2175: 2171: 2167: 2163: 2160: 2158: 2155: 2154: 2153:JSTOR, then: 2152: 2151: 2150: 2146: 2142: 2137: 2136: 2135: 2134: 2131: 2127: 2123: 2118: 2117: 2113: 2109: 2105: 2101: 2097: 2096:Arabic script 2093: 2089: 2085: 2081: 2079: 2076: 2075:WP:COMMONNAME 2072: 2069: 2066: 2062: 2058: 2054: 2051: 2050: 2049: 2047: 2043: 2039: 2036: 2035: 2028: 2024: 2019: 2014: 2009: 2008: 2004: 2000: 1999: 1995: 1994: 1989: 1983: 1978: 1977:no consensus. 1971: 1969: 1964: 1959: 1954: 1953: 1948: 1946: 1945: 1941: 1937: 1929: 1927: 1926: 1922: 1918: 1908: 1903: 1901: 1897: 1896: 1895: 1894: 1893: 1887: 1885: 1884: 1880: 1876: 1872: 1868: 1859: 1855: 1851: 1847: 1843: 1842: 1841: 1840: 1836: 1832: 1828: 1819: 1811: 1806: 1803: 1800: 1795: 1792: 1788: 1783: 1779: 1775: 1771: 1770: 1766: 1762: 1758: 1750: 1747: 1743: 1739: 1731: 1729: 1728: 1723: 1718: 1717: 1706: 1702: 1699: 1695: 1694: 1693: 1686: 1680: 1676: 1672: 1668: 1662: 1657: 1653: 1647: 1643: 1639: 1632: 1628: 1624: 1623: 1622: 1620: 1616: 1612: 1607: 1601: 1597: 1593: 1589: 1584: 1583: 1582: 1581: 1577: 1573: 1569: 1564: 1557:Missing fonts 1556: 1552: 1548: 1544: 1540: 1536: 1535: 1534: 1533: 1529: 1525: 1519: 1509: 1507: 1506: 1502: 1498: 1490: 1488: 1487: 1483: 1479: 1476:Brahmi, etc. 1470: 1466: 1462: 1458: 1454: 1453: 1452: 1446: 1443: 1440: 1439: 1435: 1434: 1430: 1428: 1422: 1412: 1408: 1404: 1399: 1398: 1397: 1396: 1395: 1394: 1393: 1392: 1382: 1377: 1373: 1368: 1367: 1366: 1365: 1364: 1363: 1362: 1361: 1350: 1346: 1342: 1338: 1337: 1336: 1335: 1334: 1333: 1332: 1331: 1324: 1320: 1316: 1311: 1310: 1309: 1308: 1307: 1306: 1301: 1297: 1293: 1288: 1287: 1286: 1285: 1278: 1277: 1276: 1275: 1268: 1267: 1266: 1265: 1258: 1257: 1256: 1255: 1250: 1246: 1242: 1241:Gareth Hughes 1238: 1237: 1236: 1235: 1232: 1228: 1224: 1219: 1218: 1217: 1215: 1210: 1207: 1206:Gareth Hughes 1204:I noted that 1199: 1197: 1191: 1189: 1187: 1183: 1179: 1175: 1162: 1159: 1158:Gareth Hughes 1154: 1153: 1152: 1149: 1145: 1140: 1139: 1138: 1135: 1134:Gareth Hughes 1130: 1129: 1128: 1127: 1124: 1120: 1111: 1103: 1100: 1096: 1092: 1091: 1090: 1087: 1086:Gareth Hughes 1082: 1081: 1080: 1079: 1076: 1073: 1072: 1067: 1061: 1060: 1059: 1058: 1055: 1051: 1043: 1041: 1040: 1037: 1036:Gareth Hughes 1033: 1029: 1025: 1021: 1017: 1013: 1005: 1003: 1001: 997: 992: 988: 984: 977: 974: 969: 965: 962: 961: 960: 958: 953: 947: 940: 939:Gareth Hughes 936: 932: 928: 924: 920: 916: 912: 911: 910: 909: 905: 901: 897: 896: 895: 892: 886: 880: 879: 878: 872: 870: 868: 863: 861: 857: 854: 852: 848: 842: 840: 839: 836: 827: 823: 819: 815: 810: 809: 806: 802: 798: 794: 789: 785: 784: 783: 781: 777: 773: 772:43.248.152.55 769: 758: 751: 747: 743: 739: 735: 728: 727: 711: 707: 701: 698: 697: 694: 690:Iran articles 677: 673: 669: 665: 661: 660: 652: 641: 639: 636: 632: 631: 627: 621: 618: 615: 611: 598: 594: 588: 585: 584: 581: 564: 563: 555: 549: 544: 542: 539: 535: 534: 530: 524: 521: 518: 514: 501: 497: 491: 488: 487: 484: 467: 463: 459: 458: 453: 450: 446: 445: 441: 435: 432: 429: 425: 412: 408: 402: 399: 398: 395: 378: 374: 370: 366: 362: 361: 353: 347: 342: 340: 337: 333: 332: 328: 322: 319: 316: 312: 299: 295: 289: 286: 285: 282: 265: 261: 257: 253: 252: 247: 244: 240: 239: 235: 229: 226: 223: 219: 214: 210: 204: 196: 192: 187: 186: 177: 173: 170: 167: 163: 159: 155: 152: 149: 146: 143: 140: 137: 134: 131: 127: 124: 123:Find sources: 120: 119: 111: 110:Verifiability 108: 106: 103: 101: 98: 97: 96: 87: 83: 81: 78: 76: 72: 69: 67: 64: 63: 57: 53: 52:Learn to edit 49: 46: 41: 40: 37: 36: 32: 26: 22: 18: 17: 2368: 2367: 2348: 2337: 2315:Latin script 2310: 2280:Latin script 2261: 2242: 2220:Austronesier 2215: 2170:Austronesier 2122:Austronesier 2112:WT:LANGUAGES 2070: 2052: 2033: 2032: 2023:AleksiB 1945 2011: 1996: 1991: 1987: 1976: 1974: 1962: 1955: 1936:AleksiB 1945 1933: 1914: 1906: 1891: 1863: 1823: 1805: 1794: 1786: 1754: 1713: 1710: 1685:source check 1664: 1658: 1645: 1641: 1637: 1635: 1608: 1605: 1567: 1560: 1513: 1494: 1474: 1450: 1447:→ {{{name}}} 1426: 1352:hieroglyphs. 1203: 1195: 1169: 1115: 1071:Steve Caruso 1070: 1047: 1044:Letter names 1009: 995: 980: 954: 951: 918: 893: 890: 876: 864: 862:03-nov-2003 858: 855: 853:03-nov-2003 849: 846: 831: 787: 766:— Preceding 762: 750:no consensus 749: 705: 657: 592: 560: 495: 455: 406: 358: 293: 264:project page 249: 209:WikiProjects 171: 165: 157: 150: 144: 138: 132: 122: 94: 19:This is the 2038:– robertsky 1968:move review 1738:Fantumphool 1652:Sourcecheck 1457:Mahmudmasri 1403:Throttleryn 1349:Champollion 1341:logographic 1292:Throttleryn 1172:—Preceding 672:discussions 651:Iran portal 365:WikiProject 148:free images 31:not a forum 2389:Categories 2373:Temerarius 2198:substance. 2034:Relisting. 1827:begadkefat 1787:References 1722:Report bug 1588:DRMcCreedy 1345:acrophonic 1290:Cheers! - 835:ܐܵܬܘܿܪܵܝܵܐ 797:Drabkikker 788:originates 676:open tasks 2077:(see here 1774:Princ3jah 1761:Princ3jah 1705:this tool 1698:this tool 1541:article. 1497:AxelBoldt 1315:Brando130 1223:Brando130 991:this page 568:Phoenicia 523:Phoenicia 88:if needed 71:Be polite 21:talk page 2262:Support? 2185:AnonMoos 2141:AnonMoos 2061:AnonMoos 1711:Cheers.— 1478:Vanisaac 1372:Hieratic 1174:unsigned 1095:Evertype 1050:Evertype 957:Mustafaa 887:spelling 768:unsigned 256:Assyrian 56:get help 29:This is 27:article. 2296:— kwami 2290:). Per 2243:Support 2071:Support 1907:enabled 1638:checked 1615:my edit 1568:enabled 1518:Achayan 1376:Demotic 1144:Futhark 1119:Futhark 1000:LinkBot 968:Pjacobi 948:Unicode 927:Aramaic 917:: Ζωη, 843:Letters 814:Tarchon 708:on the 595:on the 498:on the 409:on the 296:on the 269:Assyria 228:Assyria 199:C-class 154:WP refs 142:scholar 2323:Serg!o 2311:Oppose 2216:script 1646:failed 1543:Shmayo 1524:Shmayo 931:Syriac 867:Wetman 205:scale. 126:Google 2247:Srnec 1993:mello 921:. In 915:Greek 738:moved 169:JSTOR 130:books 84:Seek 2377:talk 2355:talk 2327:talk 2317:and 2300:talk 2282:and 2274:and 2251:talk 2224:talk 2189:talk 2174:talk 2145:talk 2126:talk 2106:vs. 2102:and 2098:vs. 2090:vs. 2073:per 2065:talk 2042:talk 2027:talk 1940:talk 1921:talk 1879:talk 1871:here 1869:and 1867:here 1850:talk 1835:talk 1778:talk 1765:talk 1742:talk 1642:true 1592:talk 1576:talk 1547:talk 1528:talk 1501:talk 1482:talk 1461:talk 1407:talk 1319:talk 1296:talk 1245:talk 1227:talk 1182:talk 1148:Talk 1123:Talk 1028:here 996:Tip: 919:life 902:and 818:talk 801:talk 776:talk 748:was 681:Iran 664:Iran 620:Iran 401:High 363:, a 162:FENS 136:news 73:and 2218:. – 2114:?). 1998:hi! 1679:RfC 1656:). 1644:or 1629:to 1066:אמר 1016:BCE 981:An 935:Eve 740:to 700:Low 587:Low 490:Low 288:Top 176:TWL 2391:: 2379:) 2357:) 2329:) 2302:) 2253:) 2226:) 2210:, 2206:, 2191:) 2176:) 2147:) 2128:) 2094:, 2044:) 2031:— 2015:→ 2005:) 2003:投稿 1990:, 1986:— 1960:. 1942:) 1923:) 1881:) 1852:) 1837:) 1780:) 1767:) 1744:) 1692:. 1687:}} 1683:{{ 1654:}} 1650:{{ 1594:) 1578:) 1549:) 1530:) 1503:) 1484:) 1463:) 1455:-- 1409:) 1321:) 1298:) 1247:) 1229:) 1192:.. 1184:) 1020:BC 937:. 820:) 803:) 795:. 778:) 156:) 54:; 2375:( 2353:( 2325:( 2298:( 2249:( 2222:( 2187:( 2172:( 2168:– 2143:( 2124:( 2120:– 2063:( 2040:( 2025:( 2001:( 1984:) 1980:( 1938:( 1919:( 1877:( 1848:( 1833:( 1776:( 1763:( 1740:( 1724:) 1720:( 1707:. 1700:. 1590:( 1574:( 1545:( 1526:( 1520:: 1516:@ 1499:( 1480:( 1459:( 1405:( 1317:( 1294:( 1243:( 1225:( 1180:( 1146:| 1121:| 1099:✆ 1097:· 1054:✆ 1052:· 906:. 816:( 799:( 774:( 752:. 712:. 678:. 599:. 502:. 413:. 379:. 300:. 266:. 258:- 211:: 172:· 166:· 158:· 151:· 145:· 139:· 133:· 128:( 58:.

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

Index