1053:
Goliath, Madam Bee was old. And she was even more frail, with one arm paralysed with polio. At the time of the fatal assault she had already been subjected to a series of attacks and was weak from a number of unhealed wounds. Yet this defenceless female was set upon in the same vicious way, pounded and hit, kicked and dragged and rolled over." So we have an implication from
Goodall that 1) had she not been old and frail from polio and unhealed wounds she could have been more of a challenge 2) the males considered her a combatant all the same with the entire male core attacking her just as they did the others. We also hear that two other females were very likely killed in the same way. The thing is, there is nothing in the article here I can source this with and it doesn't make sense to source "3 females" with this circumstantial evidence. In my opinion, distinguishing between the female and male combatants is enough of a clarification for readers to understand the power difference. Unbh, could there be a compromise you'd agree to?
543:
uncomfortable. The fact is that the Gombe War was, definitionally, a war. It was a conflict over land and political power between two populations of the same species and their two governing authorities. The size of the groups is irrelevant, the infobox designed for wars is useful and accurate here since this WAS a war and so all the basic information necessary to study it can be communicated in this infobox. And yes, if a war between ant colonies was significantly notable enough for a wikipedia article the infobox would be appropriate there too. It would not be appropriate for a barfight, as a barfight is not a war.
856:
planet's limited surface. No less are they in principle capable of consciously taming their combative impulses themselves, e.g. by agreeing with their enemies on treaties that compensate for the lack of resources (as a frequent result of overpopulation) by peaceful exchange of goods. This capacity is called attention to by primate ethologist Frans de Waal, on the occasion of the very impression of the cruelty of the war-like behavior of our closest relatives and the questions, also raised by the interview, of what we share with them that makes us different.
1168:
engagement. Option 2 seems preferable, but remember that this is only the ones
Goodall or her assisants saw and includes for example Madam Bee. We would also have to decide whether chimpanzees that were presumed but not confirmed to have fallen to Kasekela troops (Willy Wally and to a lesser extent the two females) are included. However, in either case I think it's valid to not include any of the Kasekela females. There is no record of a Kahama troop ever assaulting a Kasekela female and they were not part of the patrols.
262:
941:. I won't revert your edits again because I would technically be edit warring myself, but your latest edits should still be discussed as deleting sourced information just because it is, in your opinion, "silly", "stupid" or "ridiculous" is not the way to go about editing Knowledge. Neither is putting the burden of proof on others simply because you find it extraordinary that our closest living relatives, ones we share 99% of our DNA with, have been found to sometimes behave similarly to us. I'll ping
845:
to anthropology as well as psychology. Jane
Goodall was one of three assistants commissioned by Louis Leakey to explore forms of cohabitation among chimpanzees, orangutans (by Birutė Galdikas), and gorillas (by Dian Fossey). As a paleoanthropologist, he hoped to be able to draw conclusions about the evolution of behavior in the early phylogenetic development of humans from the results of the new research areas thus established - for Goodall, a mission she made her life's work.
252:
225:
328:
340:
385:
1082:"unless reliable sources can be found that specifically state the females were combatants (my views on that sort of terminology are abundantly clear already) than we should leave them out." I still don't understand this. We don't have sources specifically stating the male Kahama chimpanzees were combatants either yet they're in there. What's your reasoning? By the way, you shouldn't have reverted
151:
72:
141:
120:
21:
89:
880:
1228:
mentioned whether she was around for any of the other skirmishes, but
Goodall does mention at the start of the ‘War’ chapter that she joined a group of males attacking a female from one of the other communities. I think this information is significant - Goodall obviously thought it was relevant in her initial recounting of the war.
734:
conflict between a chimpanzee society that's relatively average in size. As far as chimpanzees go, this is a pretty big conflict, and it's accurate to call it a war within that context. Not only that, but from a large sum of articles I've looked up involving this event describe it as a war waged rather than a feud.
1227:
Sorry to re-open this conversation, but
Goodall claims that at least one female (Gigi) was involved on two occasions: on the initial attack against Godi she’s reported to have ‘charged back and forth around the melee’ and she actually joined in with the attack on Dé. (Through A Window p.122) It’s not
855:
Homo sapiens has several other options to choose from: its members possess a consciousness that has evolved to such an extent that they are in principle capable of memorializing and transmitting the events of wars they have experienced, and of controlling their birth rate in wise consideration of the
844:
How male specimens of common chimpanzees organize themselves into 'fighting associations' to maintain the territories they occupy against predators and species-specific competition, how the 'conquered' female communities care for their offspring, and how the offspring in turn interact, is of interest
834:
The german article has a very important section on how war among humans isnt necessarily necessary and can be avoided which the english version lacks. I cant add it, can someone else do it? (Maybe take a quick look that the words are correct because im max C1, not C2, and cant flatten the translation
811:
magazine website, is suspiciously similar in structure and content to the version of this article that already existed at that time. I am becoming deeply concerned about the increasing difficulty of finding reliable sources that are independent of
Knowledge content. The very existence of Knowledge is
1000:
You can't say something isn't in the article, so it can't be sourced. If it's not in the article, and it's not sourced there's no way it would be in the info box. It doesn't matter if there are plenty of other examples of females fighting. The burden is in you to support the claim they fought here.
591:
The Gombe War is not analogous to the "Emu War." The so-called Emu War was a campaign of extermination in which only one side was actually committing violent action. The Gombe War was a conflict over territory between two equally intelligent groups of the same species, with comparable political and
444:
Ok this is a cool subject and it's scientifically significant but isn't it a bit ridiculous to use the normal sidebox for wars here? "Result: Decisive
Kasakela victory." It's good that whoever made the article had fun but give me a break. It involved 30 chimps. Are we going to use this template for
1067:
We can't include stuff that's implication. The problem here is the info box template that begs to be filled. There simply doesn't appear to be the information to do so without resorting to some level of OR, so unless reliable sources can be found that specifically state the females were combatants
1161:
All six Kahama males were almost certainly killed in ambush assaults by the
Kasekela males, with five confirmed and only Willy Wally's attack being unconfirmed (because his body was never found; Goodall p.125). One female (Madam Bee) was also killed in an assault (Goodall p.124). Two more females
1157:
For a year or so, the Kahama and
Kasekela males would engage in (mostly intimidation) battles whenever they met in the area where their territories overlapped (Goodall p.121). There were no deaths during these engagements and presumably both sides were successfully intimidated by the other side's
1115:
The infobox is appropriate, as several researchers described this event as a conflict which basically proved that chimpanzees could wage wars similar to humans. Either way, a "combatant" in this context is someone who was confirmed to have fought. By my understanding, male Kahama chimpanzees were
1167:
Now, I see two ways to go about this: either we play it simple and give the total estimated strength (according to the sources) of both sides - excluding children, which aren't really mentioned anyway - OR we only mention those that are specifically mentioned to have been involved in a confirmed
962:
There is no reason not to include the adult females as part of the group strength. YOU made the claim, with no source, that the females don't fight. When I pointed out a random example of them fighting in my edit summary you flippantly commented that sources don't go in edit summaries. How can I
916:
The info box is ridiculous, but if it must be there it needs to be cleaned of the anthropomorphising nonsense about commanders and slaves. This is not Animal Farm. Claims that animals have commanders and slaves are extraordinary, and need explicit qualification with high quality sources actually
733:
When it comes to numbers involved, keep in mind human societies are far larger than animal societies. You could accurately identify conflicts involving very few people as feuds rather than wars, and if this were a human conflict then I'd actually say it fits that moniker. But this is an internal
958:
We have sources stating that three females were beaten and kidnapped. I actually agree here that "enslaved" is original wording that doesn't really accurately portray the situation, but something like "three female captives", "three females captured" or "three females kidnapped" should still be
1052:
regarding the females fighting: I would, but nearly all of the actual fighting happened without
Goodall or her assistants seeing it. Goodall never outright states or doesn't state that the females fought (in the pages I can read at least). However, she does state the following on pg.124: "Like
718:
There's no objective difference between the two, really. Like when scientists say that grizzly bears and polar bears are different species despite being interfertile and even repeatedly interbreeding over the past several thousand years, these terms are pretty loosey-goosey. Gang wars might be
763:
The article infobox mention that Kasakela chimpanzees suffered 1 casualty, but nowhere in the text does it say when. Nor the source (Through a Window...) mentioned any Kasakela casualties or at least I couldn't find any. However in subsesquent conflict against the Kalande, two Kasakela males
778:
Came here to ask this exact question! I also feel like the female chimpanzee (Gigi) who tagged along to multiple attacks and even participated should be listed in the ‘strength’ column. Given that we know females were involved on both sides, shouldn’t they be counted as part of the whole?
542:
You are doing the same thing other primatologists did when first confronted with Goodall's research: kneejerk reacting to label anything human like done by non-humans as "not real ___." Probably this is because the idea that chimps are as smart, and as capable of evil, as humans makes you
936:
It's good that you started a discussion. However, you've reverted or partially reverted three users five times in a row now (after attempting to remove the whole infobox against standing consensus) and waited until now to open the talk page, a prime example of
679:
Because the Emu War wasn't an actual war, it was just a time when some Australian soldiers shot at some Emus (and missed). This, however, is a prolonged violent conflict between two organized groups. If that isn't the definition of "war", what is?
397:
492:
Maybe a military conflict infobox isn't quite necessary, but a civil conflict infobox could suffice? After all, this conflict seems to have relevance to the theory of war driving human evolution, which could have social aspects.
963:
source something that isn't in the article? This is you - again - putting the burden of proof on another when it is on you. Plenty of other examples in Goodall's book of them fighting, particularly to protect their offspring.
637:
I wonder why Goliath is marked as the leader of the Kahama community. According to "Chimpanzees of Gombe: patterns of behavior" Goliath was old and low-ranking at the time, while Charlie was the alpha male of Kahama.
955:
The infobox says "Commanders and leaders". Goodall refers to "leaders" of tribes in her book. A leader leads the troop in battle (her choice of words). What exactly is the problem in mentioning these leaders?
1100:
Then they should be taken out as well. if it's not sourced it shouldn't be in here. All this continues to do is emphasise the absurdity of including this infobox at all. it's not appropriate to the subject.
509:
If the researchers who witnessed the events call it a "war" I see no reason why not to use the normal war sidebox here. And using "decisive kasakela victory" is technically correct however funny it may be.
1315:
added to this page that could be vandalism, around midway through it the speaker starts laughing and it seems to be in an over the top accent, however I'm not 100% on it being made on bad faith or not.
574:
Bruv, we reached no consensus on this, I liked the war box better as it applied here since as random IPv6 above said, it was a real war, it was political, it was for land and the women chimpanzees.
1335:. It's been nominated for deletion on Commons. Thanks for bringing it to our attention. I don't see any links to this audio currently in the article, but if I missed any, feel free to remove it. –
618:
544:
681:
892:
64:
599:
1355:
765:
1044:
Alright, let's start over. Unbh, I sympathise. You're trying to make this article better and so do I, so I'll try to be more constructive in my argument this time.
548:
917:
using this trend, not just synth conclusions because that's what it sounds like to the reader of Goodall's book. If you want this extraordinary stuff in there the
1162:
were thought to have been killed in assaults, but like Willy Wally their bodies were never found. Three other females were severely beaten and kidnapped (Morris).
719:
definable as "just" feuds, too, but the term "war" frames the conflict in a way which (those who use the term assume) conveys useful information in itself.
1425:
1400:
421:
358:
207:
197:
1390:
524:
Then why didn't the Emu War use the same infobox? I see no difference between two of them, though Emu War involved more combatants and even humans.
1415:
318:
308:
1430:
1405:
592:
social lives, both acting violently. Also, I don't find the phrase "decisive Kasakela victory" funny at all-- it was a pretty brutal victory.
645:
494:
1435:
60:
173:
1420:
888:
872:
703:
622:
446:
1395:
685:
284:
1116:
confirmed to have battled their opponents, did they not? Unless the same can be said about the females, they should not be listed.
1410:
1015:
Regarding the females fighting and any "commanders" being listed, if Goodall's account backs it up, I support the inclusion.
603:
353:
235:
164:
125:
802:
769:
617:
Chimpanzee societies, as well as their conflicts are sophisticated enough to warrant this kind of sidebar. It should stay.
664:
Why does this one get counted as a war, right down to ‘decisive Kaskella victory’, but the Emu War is just an ‘event’ --
275:
230:
100:
669:
1292:, with the character Hope Clearwater modelled on Jane Goodall. Does anyone know whether Boyd has talked about this?
1312:
724:
515:
1270:
1233:
1182:
IMO, perhaps it would be best to list those with unconfirmed fates as "missing, presumed dead" in the infobox.
784:
746:
649:
511:
498:
1368:
1345:
861:
450:
1321:
1201:
1173:
1091:
1058:
968:
884:
707:
665:
582:
465:
1285:
1284:
This discovery of the violent nature of chimpanzee groups must have been one of the inspirations behind
720:
106:
36:
857:
1332:
1317:
1143:
895:
until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.
699:
641:
595:
52:
88:
50:... that one chimpanzee group killed off all the adult males in another chimpanzee group during the
1266:
1255:
1245:
1229:
1187:
1121:
1068:(my views on that sort of terminology are abundantly clear already) than we should leave them out.
1028:
807:
780:
735:
283:
on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
172:
on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
1359:
1336:
1293:
565:
529:
429:
388:
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between
1138:
degree of interpreting and summarising on Knowledge is allowed, otherwise everything would be a
1023:, could you please add the specific pages as refs to the article - perhaps also in the infobox?
251:
224:
20:
1154:
I think that's fair and I'll give my two cents. Goodall and Morris's books confirm two things:
1289:
1197:
1169:
1139:
1087:
1054:
1018:
982:
964:
938:
578:
461:
1297:
817:
401:
577:
We need a consensus on which one to use before you just change stuff like that. Reverting.
989:
345:
156:
1251:
1183:
1149:
1117:
1106:
1073:
1047:
1024:
1006:
942:
926:
918:
413:
405:
41:
1384:
899:
561:
525:
481:
425:
267:
1131:
557:
Yeah, I agree, the war infobox should be changed into event infobox just like the
813:
384:
1373:
1350:
1325:
1301:
1274:
1259:
1237:
1205:
1191:
1177:
1125:
1110:
1095:
1077:
1062:
1032:
1010:
993:
972:
930:
906:
865:
821:
788:
773:
752:
728:
711:
696:
Due to the numbers involved I would say this was more a of a feud than a war.
689:
673:
653:
626:
607:
586:
569:
552:
533:
519:
502:
485:
469:
454:
433:
327:
150:
1083:
985:
946:
409:
335:
257:
146:
1102:
1069:
1039:
1002:
922:
893:
Knowledge:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 December 28#Great Chimpanzee War
31:
140:
119:
477:
169:
879:
949:
for the discussion too because they were also involved in your reverts.
558:
280:
883:
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect
82:
15:
1158:
strength because they mostly avoided each other's territory.
326:
70:
1250:
That's a valid point. I added her to the text and infobox.
921:
it's on you to source it properly. As it stands is just OR.
830:
Philosophical Anthropology Or: Why We Humans Dont Need War
1356:
c:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Gombe Chimpanzee War.ogg
812:
making the project of creating Knowledge more difficult.
805:" by Matthew Bian, published September 17, 2021 on the
65:
Template:Did you know nominations/Gombe Chimpanzee War
63:. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at
476:
If people write books about individual wars: Sure. --
379:
Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
460:
If they're especially notable, I don't see why not.
279:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
168:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
959:included as casualties. Tweak rather than delete.
1146:) and no cohesive article could ever be made.
8:
445:bar fights or battles between ant colonies?
841:(Not soooo important: Evolutionary Biology
803:A Brief History of the Gombe Chimpanzee War
697:
639:
593:
219:
114:
1001:Put the sources in the article properly.
422:Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment
44:). The text of the entry was as follows:
838:Interdisciplinary importance/relevance
420:Above undated message substituted from
221:
116:
86:
619:2001:569:5814:E200:4479:92DA:39B3:8743
545:2601:642:C481:4640:487A:F71:5100:72E6
59:A record of the entry may be seen at
7:
682:2600:1:92AC:6619:461E:72AA:E6D1:D3C0
273:This article is within the scope of
162:This article is within the scope of
61:Knowledge:Recent additions/2014/June
105:It is of interest to the following
764:disappeared, presumably killed. --
393:
389:
14:
952:Now, regarding your latest edit:
871:"Great Chimpanzee War" listed at
440:silly use of war sidebox template
71:
1426:Low-importance Tanzania articles
1401:High-importance Primate articles
891:. This discussion will occur at
878:
462:Bataaf van Oranje (Prinsgezinde)
396:. Further details are available
383:
338:
260:
250:
223:
149:
139:
118:
87:
19:
1391:Knowledge Did you know articles
1265:@Applodion thank you so much!
313:This article has been rated as
202:This article has been rated as
1416:Low-importance Africa articles
712:14:09, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
182:Knowledge:WikiProject Primates
1:
1431:WikiProject Tanzania articles
1406:WikiProject Primates articles
1238:20:42, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
907:16:09, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
866:01:50, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
789:20:28, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
729:17:11, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
690:17:38, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
600:2601:642:C481:4640:0:0:0:B029
455:02:58, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
351:This article is supported by
287:and see a list of open tasks.
185:Template:WikiProject Primates
176:and see a list of open tasks.
848:But NOW it gets important!)
822:02:16, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
674:07:31, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
654:14:17, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
587:00:28, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
570:09:05, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
534:09:07, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
486:18:25, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
470:09:51, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
434:21:52, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
293:Knowledge:WikiProject Africa
1436:WikiProject Africa articles
1275:21:43, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
1260:15:24, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
1206:12:55, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
852:Philosophical anthropology
766:2001:14BA:AB01:3186:0:0:0:1
520:21:52, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
296:Template:WikiProject Africa
1452:
1302:11:01, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
1192:14:15, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
1178:13:01, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
1126:12:04, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
1111:00:31, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
1096:23:53, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
1078:11:35, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
1063:11:24, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
1033:09:29, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
1011:00:51, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
994:19:35, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
973:17:07, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
931:13:38, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
503:21:04, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
319:project's importance scale
208:project's importance scale
1421:C-Class Tanzania articles
753:08:52, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
608:18:48, 2 March 2022 (UTC)
334:
312:
245:
201:
134:
113:
1396:C-Class Primate articles
873:Redirects for discussion
774:14:47, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
633:Goliath - Kahama leader?
627:06:02, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
40:column on 19 June 2014 (
30:appeared on Knowledge's
1411:C-Class Africa articles
1374:14:06, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
1351:12:12, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
1326:06:51, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
1130:I think this is taking
887:and has thus listed it
553:18:40, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
331:
95:This article is rated
76:
400:. Student editor(s):
330:
74:
885:Great Chimpanzee War
759:Kasakela casualties?
354:WikiProject Tanzania
165:WikiProject Primates
53:Gombe Chimpanzee War
28:Gombe Chimpanzee War
1140:copyright violation
512:StraightOuttaBoston
1280:William Boyd novel
398:on the course page
332:
276:WikiProject Africa
101:content assessment
77:
1372:
1349:
1290:Brazzaville Beach
714:
702:comment added by
666:StrexcorpEmployee
656:
644:comment added by
610:
598:comment added by
373:
372:
369:
368:
365:
364:
218:
217:
214:
213:
81:
80:
1443:
1366:
1364:
1343:
1341:
1249:
1153:
1134:to the extreme.
1051:
1043:
1022:
882:
749:
743:
738:
721:CallMeSalticidae
436:
395:
391:
387:
348:
343:
342:
341:
301:
300:
297:
294:
291:
270:
265:
264:
263:
254:
247:
246:
241:
238:
227:
220:
190:
189:
188:Primate articles
186:
183:
180:
159:
154:
153:
143:
136:
135:
130:
122:
115:
98:
92:
91:
83:
73:
23:
16:
1451:
1450:
1446:
1445:
1444:
1442:
1441:
1440:
1381:
1380:
1360:
1337:
1309:
1307:Audio vandalism
1282:
1243:
1147:
1045:
1037:
1016:
914:
898:
876:
832:
799:
761:
747:
739:
736:
662:
646:109.173.112.229
635:
495:107.179.249.218
442:
419:
394:6 December 2019
381:
346:Tanzania portal
344:
339:
337:
299:Africa articles
298:
295:
292:
289:
288:
266:
261:
259:
239:
233:
204:High-importance
187:
184:
181:
178:
177:
157:Primates portal
155:
148:
129:High‑importance
128:
99:on Knowledge's
96:
12:
11:
5:
1449:
1447:
1439:
1438:
1433:
1428:
1423:
1418:
1413:
1408:
1403:
1398:
1393:
1383:
1382:
1379:
1378:
1377:
1376:
1308:
1305:
1288:'s 1990 novel
1281:
1278:
1267:EerieSomething
1263:
1262:
1246:EerieSomething
1230:EerieSomething
1225:
1224:
1223:
1222:
1221:
1220:
1219:
1218:
1217:
1216:
1215:
1214:
1213:
1212:
1211:
1210:
1209:
1208:
1165:
1164:
1163:
1159:
1128:
1035:
998:
997:
996:
976:
975:
960:
956:
950:
913:
910:
896:
889:for discussion
875:
869:
851:
831:
828:
826:
798:
792:
781:EerieSomething
760:
757:
756:
755:
731:
695:
693:
692:
661:
658:
634:
631:
630:
629:
615:
614:
613:
612:
611:
575:
555:
539:
538:
537:
536:
506:
505:
489:
488:
473:
472:
441:
438:
390:26 August 2019
380:
377:
375:
371:
370:
367:
366:
363:
362:
359:Low-importance
350:
349:
333:
323:
322:
315:Low-importance
311:
305:
304:
302:
285:the discussion
272:
271:
255:
243:
242:
240:Low‑importance
228:
216:
215:
212:
211:
200:
194:
193:
191:
174:the discussion
161:
160:
144:
132:
131:
123:
111:
110:
104:
93:
79:
78:
68:
58:
57:
24:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1448:
1437:
1434:
1432:
1429:
1427:
1424:
1422:
1419:
1417:
1414:
1412:
1409:
1407:
1404:
1402:
1399:
1397:
1394:
1392:
1389:
1388:
1386:
1375:
1370:
1365:
1363:
1362:Novem Linguae
1357:
1354:
1353:
1352:
1347:
1342:
1340:
1339:Novem Linguae
1334:
1330:
1329:
1328:
1327:
1323:
1319:
1314:
1306:
1304:
1303:
1299:
1295:
1291:
1287:
1279:
1277:
1276:
1272:
1268:
1261:
1257:
1253:
1247:
1242:
1241:
1240:
1239:
1235:
1231:
1207:
1203:
1199:
1195:
1194:
1193:
1189:
1185:
1181:
1180:
1179:
1175:
1171:
1166:
1160:
1156:
1155:
1151:
1145:
1144:WP:PARAPHRASE
1141:
1137:
1133:
1129:
1127:
1123:
1119:
1114:
1113:
1112:
1108:
1104:
1099:
1098:
1097:
1093:
1089:
1085:
1081:
1080:
1079:
1075:
1071:
1066:
1065:
1064:
1060:
1056:
1049:
1041:
1036:
1034:
1030:
1026:
1020:
1014:
1013:
1012:
1008:
1004:
999:
995:
991:
987:
984:
981:I agree with
980:
979:
978:
977:
974:
970:
966:
961:
957:
954:
953:
951:
948:
944:
940:
935:
934:
933:
932:
928:
924:
920:
911:
909:
908:
905:
904:
903:
894:
890:
886:
881:
874:
870:
868:
867:
863:
859:
853:
849:
846:
842:
839:
836:
829:
827:
824:
823:
819:
815:
810:
809:
804:
801:The article "
796:
793:
791:
790:
786:
782:
776:
775:
771:
767:
758:
754:
750:
744:
742:
732:
730:
726:
722:
717:
716:
715:
713:
709:
705:
701:
691:
687:
683:
678:
677:
676:
675:
671:
667:
659:
657:
655:
651:
647:
643:
632:
628:
624:
620:
616:
609:
605:
601:
597:
590:
589:
588:
584:
580:
576:
573:
572:
571:
567:
563:
560:
556:
554:
550:
546:
541:
540:
535:
531:
527:
523:
522:
521:
517:
513:
508:
507:
504:
500:
496:
491:
490:
487:
483:
479:
475:
474:
471:
467:
463:
459:
458:
457:
456:
452:
448:
439:
437:
435:
431:
427:
423:
417:
415:
411:
407:
403:
399:
386:
378:
376:
360:
357:(assessed as
356:
355:
347:
336:
329:
325:
324:
320:
316:
310:
307:
306:
303:
286:
282:
278:
277:
269:
268:Africa portal
258:
256:
253:
249:
248:
244:
237:
232:
229:
226:
222:
209:
205:
199:
196:
195:
192:
175:
171:
167:
166:
158:
152:
147:
145:
142:
138:
137:
133:
127:
124:
121:
117:
112:
108:
102:
94:
90:
85:
84:
69:
66:
62:
55:
54:
49:
46:
45:
43:
39:
38:
33:
29:
25:
22:
18:
17:
1361:
1338:
1310:
1286:William Boyd
1283:
1264:
1226:
1198:Prinsgezinde
1170:Prinsgezinde
1135:
1088:Prinsgezinde
1055:Prinsgezinde
1019:Prinsgezinde
983:Prinsgezinde
965:Prinsgezinde
939:edit warring
915:
912:The info box
901:
900:
877:
858:That No Joke
854:
850:
847:
843:
840:
837:
833:
825:
806:
800:
794:
777:
762:
740:
704:217.32.168.5
698:— Preceding
694:
663:
640:— Preceding
636:
594:— Preceding
579:LucasImpulse
447:216.36.8.232
443:
418:
382:
374:
352:
314:
274:
203:
163:
107:WikiProjects
51:
48:Did you know
47:
37:Did you know
35:
27:
26:A fact from
1311:There's an
1142:(also note
402:MaroonPants
42:check views
1385:Categories
1333:Kauefields
1318:Kauefields
737:Nekomancer
1252:Applodion
1184:Applodion
1150:Applodion
1118:Applodion
1048:Applodion
1025:Applodion
943:Applodion
414:G.keppler
406:Sol Azure
75:Knowledge
32:Main Page
902:Rosguill
897:signed,
808:Discover
795:Discover
700:unsigned
642:unsigned
596:unsigned
562:Mhatopzz
526:Mhatopzz
426:PrimeBOT
236:Tanzania
179:Primates
170:Primates
126:Primates
1086:again.
986:Vincent
919:WP:ONUS
797:article
559:Emu War
317:on the
206:on the
97:C-class
34:in the
1294:PhilUK
1196:Done.
814:Gildir
741:Jaidyn
290:Africa
281:Africa
231:Africa
103:scale.
1313:audio
1132:WP:OR
1084:Vfp15
947:Vfp15
835:out)
410:Ifein
1369:talk
1346:talk
1322:talk
1298:talk
1271:talk
1256:talk
1234:talk
1202:talk
1188:talk
1174:talk
1136:Some
1122:talk
1107:talk
1103:Unbh
1092:talk
1074:talk
1070:Unbh
1059:talk
1040:Unbh
1029:talk
1007:talk
1003:Unbh
990:talk
969:talk
945:and
927:talk
923:Unbh
862:talk
818:talk
785:talk
770:talk
748:talk
725:talk
708:talk
686:talk
670:talk
660:War?
650:talk
623:talk
604:talk
583:talk
566:talk
549:talk
530:talk
516:talk
499:talk
482:talk
466:talk
451:talk
430:talk
392:and
198:High
478:mfb
424:by
309:Low
1387::
1324:)
1300:)
1273:)
1258:)
1236:)
1204:)
1190:)
1176:)
1124:)
1109:)
1094:)
1076:)
1061:)
1031:)
1009:)
992:)
971:)
929:)
864:)
820:)
787:)
772:)
751:)
727:)
710:)
688:)
672:)
652:)
625:)
606:)
585:)
568:)
551:)
532:)
518:)
501:)
493:--
484:)
468:)
453:)
432:)
416:.
412:,
408:,
404:,
361:).
234::
1371:)
1367:(
1358:–
1348:)
1344:(
1331:@
1320:(
1296:(
1269:(
1254:(
1248::
1244:@
1232:(
1200:(
1186:(
1172:(
1152::
1148:@
1120:(
1105:(
1090:(
1072:(
1057:(
1050::
1046:@
1042::
1038:@
1027:(
1021::
1017:@
1005:(
988:(
967:(
925:(
860:(
816:(
783:(
768:(
745:(
723:(
706:(
684:(
668:(
648:(
621:(
602:(
581:(
564:(
547:(
528:(
514:(
497:(
480:(
464:(
449:(
428:(
321:.
210:.
109::
67:.
56:?
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
