Talk:Hollow Moon - Knowledge (XXG)

3090:

craters, as can be seen on Mars and on the Earth as well. There was never any claim that the larger meteors that created the larger craters were breaking through the crust and hitting something underneath; the claim was that the small and large craters being approximately equal in depth COULD BE EXPLAINED BY A LIMITED CRUST THICKNESS OF ABOUT 20 MILES, SURROUNDING A HOLLOW INNER CORE. The statement that "there is no scientific evidence" of a hollow moon is patently incorrect, since the NASA collected seismic readings are themselves evidence of the possibility of a partially hollow body. The writer mentions that Apollo 12 directed the lunar lander to crash on the moon's surface in order to obtain the seismic response, but no mention is made of the fact that the following mission, Apollo 14, directed the even larger rocket booster to crash on the moon in order to obtain further readings, at the request of Werner Von Braun. The seismic readings of that crash experiment resulted in even more extensive ringing, for a period of about 3 hours. There is no good explanation for the moon's seismic readings, given the current understanding of a solid moon constructed mainly of basalt, which material readily absorbs impact and therefore does not easily transmit shock waves (that result in ringing). The editor will notice that the current article is misleading in the ways that I've outlined here, misstates a number of facts, and implies there is no reason to question the nature of the Earth's moon, either for NASA or for the many astrophysicists who are doing just that. The facts about the matter should at least be stated without prejudice.

1245:

which is on a par with the Earth average density, although not Earth surface density. However a natural body should have an increasing density towards the centre because the heavy elements should have sunk to the centre when it was molten - like they did on Earth. (Surface rocks on the Earth tend to be composed of light elements such as silicon and aluminum while lunar surface rocks are composed of heavy elements such as titanium, uranium and iron as well as the lighter elements.) So the moon is too light, there's missing mass.

1249:

width is proportional until the crater is about five miles across and then the bigger craters are wider but not deeper. This tends to indicate a very high density "shell" about five miles below the rocky surface of the moon. The big/fast meteors are ploughing through the rocky surface and hitting a shell, possibly made of titanium, and maybe a hundred miles thick. There is even some indication of "splash back" off the shell with little peaks at the centre of large craters which we don't see in terrestral meteor craters.

1770:"Sceptical author Jason Colavito points out that all of their evidence is circumstantial, and that, in the 1960s, the atheistic Soviet Union promoted the ancient astronaut concept in an attempt to undermine the West's faith in religion"Who is Jason Colavito and what kind of article is this and what is the connection between religions and the concepts of ancient astronauts, which was not supported in the USSR for the most part and was only the opinion of individual scientists and publicists 495: 3757:

accurate (e.g., disproven theory or disproven hypothesis). Calling the hollow moon theory a conspiracy undermines the veracity of the article (not every disproven theory or hypothesis is a conspiracy). Finally, the fact that some do not believe the evidence does not make them think the scientists are engaging in a conspiracy- they just continue to assert that the scientists are wrong despite the best evidence is to the contrary.

516: 277: 246: 44: 1480:"a hypothesis proposing that Earth's Moon is either wholly hollow or otherwise contains a substantial interior space" - that sentence from the intro seems to very succinctly describe the theory. What else could there be, I wonder? I mean, *is* there any real proponent of the "theory" or is is just vague idea that somebody put into literature? It's not like Hollow Earth, which has a long history ... is it? - 2875: 2849: 2815: 2762: 2739: 2718: 2659: 2638: 2609: 2588: 2529: 2508: 215: 21: 423: 3794: 405: 3846: 3599: 3526: 3134: 3062: 373: 349: 2695: 287: 3914: 3730: 3660: 3454: 3441: 3426: 3411: 3396: 3383: 3368: 3350: 3335: 3312: 3284: 3271: 3245: 3222: 3209: 3175: 2393: 1803: 3892:

Edit: The Moon is depleted in volatile elements compared to Earth. Volatile elements vaporize at relatively low temperatures, and could be lost in a high-energy event. The Earth's gravitational pull would have been powerful enough to recapture these elements, but the Moon's smaller gravity would have

1566:

Maybe there should be a bright red highlighted bar that announces that this article and articles like this are only barely notable as public opinion and lack reputable citation; and are only separated from fiction storytelling by the presentation of being real. though, maybe any article deserving of

1244:

There are a couple of factoids that tend to support the HMT. First, there's density. From orbital chanracteristics we know the moon has a density overal of approx 3000kg/m^3 whereas the surface rocks obtained by the Apollo program are full of heavy elements with a density in the order of 5000kg/m^3 -

825:

Knowledge (XXG) is here to be a "first starting point" for people -- we all know Hollow Moon is considered FRINGE by mainstream sources, and Knowledge (XXG)'s mission is to summarizes those. If there's a conspiracy to hide something unusual about the moon -- and I'm open to the idea in theory cause

684:

Provide a link to a legitimate peer-reviewed article or established scientific organization that supports your claim, or accept the fact that your theory is only held by conspiracy nuts. By the way, there's a hole in your tinfoil hat. I'm picking up your theta-waves on my receiver. You're a dirty,

652:

BAHAHAHA, geocities 'fact' page. What a joke. Funny that it's also a 404 now. Kids, sorry to say, you really have to take the interbutts with about 100 million grains of salt. If you can't think critically, and aren't the least bit skeptical of everything you read, online or off, you need to STFU

2908:

In a cave Dunno falls into an icy tunnel leading down to the internal cavity of the moon and slides down, apparently sitting down, thereon in the sublunary space. Going down on a parafoil, he finds on the inner core of the moon (which the locals call the Earth, too) with the civilization of the same

1455:

As batshit crazy as the "theory" and its proponents are, you're absolutely right. Somebody coming to this page trying to find out what the Hollow Moon Theory is would get no help whatsoever, and instead merely be told that it's bogus. It's fine to have the scientific debunking here (indeed we must

1297:

At the centre there probably is a small iron-rich metallic core with a radius of about 350 km (250 miles) at most. At one time, shortly after the Moon’s formation, the core had an electromagnetic dynamo like that of Earth (see geomagnetic field), which accounts for the remanent magnetism observed in

3089:

The claims of the Russian scientists that the moon is hollow or partly hollow rely heavily on the fact that the moon's smaller craters and its larger craters ARE NEARLY EQUAL IN DEPTH, which defies the physics of a natural, solid planetary body. Larger meteors should create larger AND DEEPER impact

1539:

Clearly most of this article was created or written with an ideological lineup to address, by way of characterization, as opposed to neutral narration. This article hasn't much to do with the HMT at all, rather, evidence to its contrary. This evidence would make an excellent section with a link to

1109:

Wow, is this the kind of thinking that produced this ridiculously biased article? Terrible! The article needs a major overhaul. I wanted to find out what the possible reasons for thinking the moon is hollow are and found a terribly stupid article frothing at the mouth, screaming that the whole idea

937:

I disagree on deleting the article. While I think the theory is silly, I think it's definately notable enough to deserve an article. I think sources pro and con are probably fairly easy to find. I'll make an effort to do so, though help would be appreciated. I've already done some reworking of tghe

2897:

Did the best I could re. reffing the books. Only 2 were available online, and one of those was lacking page numbers; I used the chapter ref for that. Links point to page/chapter. All have secondary: recycled the Nasa cite for Wells & Burroughs (which is the closest I've found to a secondary

1755:

This section also contains not accurate information. The article in Sputnik is a reprint of an earlier article published in Soviet newspaper "Komsomolskaya Pravda" on the January, 10th, 1968. The authors are Mikhail Khvastunov (pen name Mikhail Vasiliev and Rem Shcherbakov. Neither of them has any

3703:

that I’ve read this entire talk page, and I only see a few mentions regarding the theory of Hollow Earth, such as the need to describe the theory in greater detail and the decision that no such summary is necessary, yet I see no mention of needing a wikilink, nor any mention of why such a wl has

2710:

I have restored the 'In literature' section which cites at least 4 major authors and is plainly a large part of the justification for the article (Edmond Halley notwithstanding). The section is probably usable as it is, given that the sources are cited, but it would be much improved with a source

1381:

Having said that, I would actually like to see these sorts of arguments presented in the article -- along with references -- so that the theory can be properly documented on the page. While I think the theory is bunk, it had a number of adherents over the years and the idea made appearances in a

1248:

The second problem is crater depth. There's no vulcanism on the moon, all craters are the result of meteor impact. Small/slow meteors make little craters while big/fast meteors make large craters. However the large craters are wider but not deeper! At least above a certain size. Crater depth and

720:

I agree. The smugness of this article belongs in the paleontology articles. I'm wondering why it doesn't even address the issue of moon responding to impacts by ringing. That would seem to make the simplicity of "no scientific evidence exists to support the idea" a bit overconfident. Unless, of

680:

Well, the facts indicate that it is *at least* likely that the Moon is hollow. The article is biased, using incomprehensible scientific gibberish to supposedly prove that the Moon cannot be hollow. Moonquakes do not correspond to a dense spherical object, but rather support the idea of a hollow

3756:

There are no suggestions that there is a world-wide plot by thousands of scientists over decades to deliberately mislead the public. In accord with the dictionary definition and common use of the term conspiracy theory, the article should replace the phrase in all instances with something more

3691:

article other than at the very bottom in the categories template? If there isn’t, should we add one? Maybe not to the first two mentions of “a hollow Earth,” which essentially means “an Earth that is hollow,” but at least to the third use of the phrase, specifically mentioning the Hollow Earth

1292:

Most of the knowledge about the lunar interior has come from the Apollo missions and from robotic spacecraft, including Galileo, Clementine, and Lunar Prospector, which observed the Moon in the 1990s. Combining all available data, scientists have created a picture of the Moon (see figure) as a

886:

I am going to wait a few weeks to see if someone cleans up this article, but if this doesn't happen, I'm going to put it up for deletion. If the seismic data is the only evidence that was used to support this theory, then it is just a piece of bad science that was never published. If there is

704:

Wow, what a ridiculously biased article. It needs a major overhaul. I wanted to find out what the possible reasons for thinking the moon is hollow are and found a terribly stupid article frothing at the mouth, screaming that the whole idea is stupid. Well, maybe, but that isn't the point of a

1507:

Not the best source. But this idea has been around for a while. Why do physicists like it but astronomers hate it? No use in looking those sorts of opinions up... no one wants to go on record. At any rate, we have the "Con" side in this article, now someone needs to write the "Pro" side.

1418:

The is not an article on the debunking of the Hollow Moon Theory, it is SUPPOSED to be an article on the Theory, as is there is NOTHING about the theory itself. If certain persons on this page do not stop their vandalism in their constant revision then I will have the page restored and

791:

This is definitely a belief of people, including myself. Do you know how hard it would be for our planet to capture a moon of that size. Capture it at the perfect distance for an eclipse. Oh, and then also capture it with a locking rotation so we never see the other side. Impossible.

3708:

I believe that this would help future readers who are not knowledgeable of this theory, and who might be interested in learning more about at least one of the similar fringe theories that, while seemingly ludicrous to most, are still believed to be true by a portion of society.

1935:

I suppose the named books in the "In literature" section are approximately self-citing, but it would be better at least to provide definite page ranges (in a blue-numbered reference), and best to cite a reliable source which comments on the fact that each book mentions a hollow

1038:

Pseudoscientific or not I would like Knowledge (XXG) to keep the article, when I find this stuff on late night TV I like to have a place to go read about it. I always look at the Discussion page to see how active they are, more active the more creditable I feel the article is.

1540:

an entirely separate article all together. Doing this, along with incorporating concurring evidence , would concentrate the meat and potatoes of the article, along with giving it a purer purpose. Leave the editorialites to Ivy league websites. This is wikipedia.

806:

Not a belief of just people. This is a credible idea put forth by legitimate scientista. Knowledge (XXG) has become a weapon for censorship. This page is locked and no one can offer any correction on piece. It is the reason I stopped donating to Knowledge (XXG)

1191:

I find it extremely "unscientific" that the author did not write how this theory came into being in the first place. Had s/he done so, it would be much more difficult to be be dismissive about it - as anyone researching it on their own would soon find out.

1523:

False dichotomy, man - there is no "pro" side, not with any actual facts behind it. That's why "no one wants to go on record" - there's no record to go on. Just as they don't want to go on the record supporting the existence of fairies or a flat earth. -

3712:

I think it would seem likely that they would be interested in doing so, if for no other reason than the fact that they are here reading about a Hollow Moon in the first place. I know that I would have if I had not already read that article a while ago.

821:

Hey there. I'm just a volunteer editor, I don't know anything about how funding or donations work, but I do want readers to like the stuff I'm helped to write. I had nothing to with the page being locked, but anyone can propose changes here on

681:

object. Apart from that, the Moon's density does not correspond with it's volume if it is a solid object. The article should state that the case is at least undecided and not push the Hollow Moon Theory in an obscure "conspiracy nut" corner.

1460:, but we also need to talk about what the theory is, what it claims, and the purported evidence behind those claims. We don't have to give it any validity, but we *do* have to do the reader the service of actually describing the subject. 1066:

was clearly being violated by implying that there is legitimate, substantive debate on the issue among the scientific community. There is not. The fact that the moon is not hollow is not a matter of debate. This is an article about the

1000:

It's not a theory, in the scientific sense of the word. A theory is something which explains current observations and predicts future ones. This does neither. Delete this nonsense, or clearly label it for the conspiracy theory it is.

3888:

Original: The Moon is depleted in volatile elements compared to Earth. Vaporizing at comparably lower temperatures, they could be lost in a high-energy event, with the Moon's smaller gravity unable to recapture them while Earth did.

609:

Hollow Moon actually ISN'T a debunked theory, and this article is full of bias. Refer to the following link to show that more observations via NASA and other astronomers show that it's more likely that the Moon *is* indeed Hollow:

3806: 1711:

to be supported by evidence: The Moon's formation process produced a hollow sphere through natural means. Details vary widely; the proposed mechanism is usually an undefined or pseudoscientific factor in accretion-disk

1110:

is stupid. Well, maybe, but that isn't the point of a Knowledge (XXG) article, is it? A poorly written, poorly researched article with a serious slant. It's this SS mentality that give real scientists a bad name.

1910:

The references are in more than one format, with names variously as "Forename Surname", as "Surname, AB", or as "A. Surname". Personally I'd recommend a standardized "Surname, Forename" but any one format will

857:

There aren't many circumstances where "pseudoscientific" is more appropriate than efforts to show that a solid body is hollow by using science-y terms and misinterpreting data. It's not "fringe" it's pseudo. -

34: 1716:

Anyone got a published, if not-necessarily scientific, source for the accretion disk point? Everything I've read on hollow moon has taken the tack that it's a spaceship/station, or that it's nice and solid.

1396:

The problem with presenting the arguments is that the arguments themselves need to come from reliable sources. There aren't any reliable sources putting forth these arguments, and so they can't be included.

1160:. The second one is completely useless, because the fact that seismic waves can't get through the Moon's interior is the main reason why all those unexplainedmysteriesdotcom sites write about the hollow Moon. 1024:

Throwaway, you do not get to determine what a theory is. It is a theory and it should have something about the theory before you and yours go bashing it. This is Knowledge (XXG) not a science convention.--

1368:. Given that it is thought that there was significant volcanic events which basically "filled-in" much of the impact craters with basalt rock, that is a good counter-argument to the "shallow crater" idea. 1093:

I agree with everything you said, and I further propose that the exact reasoning you have provided entitles us to edit the Scientology page to relflect its status as a myth and direct product of science

923:

When searching for an authoritative debunking of this theory, I came across many, many sites that supported this. More so than were debunking it... I do believe it should be renamed to Hollow Moon myth

2148:

The "Density" section does not exactly explain how the Moon can have a density of only 3.3kg/m. Perhaps what is needed is a short cited statement that this is the density of such-and-such types of rock.

808: 166: 2289:

Nom has not replied to any communication, so I'm closing this now. If anyone wishes to take up the reins, they are welcome to ping me and I expect we can quickly bring this article to GA status.

2077:

The "In literature" section is currently formatted as a list. This would be better as continuous prose. It should also be expanded and cited to discuss each usage rather than merely asserting it.

1637:

section that's effectively duplicated here (in greater detail). Anyone think of a reason why the Spaceship Moon article shouldn't be merged? I'm quite surprised it's not been discussed before.

1574: 2906:

was a hard one. It's a Russian (Soviet) book that's not been translated, so it's hard to track down. The WP page on it is quite thorough, and clearly refers to a substantially hollow moon:

1434:

I agree with this comment. This is supposed to be an article on the theory, and reasons which support the theory. Why are some people so adamant to actually suppress speculative theories?

911: 2629:, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). 382: 260: 3970: 2174:

The heading "Arguments advanced in support" does not exactly match that section's contents; perhaps something like "Arguments for and against" or "Claims and rebuttals" would fit better.

3296:

There's something here, but how to get at it? Maybe discuss the earlier "Dark Side" conspiracy theories. July 4, 1947 instance of Dark Side CT -- Flying Saucers come from Dark Side

2626: 1977:. I do not have any reference for this, as sources tend to refer to it as a conspiracy theory (the article reflects this), so I've added a note to avoid problems down the line. 642:

Yeah, I'll stick to the sources already in the articles from Cornell U. and Science Magazine, rather than a list of "facts" (and I emphasize the quotation marks) from geocities.

339: 185: 2517: 843:

I have no horse in this race. The use of the word “pseudoscientific” feels incorrect as used in this article. The scientific method can obviously be applied in this case.

2554: 2431: 1841: 358: 256: 656:

I agree that the article is biased. However nutty or silly the theory may be, wikipedia should remain neutral. The facts alone should suffice in debunking this theory.

2999: 2995: 2981: 1295:

low-density crust, which ranges from 60 to 100 km (40 to 60 miles) in thickness, overlying a denser mantle, which constitutes the great majority of the Moon’s volume.

829:

Do you have any specific suggestions for improving the article without going so far as to promote the idea that mainstream conclusions suggest the moon is hollow?

4010: 1156:

Those references are quite poor. The first one says that the Moon is too heavy to be hollow. That is wrong. We can say that the Moon is not hollow by measuring its

471: 2421: 1831: 578: 477: 113: 3995: 3965: 387: 329: 2832: 1382:

number of Science Fiction stories, primarily before the advent to the Space Age. I think it is worth documenting from a historical standpoint if nothing else.

1252:

Obviously a high density shell below the moon's crust makes the overall weight of the moon even more problematic and indicates internal voids, ie hollowness.

2124:

The lead needs to be extended slightly to reflect the article's contents. I'd suggest adding the dates that both Hollow Moon and Hollow Earth first appeared.

4025: 2398: 1808: 749:

Yes, the ringing is addressed, and your last edit is also a step in the right direction to making the article sound less like it's got something to prove.

568: 2558: 2550: 55: 3559:

footnote 38 "About the Ask an Astronomer Team". Ask an Astronomer. Cornell University. 14 November 2011. Archived from the original on 4 February 2015.

2542: 1674: 443: 4030: 4015: 2842:

Both images from Commons correctly licensed. The author of the Halley portrait seems to be unknown, which ought to be stated explicitly on Commons.

544: 30: 3990: 3950: 3362:

1969 - Apollo 12 lander intentionally crashed yields longer duration quakes than predicted, headlines debunk claims this suggests hollowness.

2967: 3772:

The article doesn't describe Hollow Moon as a CT, it's an obsolete scientific theories that has been incorporated into CTs of Marrs and Icke.

73: 4020: 4005: 3980: 3955: 2890:

With the improvements made, as recorded both in GA1 and GA2, I'm now satisfied that the article meets the criteria to become a Good Article.

1420: 1202: 634:

I don't know why I would expect a conspiracy theorist to have a healthy grasp of the concept of irony, but that link made me laugh. Thanks.

363: 2862: 982:

Weren't there later measurements that corrected this? And where is the source for the inaccurate measurements? (And before I forget, I have

3960: 3169:(1991) because it was published first under this title; the later book is just a re-issue. the article for Mutineers' Moon is better too. 3643: 3635: 3560: 2470: 1880: 1756:

affiliation with the USSR Academy of Sciences in any way whatsoever. They were both just science journalists of "Komsomolskaya Pravda".

1441: 1076: 1040: 793: 663: 3945: 3556:

The footnote cited does not support this statement. Please find better evidence, or remove this unsubstantiated opinion. Thank you.

2546: 812: 523: 500: 447: 439: 430: 410: 3758: 3344:

1968 - "Hollow Moon Paradox" resolved -- theoretical error discovered throwing off lunar Moment of Inertial calculations since 1959.

3091: 2269: 1547: 1125: 844: 33:. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination was archived. For older candidates, please check the 3814: 3499:

Minor suggestion: I think you can trim the Asimov quote - it takes up a ton of screen. I'd kill the third graf, at the very least. -

2749: 2426: 1836: 1578: 300: 251: 61: 3985: 2977:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

2403: 1813: 1775: 3885:

This last bullet point of the "Origin of The Moon" heading in the "Scientific Perspective" section should be reworded for clarity.

2668: 2647: 973:

Correct or not, it is still a theory. If I remember it correctly, early inaccurate measurements suggested that the Moon is hollow.

4000: 2824: 1195:

But is it the role of an encyclopaedia to indirectly promote independent research by obfuscating the whole truth? I think not.

3975: 3185: 226: 2304:

Sorry, took a big break from WP. Thanks for reviewing. Back now and addressing the points; will ping you when it's ready.

3322: 3254: 1696:

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

2836: 2618: 543:

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

3042: 2622: 2538: 2029:- none of the sources, which are heavyweight academic ones, mention the units, so I would be very reluctant to do so. 2057:

section is useful. I didn't convert the units from those given in the source, as that could cause confusion, but did

772:

and all that) but with notability. There's a lot of debunking of a hollow moon hypothesis, but it fails to show that

1740:

source for that. So the article just mentions 1970, but I'm mentioning it here in case it's useful down the line.

3260: 3218:

Need sharper contract between Pre-modern hollow bodies speculation (once hard sci-fi) vs mid-20th century fringe.

3181: 1347: 1265: 3852: 3605: 3532: 3481:

Great list. I don't think we need to summarize hollow Earth, though - a quick mention of it is enough, I think. -

3140: 3068: 2828: 2727: 2573: 1667: 721:

course, reports of the ringing don't exist, in which case, this common misconception still needs to be addressed.

20: 1424: 1029: 2998:

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

2775: 2704: 2445: 1855: 3901: 3896:

There is also no citation for the above, so I couldn't check to see if those terms are even right lol. Thanks!

1206: 3876:

Orignal: Both Hollow Moon and Hollow Earth are now considered to be a fringe theories or conspiracy theories.

2053:- I didn't wl the first mention of density, as that was just conversational, whereas wling the mention in the 232: 3647: 3639: 3564: 2968:

https://web.archive.org/web/20141221063318/http://scripts.mit.edu/~paleomag/articles/60_03_Wieczorek_etal.pdf

1445: 1044: 797: 705:

Knowledge (XXG) article, is it? A poorly written, poorly researched article with a serious slant. For shame!

667: 3762: 3202: 3033: 2959: 2930: 2464: 2345: 2294: 2018: 1895: 1874: 1761: 1551: 1129: 848: 3879:

Edited: Both Hollow Moon and Hollow Earth are now considered to be fringe theories or conspiracy theories.

3327:

1965 Asimov Heavenly Zoo later quoted by CTs without caveats. Of Time And Space 4. The Heavenly Zoo, cited

2672: 2265: 1570: 1543: 1437: 1198: 659: 3504: 3486: 3095: 2955: 2273: 1529: 1485: 863: 740: 3897: 907: 623: 3264: 3162: 3017:

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

3005: 2340:

OK, I suggest you renominate it (the old GA1 is now closed) and I can then swiftly complete the review.

1757: 1630: 1465: 1402: 1343: 1333: 1280: 1261: 1230: 1161: 1099: 1006: 974: 690: 611: 43: 2958:. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit 1707:

Hollow Moon adherents can be broadly grouped in two major camps, neither of which is considered by the

952: 1079:

but I believe that the article as it existed before his changes did a far better job of not violating

3115: 2971: 2449: 1859: 1708: 1513: 1502: 1169:

Sounds like you know more about the history and science than I do. I'd love to see better sources.

1147:

This is why this article is cited. See the references from Science Magazine and Cornell University.

1115: 1025: 710: 147: 128: 1736:

The issue that the article was published in was apparently the July 1970 one, but I've not founds a

1364:

Well, that's debatable. While you state that there is no vulcanism on the Moon now, there certainly

65: 2916: 2363: 2327: 2309: 2235: 2211: 2187: 2163: 2137: 2113: 2090: 2066: 2034: 2006: 1982: 1949: 1924: 1745: 1722: 1682: 1657: 1642: 1615: 1387: 442:

on Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, you can edit the attached article, help with

2801: 2797: 769: 750: 722: 3797:

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between

3718: 2926: 2858: 2460: 2355: 2341: 2319: 2290: 1891: 1870: 1771: 1319: 1304: 3302: 3002:

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

2805: 1080: 1063: 3018: 3926: 3826: 3810: 3777: 3742: 3672: 3579: 3500: 3482: 3471: 3406: 3307: 2596:. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with 2260: 1525: 1481: 1157: 991: 859: 834: 781: 754: 736: 726: 3301:

1965, theoretical calculation yields 'absurd' conclusion that moon might be hollow, rejected

2597: 2485: 1457: 618: 3378: 3166: 1461: 1398: 1329: 1276: 1226: 1221:

Claiming as representative of scientific thought claims made by conspiracy theory websites (

1095: 1002: 686: 635: 515: 494: 292: 3025: 2911:

The secondary source talks about a technologically advanced civilisation inside the Moon.

1143:

who ever said the hollow moon theory was debunked? the theory was NOT proved or disproved.

1944:- rm section, as it's OR (can't find a RS that discusses their mentions of a hollow moon) 1509: 1111: 983: 826:

I loved the film 2001 -- then we at wikipedia are the VICTIMS of it, not the perpetrators.

706: 3111: 3106: 2753:: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. 1298:

some lunar rocks, but it appears that such internal activity has long ceased on the Moon.

3328: 2984:, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by 2912: 2359: 2337: 2323: 2305: 2231: 2207: 2183: 2159: 2133: 2109: 2086: 2062: 2030: 2002: 1978: 1945: 1920: 1741: 1718: 1678: 1670: 1653: 1638: 1611: 1383: 1072: 939: 887:

literature of crackpots that subscribe to this theory, then that would be interesting.

3553:

Internal structure "Multiple lines of evidence disprove that the Moon is hollow.[38}"

3024:

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

2991: 3939: 3714: 3105:

If this is an edit request rather than just opening of a discussion, please point to

1974: 1315: 1300: 1258:(It goes without saying, I think, that if the moon is hollow it is also artificial.) 1071:

of the Hollow moon. The origins of the myth, the myth in sci-fi, etc. I appreciate

898: 888: 601: 536: 532: 1567:

my suggested template should be the pathway to a speedy deletion template as well.

3922: 3822: 3773: 3738: 3688: 3668: 3630: 3575: 3467: 3233: 2045:

Please wikilink "density" and replace the units in the "Density" section with kg/m.

987: 915: 830: 777: 3421: 3793: 2951: 735:

OK, it's addressed. There's still no scientific evidence to support the idea. -

1222: 3436: 3297: 3294: 2990:. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than 1365: 540: 435: 422: 404: 282: 3363: 3304: 1170: 1148: 1084: 965: 925: 653:

and sit at the kids table, the grown-ups are trying to have a conversation.

643: 305: 276: 245: 3321:

1965, Asimov article "What Can We Expect of The Moon?", later cited by CTs

2726:. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see 2452:. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review. 1862:. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review. 348: 3241:

Section on the pre-apollo non-fringe debates about moon composition?

2774:: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing 1183:

There is no need to debunk a claim that hasn't met it's burden of proof.

372: 3873:

In this paragraph under "Introduction" the word "a" should be removed.

3705: 3345: 1314:

So I don't see any remaining issues to be addressed to debunk the HMT.

528: 3201:

Need sharper contrast between "Spaceship Moon" (fringe nonsense) and

1255:

A proper debunking of the HMT would need to address these two issues.

600:

I find this article to be very biased and needing a major overhaul. -

1633:

article that has 4 short paras introducing/describing it and then a

3930: 3905: 3830: 3781: 3766: 3746: 3722: 3676: 3651: 3583: 3568: 3508: 3490: 3475: 3189: 3118: 3099: 3047: 2934: 2920: 2474: 2367: 2349: 2331: 2313: 2298: 2277: 2239: 2215: 2191: 2167: 2141: 2117: 2094: 2070: 2038: 2010: 1986: 1953: 1928: 1899: 1884: 1779: 1765: 1749: 1726: 1686: 1661: 1646: 1619: 1582: 1555: 1533: 1517: 1489: 1469: 1449: 1428: 1406: 1391: 1351: 1337: 1323: 1308: 1284: 1269: 1234: 1210: 1173: 1164: 1151: 1133: 1119: 1103: 1087: 1048: 1033: 1010: 995: 977: 968: 955: 942: 928: 918: 906:

Turns out there IS a published book about this so called "theory" (

901: 891: 867: 852: 838: 816: 801: 785: 758: 744: 730: 714: 694: 671: 646: 626: 615: 604: 2972:

http://scripts.mit.edu/~paleomag/articles/60_03_Wieczorek_etal.pdf

1503:

http://www.redicecreations.com/specialreports/2006/01jan/moon.html

3280:

debunk solar/lunar angular diameter coincidence if merited by RS

1965:

There's one "dubious - discuss" tag which needs to be sorted out.

434:, which aims to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to the 3840: 3593: 3520: 3128: 3056: 1225:) is not acceptable. I have removed the section in question. 208: 3687:

Is there any specific reason why there is no wikilink to the

3359:

1968 - Mass concentrations discovered ?? maybe we skip this.

2711:

that discussed the book mentions (i.e. 2ndry wrt the books).

1610:

The result of this discussion (or lack thereof) was to merge

3109:

and word your request on the form "please change X to Y". –

371: 347: 3450:

Clarke or Sagan or similar on perfect solar? IT was Asimov

3161:

in "in literature" in the david weber entry, please change

1973:- followed advice of editor that added tag and called it a 2962:

for additional information. I made the following changes:

2322:. The article's all good to go, when you have a chance. 1652:

Couple more days and then I'll merge, if no one objects.

619:

http://www.geocities.com/area51/hollow/8827/moonfacts.html

2909:

shorties, but living according to the laws of capitalism.

776:, let alone being big enough to warrant its own article. 964:

It's an incorrect theory. That's what makes it a myth.

3683:

Should there be a wikilink to the Hollow Earth article?

2898:

source covering multiple entries), rest have their own.

2198:"of the what was then" - please remove the stray "the". 2157: 1993:

Nosov's novel title should begin with a capital letter.

1059: 198:

Former featured article candidate, current good article

178: 159: 140: 106: 3737:

Thanks for pointing that out. Excellent suggestion.

3377:

1997 - Jim Marrs Alien Agenda -- Perfect Solar Eclipse

2085:- section previously removed as not presented in RS. 2021:(m) should be supplied after each usage (each value). 1919:- only one ref was last/first, so I went with author 2245:

The images are suitable for the article and are PD.

1603:

Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

527:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 2994:using the archive tool instructions below. Editors 1562:

should there be a new template for things like this

476:This article has not yet received a rating on the 2518:understandable to an appropriately broad audience 450:, where you can join the project and discussions. 3971:GA-Class Astronomy articles of Bottom-importance 3631:https://armaghplanet.com/is-the-moon-hollow.html 3590:Semi-protected edit request on 18 March 2022 (2) 1342:There remains the issue of meteor crater depth. 3293:1961 instance of Hollow Moon Conspiracy Theory 2222:Please remove the empty External links section. 768:This article has a major issue - not with POV ( 2980:This message was posted before February 2018. 71:If it no longer meets these criteria, you can 1606:A summary of the conclusions reached follows. 1328:I don't think there were any to begin with. 8: 3517:Semi-protected edit request on 18 March 2022 3125:Semi-protected edit request on 18 April 2021 1223:http://www.onelight.com/thei/hollowmoon.html 304:, which collaborates on articles related to 3788:Wiki Education assignment: Cold War Science 3053:Semi-protected edit request on 30 June 2020 2868:I wikilinked the caption of the schematic. 2156:- McGeddon addressed this after the review. 3837:Semi-protected edit request on 5 June 2023 2950:I have just modified one external link on 2381: 2263: 1791: 1568: 882:I think that we should delete this article 489: 399: 240: 85: 15: 2230:- FockeWulf FW 190 removed post-review. 938:article to make it more encyclopaedic. -- 2478: 2001:- section removed, so now unnecessary. 1075:attempt to clean up the havoc caused by 2412: 2384: 1822: 1794: 1240:Some support for the hollow moon theory 809:2603:8001:8700:1761:7BBF:A510:2842:BB19 491: 401: 242: 4011:Unknown-importance paranormal articles 2132:Halley and Wells' dates now in Lead. 897:I second the idea of Deletion. AfD? -- 553:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Skepticism 456:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Paranormal 428:This article falls under the scope of 3420:anthropic & perfect solar - who? 2251:The article is correctly structured. 1575:2605:A601:773:900:957E:F097:BBD1:D21A 314:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Astronomy 7: 3996:Low-importance Solar System articles 3966:Bottom-importance Astronomy articles 2520:; spelling and grammar are correct. 1597:The following discussion is closed. 986:for not wanting this page deleted.) 521:This article is within the scope of 298:This article is within the scope of 214: 212: 3257:add better link, but otherwise okay 2564:Lead now much improved, thank you. 2516:. the prose is clear, concise, and 231:It is of interest to the following 4026:Low-importance Skepticism articles 3802: 3798: 2694: 1290:From the Encyclopedia Britannica, 14: 2954:. Please take a moment to review 1705:Currently we have the statement: 1673:source that was supplied over on 64:. If you can improve it further, 3921:Thank you for the suggestions! 3912: 3844: 3805:. Further details are available 3792: 3728: 3658: 3597: 3524: 3452: 3439: 3424: 3409: 3394: 3381: 3366: 3348: 3333: 3310: 3282: 3269: 3243: 3220: 3207: 3173: 3132: 3060: 2873: 2847: 2813: 2760: 2737: 2716: 2693: 2657: 2636: 2607: 2586: 2527: 2506: 2206:- IP editor fixed post-review. 1692:The discussion above is closed. 514: 493: 421: 403: 285: 275: 244: 213: 42: 19: 4031:WikiProject Skepticism articles 4016:WikiProject Paranormal articles 3435:Prometheus also has same ratio 1058:I just did a massive revert to 573:This article has been rated as 556:Template:WikiProject Skepticism 459:Template:WikiProject Paranormal 334:This article has been rated as 3991:GA-Class Solar System articles 3951:Natural sciences good articles 2627:could reasonably be challenged 2248:The prose is suitable for GA. 2061:. Will convert if required. 1104:19:43, 17 September 2009 (UTC) 1011:19:34, 17 September 2009 (UTC) 695:19:31, 17 September 2009 (UTC) 616:07:14, 18 September 2009 (UTC) 317:Template:WikiProject Astronomy 56:Natural sciences good articles 52:has been listed as one of the 1: 3946:Knowledge (XXG) good articles 3831:19:22, 16 December 2022 (UTC) 3821:— Assignment last updated by 3642:) 19:39, 18 March 2022 (UTC) 3491:12:38, 19 February 2022 (UTC) 3476:08:11, 18 February 2022 (UTC) 3463:Prose section on CT evolution 2833:valid non-free use rationales 2278:02:30, 14 November 2023 (UTC) 2261:Australian hollow moon theory 2255:Australian hollow moon theory 1780:19:27, 6 September 2022 (UTC) 1534:13:31, 17 February 2012 (UTC) 1518:10:28, 17 February 2012 (UTC) 1407:20:08, 26 November 2009 (UTC) 1392:15:52, 26 November 2009 (UTC) 1352:15:05, 26 November 2009 (UTC) 1338:01:37, 25 November 2009 (UTC) 1324:21:57, 24 November 2009 (UTC) 1309:21:53, 24 November 2009 (UTC) 1285:17:47, 24 November 2009 (UTC) 1270:10:50, 24 November 2009 (UTC) 1211:13:26, 22 December 2008 (UTC) 1134:21:55, 21 December 2012 (UTC) 1120:10:15, 17 February 2012 (UTC) 992:He does it without notability 715:10:11, 17 February 2012 (UTC) 547:and see a list of open tasks. 380:This article is supported by 356:This article is supported by 4021:GA-Class Skepticism articles 4006:GA-Class paranormal articles 3981:Low-importance Moon articles 3956:Former good article nominees 3782:03:21, 1 November 2022 (UTC) 3767:02:54, 1 November 2022 (UTC) 3626:Footnote 1 link is broken. 3405:1999 - RS on perfect solar? 3048:08:53, 14 January 2018 (UTC) 2874: 2848: 2814: 2761: 2738: 2717: 2658: 2637: 2608: 2587: 2528: 2507: 2299:07:35, 28 October 2016 (UTC) 1900:15:18, 21 October 2016 (UTC) 1885:15:18, 21 October 2016 (UTC) 1766:00:03, 14 October 2019 (UTC) 996:20:54, 17 January 2009 (UTC) 786:15:47, 4 December 2013 (UTC) 759:13:36, 6 November 2013 (UTC) 745:00:10, 5 November 2013 (UTC) 731:16:44, 4 November 2013 (UTC) 3961:GA-Class Astronomy articles 3867:to reactivate your request. 3855:has been answered. Set the 3620:to reactivate your request. 3608:has been answered. Set the 3547:to reactivate your request. 3535:has been answered. Set the 3155:to reactivate your request. 3143:has been answered. Set the 3083:to reactivate your request. 3071:has been answered. Set the 1750:02:32, 30 August 2016 (UTC) 1727:10:12, 25 August 2016 (UTC) 1687:03:02, 22 August 2016 (UTC) 1662:02:58, 22 August 2016 (UTC) 1647:03:57, 10 August 2016 (UTC) 1620:13:24, 24 August 2016 (UTC) 1235:08:49, 26 August 2009 (UTC) 1174:14:54, 14 August 2007 (UTC) 1165:14:18, 14 August 2007 (UTC) 978:14:46, 14 August 2007 (UTC) 4047: 3677:20:04, 18 March 2022 (UTC) 3652:19:39, 18 March 2022 (UTC) 3629:Here is the correct link: 3584:20:08, 18 March 2022 (UTC) 3569:19:31, 18 March 2022 (UTC) 3267:(1968) in fiction section 3190:12:25, 20 April 2021 (UTC) 3011:(last update: 5 June 2024) 2947:Hello fellow Wikipedians, 2598:the layout style guideline 1450:19:54, 19 April 2011 (UTC) 1293:layered body comprising a 1088:20:21, 30 April 2007 (UTC) 988:Raekuul, bringer of Tropes 951:Its a theory, not a myth. 943:18:16, 29 April 2007 (UTC) 868:11:28, 14 April 2024 (UTC) 853:16:03, 13 April 2024 (UTC) 579:project's importance scale 478:project's importance scale 340:project's importance scale 167:Featured article candidate 31:featured article candidate 3509:23:22, 2 March 2022 (UTC) 3119:09:15, 30 June 2020 (UTC) 3100:03:18, 30 June 2020 (UTC) 2785: 2681: 2568: 2494: 2484: 2182:- Claims and rebuttals. 2101:Please wikilink "Phobos". 1583:16:46, 28 July 2016 (UTC) 1556:04:47, 2 April 2013 (UTC) 1429:22:41, 9 April 2010 (UTC) 1054:Revert to 4/10/07 version 1034:22:46, 9 April 2010 (UTC) 929:15:30, 8 March 2007 (UTC) 919:15:23, 8 March 2007 (UTC) 902:14:12, 8 March 2007 (UTC) 892:14:11, 8 March 2007 (UTC) 839:13:54, 8 April 2024 (UTC) 817:22:30, 7 April 2024 (UTC) 672:20:28, 30 July 2009 (UTC) 605:13:07, 7 March 2007 (UTC) 572: 509: 475: 416: 379: 355: 333: 270: 239: 195: 186:Good article reassessment 88: 84: 3986:Moon task force articles 3931:22:26, 5 June 2023 (UTC) 3906:15:32, 5 June 2023 (UTC) 3893:been too weak to do so. 3747:08:59, 10 May 2022 (UTC) 3723:06:50, 10 May 2022 (UTC) 3255:Hollow Phobos hypothesis 2935:12:53, 15 May 2017 (UTC) 2921:12:15, 15 May 2017 (UTC) 2481: 2475:08:01, 15 May 2017 (UTC) 2368:07:58, 15 May 2017 (UTC) 2350:07:11, 15 May 2017 (UTC) 2332:05:48, 15 May 2017 (UTC) 2314:23:49, 14 May 2017 (UTC) 2240:23:29, 14 May 2017 (UTC) 2216:23:29, 14 May 2017 (UTC) 2192:23:29, 14 May 2017 (UTC) 2168:23:29, 14 May 2017 (UTC) 2142:23:48, 14 May 2017 (UTC) 2118:23:29, 14 May 2017 (UTC) 2095:23:29, 14 May 2017 (UTC) 2071:23:29, 14 May 2017 (UTC) 2039:23:29, 14 May 2017 (UTC) 2011:23:29, 14 May 2017 (UTC) 1987:05:05, 15 May 2017 (UTC) 1954:21:58, 14 May 2017 (UTC) 1929:21:58, 14 May 2017 (UTC) 1694:Please do not modify it. 1600:Please do not modify it. 1490:01:43, 8 July 2011 (UTC) 1470:01:34, 8 July 2011 (UTC) 1152:14:27, 28 May 2007 (UTC) 1049:01:23, 8 July 2011 (UTC) 969:14:26, 28 May 2007 (UTC) 956:07:08, 28 May 2007 (UTC) 802:21:51, 16 May 2023 (UTC) 647:18:48, 11 May 2007 (UTC) 627:18:33, 11 May 2007 (UTC) 4001:Solar System task force 3203:Giant-impact hypothesis 2943:External links modified 2861:to the topic, and have 2537:. it complies with the 2019:polar moment of inertia 1217:Inappropriate Sourcing. 1187:Unscientifically biased 774:this belief even exists 383:Solar System task force 3976:GA-Class Moon articles 3574:Thank you! Ref added. 1701:Accretion disk source? 524:WikiProject Skepticism 431:WikiProject Paranormal 376: 352: 221:This article is rated 3809:. Student editor(s): 3704:been omitted. As per 3392:Lunar Prospector DGE 3265:2001: A Space Odyssey 3182:ScottishFinnishRadish 3163:Empire from the Ashes 2686:Broad in its coverage 1631:Spaceship Moon Theory 375: 351: 301:WikiProject Astronomy 225:on Knowledge (XXG)'s 114:Articles for deletion 62:good article criteria 2992:regular verification 2778:or content dispute. 2669:copyright violations 2648:no original research 2579:no original research 2450:Talk:Hollow Moon/GA2 1860:Talk:Hollow Moon/GA1 1709:scientific community 1629:We currently have a 148:Good article nominee 129:Good article nominee 3306:Explicitly refuted 3196:To do/Notes to Self 2982:After February 2018 2703:. it addresses the 2625:. All content that 1890:I'll take this on. 1666:I'll likely add in 559:Skepticism articles 462:paranormal articles 308:on Knowledge (XXG). 3807:on the course page 3752:Not a “conspiracy” 3036:InternetArchiveBot 2987:InternetArchiveBot 2885:Overall assessment 2829:copyright statuses 2792:, if possible, by 2559:list incorporation 2358:. Cheers, done. 377: 353: 320:Astronomy articles 227:content assessment 89:Article milestones 3871: 3870: 3624: 3623: 3551: 3550: 3159: 3158: 3087: 3086: 3012: 2904:Dunno on the Moon 2894: 2893: 2863:suitable captions 2835:are provided for 2667:. it contains no 2440: 2439: 2280: 2268:comment added by 2017:The SI units for 1960:Specific comments 1850: 1849: 1732:Vasin-Shcherbakov 1585: 1573:comment added by 1546:comment added by 1440:comment added by 1275:Cool story, bro. 1201:comment added by 1158:Moment of inertia 662:comment added by 593: 592: 589: 588: 585: 584: 488: 487: 484: 483: 398: 397: 394: 393: 336:Bottom-importance 265:Bottom‑importance 207: 206: 203: 202: 80: 4038: 3920: 3916: 3915: 3862: 3858: 3848: 3847: 3841: 3833: 3815:article contribs 3804: 3803:14 December 2022 3800: 3796: 3736: 3732: 3731: 3666: 3662: 3661: 3615: 3611: 3601: 3600: 3594: 3542: 3538: 3528: 3527: 3521: 3460: 3456: 3455: 3447: 3443: 3442: 3432: 3428: 3427: 3417: 3413: 3412: 3402: 3398: 3397: 3389: 3385: 3384: 3374: 3370: 3369: 3356: 3352: 3351: 3341: 3337: 3336: 3318: 3314: 3313: 3290: 3286: 3285: 3277: 3273: 3272: 3251: 3247: 3246: 3228: 3224: 3223: 3215: 3211: 3210: 3177: 3176: 3150: 3146: 3136: 3135: 3129: 3107:realible sources 3078: 3074: 3064: 3063: 3057: 3046: 3037: 3010: 3009: 2988: 2877: 2876: 2851: 2850: 2837:non-free content 2817: 2816: 2764: 2763: 2741: 2740: 2720: 2719: 2697: 2696: 2661: 2660: 2640: 2639: 2619:reliable sources 2611: 2610: 2590: 2589: 2531: 2530: 2510: 2509: 2479: 2394:Copyvio detector 2382: 1905:General comments 1804:Copyvio detector 1792: 1602: 1558: 1452: 1344:Darmot and gilad 1262:Darmot and gilad 1213: 674: 561: 560: 557: 554: 551: 518: 511: 510: 505: 497: 490: 464: 463: 460: 457: 454: 425: 418: 417: 407: 400: 322: 321: 318: 315: 312: 295: 293:Astronomy portal 290: 289: 288: 279: 272: 271: 266: 263: 248: 241: 224: 218: 217: 216: 209: 196:Current status: 181: 162: 143: 124:October 28, 2016 109: 107:January 16, 2009 86: 69: 46: 23: 16: 4046: 4045: 4041: 4040: 4039: 4037: 4036: 4035: 3936: 3935: 3913: 3911: 3860: 3856: 3845: 3839: 3820: 3790: 3754: 3729: 3727: 3685: 3659: 3657: 3613: 3609: 3598: 3592: 3540: 3536: 3525: 3519: 3453: 3451: 3440: 3438: 3425: 3423: 3410: 3408: 3395: 3393: 3382: 3380: 3367: 3365: 3349: 3347: 3334: 3332: 3311: 3309: 3283: 3281: 3270: 3268: 3244: 3242: 3221: 3219: 3208: 3206: 3198: 3174: 3167:Mutineers'_Moon 3148: 3144: 3133: 3127: 3076: 3072: 3061: 3055: 3040: 3035: 3003: 2996:have permission 2986: 2960:this simple FaQ 2945: 2541:guidelines for 2539:Manual of Style 2490:Review Comment 2444:This review is 2436: 2408: 2380: 2287: 2257: 1962: 1907: 1854:This review is 1846: 1818: 1790: 1734: 1703: 1698: 1697: 1627: 1598: 1591: 1589:Merger proposal 1564: 1541: 1500: 1435: 1421:209.213.220.227 1366:was in the past 1242: 1219: 1203:194.165.110.174 1196: 1189: 1141: 1056: 1026:Degen Earthfast 884: 657: 598: 558: 555: 552: 549: 548: 503: 461: 458: 455: 452: 451: 446:, or visit the 359:Moon task force 319: 316: 313: 310: 309: 291: 286: 284: 264: 254: 222: 179:August 15, 2023 177: 160:October 3, 2022 158: 139: 105: 12: 11: 5: 4044: 4042: 4034: 4033: 4028: 4023: 4018: 4013: 4008: 4003: 3998: 3993: 3988: 3983: 3978: 3973: 3968: 3963: 3958: 3953: 3948: 3938: 3937: 3934: 3933: 3898:TheWhitewasher 3869: 3868: 3849: 3838: 3835: 3799:23 August 2022 3789: 3786: 3785: 3784: 3753: 3750: 3684: 3681: 3680: 3679: 3622: 3621: 3602: 3591: 3588: 3587: 3586: 3549: 3548: 3529: 3518: 3515: 3514: 3513: 3512: 3511: 3494: 3493: 3465: 3464: 3461: 3448: 3433: 3418: 3403: 3390: 3375: 3360: 3357: 3342: 3325: 3319: 3299: 3291: 3278: 3258: 3252: 3239: 3229: 3216: 3197: 3194: 3193: 3192: 3157: 3156: 3137: 3126: 3123: 3122: 3121: 3085: 3084: 3065: 3054: 3051: 3030: 3029: 3022: 2975: 2974: 2966:Added archive 2944: 2941: 2940: 2939: 2938: 2937: 2900: 2899: 2892: 2891: 2888: 2878: 2870: 2869: 2866: 2852: 2844: 2843: 2840: 2818: 2810: 2809: 2783: 2782: 2779: 2765: 2757: 2756: 2754: 2742: 2734: 2733: 2731: 2721: 2713: 2712: 2708: 2707:of the topic. 2698: 2690: 2689: 2679: 2678: 2676: 2662: 2654: 2653: 2651: 2646:. it contains 2641: 2633: 2632: 2630: 2612: 2604: 2603: 2601: 2591: 2583: 2582: 2566: 2565: 2562: 2551:words to watch 2532: 2524: 2523: 2521: 2511: 2503: 2502: 2492: 2491: 2488: 2483: 2455: 2454: 2438: 2437: 2435: 2434: 2429: 2424: 2418: 2415: 2414: 2410: 2409: 2407: 2406: 2404:External links 2401: 2396: 2390: 2387: 2386: 2379: 2376: 2375: 2374: 2373: 2372: 2371: 2370: 2334: 2286: 2283: 2282: 2281: 2256: 2253: 2243: 2242: 2224: 2223: 2219: 2218: 2200: 2199: 2195: 2194: 2176: 2175: 2171: 2170: 2150: 2149: 2145: 2144: 2126: 2125: 2121: 2120: 2103: 2102: 2098: 2097: 2079: 2078: 2074: 2073: 2047: 2046: 2042: 2041: 2023: 2022: 2014: 2013: 1995: 1994: 1990: 1989: 1967: 1966: 1961: 1958: 1957: 1956: 1938: 1937: 1932: 1931: 1913: 1912: 1906: 1903: 1889: 1865: 1864: 1848: 1847: 1845: 1844: 1839: 1834: 1828: 1825: 1824: 1820: 1819: 1817: 1816: 1814:External links 1811: 1806: 1800: 1797: 1796: 1789: 1786: 1785: 1784: 1783: 1782: 1733: 1730: 1702: 1699: 1691: 1690: 1689: 1671:Jason Colavito 1664: 1626: 1625: 1624: 1623: 1622: 1593: 1592: 1590: 1587: 1563: 1560: 1537: 1536: 1499: 1496: 1495: 1494: 1493: 1492: 1475: 1474: 1473: 1472: 1416: 1415: 1414: 1413: 1412: 1411: 1410: 1409: 1374: 1373: 1372: 1371: 1370: 1369: 1357: 1356: 1355: 1354: 1340: 1288: 1287: 1241: 1238: 1218: 1215: 1188: 1185: 1181: 1180: 1179: 1178: 1177: 1176: 1171:Charles (Kznf) 1149:Charles (Kznf) 1140: 1137: 1107: 1106: 1085:Charles (Kznf) 1077:203.54.28.161 1055: 1052: 1022: 1021: 1020: 1019: 1018: 1017: 1016: 1015: 1014: 1013: 966:Charles (Kznf) 959: 958: 948: 947: 946: 945: 932: 931: 926:Charles (Kznf) 921: 904: 883: 880: 879: 878: 877: 876: 875: 874: 873: 872: 871: 870: 827: 823: 766: 765: 764: 763: 762: 761: 702: 701: 700: 699: 698: 697: 650: 649: 644:Charles (Kznf) 640: 639: 638: 624:129.21.144.217 597: 594: 591: 590: 587: 586: 583: 582: 575:Low-importance 571: 565: 564: 562: 545:the discussion 519: 507: 506: 504:Low‑importance 498: 486: 485: 482: 481: 474: 468: 467: 465: 440:related topics 426: 414: 413: 408: 396: 395: 392: 391: 388:Low-importance 378: 368: 367: 364:Low-importance 354: 344: 343: 332: 326: 325: 323: 297: 296: 280: 268: 267: 249: 237: 236: 230: 219: 205: 204: 201: 200: 193: 192: 189: 182: 174: 173: 170: 163: 155: 154: 151: 144: 136: 135: 132: 125: 121: 120: 117: 110: 102: 101: 98: 95: 91: 90: 82: 81: 47: 39: 38: 24: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 4043: 4032: 4029: 4027: 4024: 4022: 4019: 4017: 4014: 4012: 4009: 4007: 4004: 4002: 3999: 3997: 3994: 3992: 3989: 3987: 3984: 3982: 3979: 3977: 3974: 3972: 3969: 3967: 3964: 3962: 3959: 3957: 3954: 3952: 3949: 3947: 3944: 3943: 3941: 3932: 3928: 3924: 3919: 3910: 3909: 3908: 3907: 3903: 3899: 3894: 3890: 3886: 3883: 3880: 3877: 3874: 3866: 3863:parameter to 3854: 3850: 3843: 3842: 3836: 3834: 3832: 3828: 3824: 3818: 3816: 3812: 3808: 3795: 3787: 3783: 3779: 3775: 3771: 3770: 3769: 3768: 3764: 3760: 3751: 3749: 3748: 3744: 3740: 3735: 3725: 3724: 3720: 3716: 3710: 3707: 3702: 3697: 3695: 3690: 3682: 3678: 3674: 3670: 3665: 3656: 3655: 3654: 3653: 3649: 3645: 3644:64.231.165.99 3641: 3637: 3636:64.231.165.99 3633: 3632: 3627: 3619: 3616:parameter to 3607: 3603: 3596: 3595: 3589: 3585: 3581: 3577: 3573: 3572: 3571: 3570: 3566: 3562: 3561:64.231.165.99 3557: 3554: 3546: 3543:parameter to 3534: 3530: 3523: 3522: 3516: 3510: 3506: 3502: 3498: 3497: 3496: 3495: 3492: 3488: 3484: 3480: 3479: 3478: 3477: 3473: 3469: 3462: 3459: 3449: 3446: 3437: 3434: 3431: 3422: 3419: 3416: 3407: 3404: 3401: 3391: 3388: 3379: 3376: 3373: 3364: 3361: 3358: 3355: 3346: 3343: 3340: 3330: 3329:by Don Wilson 3326: 3323: 3320: 3317: 3308: 3305: 3303: 3300: 3298: 3295: 3292: 3289: 3279: 3276: 3266: 3262: 3259: 3256: 3253: 3250: 3240: 3237: 3235: 3230: 3227: 3217: 3214: 3204: 3200: 3199: 3195: 3191: 3187: 3183: 3180: 3172: 3171: 3170: 3168: 3164: 3154: 3151:parameter to 3142: 3138: 3131: 3130: 3124: 3120: 3117: 3114: 3113: 3108: 3104: 3103: 3102: 3101: 3097: 3093: 3082: 3079:parameter to 3070: 3066: 3059: 3058: 3052: 3050: 3049: 3044: 3039: 3038: 3027: 3023: 3020: 3016: 3015: 3014: 3007: 3001: 2997: 2993: 2989: 2983: 2978: 2973: 2969: 2965: 2964: 2963: 2961: 2957: 2953: 2948: 2942: 2936: 2932: 2928: 2927:Chiswick Chap 2925:Many thanks. 2924: 2923: 2922: 2918: 2914: 2910: 2905: 2902: 2901: 2896: 2895: 2889: 2886: 2882: 2879: 2872: 2871: 2867: 2864: 2860: 2856: 2853: 2846: 2845: 2841: 2838: 2834: 2830: 2826: 2822: 2819: 2812: 2811: 2807: 2803: 2799: 2795: 2791: 2788: 2784: 2780: 2777: 2773: 2769: 2766: 2759: 2758: 2755: 2752: 2751: 2746: 2743: 2736: 2735: 2732: 2729: 2728:summary style 2725: 2722: 2715: 2714: 2709: 2706: 2702: 2699: 2692: 2691: 2687: 2684: 2680: 2677: 2674: 2670: 2666: 2663: 2656: 2655: 2652: 2649: 2645: 2642: 2635: 2634: 2631: 2628: 2624: 2620: 2616: 2613: 2606: 2605: 2602: 2599: 2595: 2592: 2585: 2584: 2580: 2576: 2575: 2571: 2567: 2563: 2560: 2556: 2552: 2548: 2544: 2543:lead sections 2540: 2536: 2533: 2526: 2525: 2522: 2519: 2515: 2512: 2505: 2504: 2500: 2497: 2493: 2489: 2487: 2480: 2477: 2476: 2472: 2469: 2466: 2462: 2461:Chiswick Chap 2459: 2453: 2451: 2447: 2442: 2441: 2433: 2430: 2428: 2425: 2423: 2420: 2419: 2417: 2416: 2411: 2405: 2402: 2400: 2397: 2395: 2392: 2391: 2389: 2388: 2383: 2377: 2369: 2365: 2361: 2357: 2356:Chiswick Chap 2353: 2352: 2351: 2347: 2343: 2342:Chiswick Chap 2339: 2335: 2333: 2329: 2325: 2321: 2320:Chiswick Chap 2317: 2316: 2315: 2311: 2307: 2303: 2302: 2301: 2300: 2296: 2292: 2291:Chiswick Chap 2284: 2279: 2275: 2271: 2267: 2262: 2259: 2258: 2254: 2252: 2249: 2246: 2241: 2237: 2233: 2229: 2226: 2225: 2221: 2220: 2217: 2213: 2209: 2205: 2202: 2201: 2197: 2196: 2193: 2189: 2185: 2181: 2178: 2177: 2173: 2172: 2169: 2165: 2161: 2158: 2155: 2152: 2151: 2147: 2146: 2143: 2139: 2135: 2131: 2128: 2127: 2123: 2122: 2119: 2115: 2111: 2108: 2105: 2104: 2100: 2099: 2096: 2092: 2088: 2084: 2083:Not necessary 2081: 2080: 2076: 2075: 2072: 2068: 2064: 2060: 2056: 2052: 2049: 2048: 2044: 2043: 2040: 2036: 2032: 2028: 2025: 2024: 2020: 2016: 2015: 2012: 2008: 2004: 2000: 1999:Not necessary 1997: 1996: 1992: 1991: 1988: 1984: 1980: 1976: 1975:fringe theory 1972: 1969: 1968: 1964: 1963: 1959: 1955: 1951: 1947: 1943: 1940: 1939: 1934: 1933: 1930: 1926: 1922: 1918: 1915: 1914: 1909: 1908: 1904: 1902: 1901: 1897: 1893: 1892:Chiswick Chap 1887: 1886: 1882: 1879: 1876: 1872: 1871:Chiswick Chap 1869: 1863: 1861: 1857: 1852: 1851: 1843: 1840: 1838: 1835: 1833: 1830: 1829: 1827: 1826: 1821: 1815: 1812: 1810: 1807: 1805: 1802: 1801: 1799: 1798: 1793: 1787: 1781: 1777: 1773: 1769: 1768: 1767: 1763: 1759: 1758:SilversmithUA 1754: 1753: 1752: 1751: 1747: 1743: 1739: 1731: 1729: 1728: 1724: 1720: 1714: 1713: 1710: 1700: 1695: 1688: 1684: 1680: 1676: 1672: 1669: 1665: 1663: 1659: 1655: 1651: 1650: 1649: 1648: 1644: 1640: 1636: 1632: 1621: 1617: 1613: 1609: 1608: 1607: 1604: 1601: 1595: 1594: 1588: 1586: 1584: 1580: 1576: 1572: 1561: 1559: 1557: 1553: 1549: 1545: 1535: 1531: 1527: 1522: 1521: 1520: 1519: 1515: 1511: 1505: 1504: 1497: 1491: 1487: 1483: 1479: 1478: 1477: 1476: 1471: 1467: 1463: 1459: 1454: 1453: 1451: 1447: 1443: 1442:24.136.37.109 1439: 1433: 1432: 1431: 1430: 1426: 1422: 1408: 1404: 1400: 1395: 1394: 1393: 1389: 1385: 1380: 1379: 1378: 1377: 1376: 1375: 1367: 1363: 1362: 1361: 1360: 1359: 1358: 1353: 1349: 1345: 1341: 1339: 1335: 1331: 1327: 1326: 1325: 1321: 1317: 1313: 1312: 1311: 1310: 1306: 1302: 1299: 1296: 1286: 1282: 1278: 1274: 1273: 1272: 1271: 1267: 1263: 1259: 1256: 1253: 1250: 1246: 1239: 1237: 1236: 1232: 1228: 1224: 1216: 1214: 1212: 1208: 1204: 1200: 1193: 1186: 1184: 1175: 1172: 1168: 1167: 1166: 1163: 1162:SuperElephant 1159: 1155: 1154: 1153: 1150: 1146: 1145: 1144: 1138: 1136: 1135: 1131: 1127: 1122: 1121: 1117: 1113: 1105: 1101: 1097: 1092: 1091: 1090: 1089: 1086: 1082: 1078: 1074: 1070: 1065: 1061: 1053: 1051: 1050: 1046: 1042: 1041:68.106.86.206 1036: 1035: 1031: 1027: 1012: 1008: 1004: 999: 998: 997: 993: 989: 985: 984:Other reasons 981: 980: 979: 976: 975:SuperElephant 972: 971: 970: 967: 963: 962: 961: 960: 957: 954: 950: 949: 944: 941: 936: 935: 934: 933: 930: 927: 922: 920: 917: 913: 909: 905: 903: 900: 896: 895: 894: 893: 890: 881: 869: 865: 861: 856: 855: 854: 850: 846: 842: 841: 840: 836: 832: 828: 824: 820: 819: 818: 814: 810: 805: 804: 803: 799: 795: 794:174.195.32.34 790: 789: 788: 787: 783: 779: 775: 771: 760: 756: 752: 748: 747: 746: 742: 738: 734: 733: 732: 728: 724: 719: 718: 717: 716: 712: 708: 696: 692: 688: 683: 682: 679: 678: 677: 676: 675: 673: 669: 665: 664:70.126.160.31 661: 654: 648: 645: 641: 637: 633: 632: 631: 630: 629: 628: 625: 621: 620: 617: 613: 607: 606: 603: 595: 580: 576: 570: 567: 566: 563: 546: 542: 538: 537:pseudohistory 534: 533:pseudoscience 530: 526: 525: 520: 517: 513: 512: 508: 502: 499: 496: 492: 479: 473: 470: 469: 466: 449: 445: 444:current tasks 441: 437: 433: 432: 427: 424: 420: 419: 415: 412: 409: 406: 402: 389: 386:(assessed as 385: 384: 374: 370: 369: 365: 362:(assessed as 361: 360: 350: 346: 345: 341: 337: 331: 328: 327: 324: 307: 303: 302: 294: 283: 281: 278: 274: 273: 269: 262: 258: 253: 250: 247: 243: 238: 234: 228: 220: 211: 210: 199: 194: 190: 188: 187: 183: 180: 176: 175: 171: 169: 168: 164: 161: 157: 156: 152: 150: 149: 145: 142: 138: 137: 133: 131: 130: 126: 123: 122: 118: 116: 115: 111: 108: 104: 103: 99: 96: 93: 92: 87: 83: 78: 76: 75: 67: 63: 59: 58: 57: 51: 48: 45: 41: 40: 36: 32: 28: 25: 22: 18: 17: 3917: 3895: 3891: 3887: 3884: 3881: 3878: 3875: 3872: 3864: 3853:edit request 3819: 3811:Lukebbaldwin 3791: 3759:72.81.222.57 3755: 3733: 3726: 3711: 3700: 3698: 3693: 3689:Hollow Earth 3686: 3663: 3634: 3628: 3625: 3617: 3606:edit request 3558: 3555: 3552: 3544: 3533:edit request 3501:DavidWBrooks 3483:DavidWBrooks 3466: 3457: 3444: 3429: 3414: 3399: 3386: 3371: 3353: 3338: 3315: 3287: 3274: 3261:The Sentinel 3248: 3234:Hollow Earth 3231: 3225: 3212: 3178: 3160: 3152: 3141:edit request 3110: 3092:12.33.29.132 3088: 3080: 3069:edit request 3034: 3031: 3006:source check 2985: 2979: 2976: 2949: 2946: 2907: 2903: 2884: 2880: 2857:. media are 2854: 2823:. media are 2820: 2793: 2789: 2786: 2781:No problem. 2771: 2767: 2748: 2744: 2723: 2705:main aspects 2700: 2685: 2682: 2664: 2643: 2623:cited inline 2614: 2593: 2578: 2572: 2569: 2534: 2513: 2499:Well-written 2498: 2495: 2467: 2457: 2456: 2443: 2432:Instructions 2288: 2270:27.33.128.28 2264:— Preceding 2250: 2247: 2244: 2227: 2203: 2179: 2153: 2129: 2106: 2082: 2058: 2054: 2051:Partial done 2050: 2026: 1998: 1970: 1941: 1916: 1888: 1877: 1867: 1866: 1853: 1842:Instructions 1737: 1735: 1715: 1706: 1704: 1693: 1634: 1628: 1605: 1599: 1596: 1569:— Preceding 1565: 1548:24.186.57.25 1542:— Preceding 1538: 1526:DavidWBrooks 1506: 1501: 1498:Some Support 1482:DavidWBrooks 1417: 1294: 1291: 1289: 1260: 1257: 1254: 1251: 1247: 1243: 1220: 1194: 1190: 1182: 1142: 1126:24.144.14.84 1123: 1108: 1068: 1057: 1037: 1023: 953:202.12.95.12 885: 860:DavidWBrooks 845:74.73.58.224 773: 767: 737:DavidWBrooks 703: 655: 651: 622: 608: 599: 574: 522: 448:project page 429: 381: 357: 335: 299: 261:Solar System 233:WikiProjects 197: 184: 172:Not promoted 165: 146: 141:May 15, 2017 127: 112: 72: 70: 66:please do so 54: 53: 49: 29:is a former 26: 3667:Thank you! 3263:(1948) and 2952:Hollow Moon 2827:with their 2790:Illustrated 2446:transcluded 1856:transcluded 1462:Throwaway85 1436:—Preceding 1399:Throwaway85 1330:Throwaway85 1277:Throwaway85 1227:Throwaway85 1197:—Preceding 1096:Throwaway85 1073:Lendorien's 1003:Throwaway85 912:amazon link 687:Throwaway85 685:dirty boy. 658:—Preceding 636:Throwaway85 50:Hollow Moon 27:Hollow Moon 3940:Categories 3857:|answered= 3610:|answered= 3537:|answered= 3331:in 1970s 3232:Summarize 3165:(2003) to 3145:|answered= 3073:|answered= 3043:Report bug 2673:plagiarism 2574:Verifiable 2399:Authorship 2385:GA toolbox 1809:Authorship 1795:GA toolbox 1635:Criticisms 1510:Gingermint 1112:Gingermint 1062:version. 707:Gingermint 550:Skepticism 541:skepticism 501:Skepticism 453:Paranormal 436:paranormal 411:Paranormal 134:Not listed 60:under the 3324:skippable 3026:this tool 3019:this tool 2913:Bromley86 2486:Attribute 2458:Reviewer: 2422:Templates 2413:Reviewing 2378:GA Review 2360:Bromley86 2338:Bromley86 2324:Bromley86 2306:Bromley86 2232:Bromley86 2208:Bromley86 2184:Bromley86 2160:Bromley86 2134:Bromley86 2110:Bromley86 2087:Bromley86 2063:Bromley86 2031:Bromley86 2003:Bromley86 1979:Bromley86 1946:Bromley86 1921:Bromley86 1868:Reviewer: 1832:Templates 1823:Reviewing 1788:GA Review 1742:Bromley86 1719:Bromley86 1712:dynamics. 1679:Bromley86 1654:Bromley86 1639:Bromley86 1612:Bromley86 1419:locked.-- 1384:Captmondo 1139:debunked? 1124:Godwin'd 940:Lendorien 770:WP:FRINGE 311:Astronomy 306:Astronomy 252:Astronomy 3715:Sykoskit 3696:itself. 3112:Thjarkur 3032:Cheers.— 2859:relevant 2796:such as 2776:edit war 2471:contribs 2427:Criteria 2318:Pinging 2266:unsigned 2027:Not done 1881:contribs 1837:Criteria 1738:reliable 1571:unsigned 1544:unsigned 1438:unsigned 1316:Saros136 1301:Saros136 1199:unsigned 1094:fiction. 1081:WP:UNDUE 1064:WP:UNDUE 899:Scorpios 889:Lunokhod 660:unsigned 602:Century0 223:GA-class 74:reassess 3923:Feoffer 3823:Hapalex 3774:Feoffer 3739:Feoffer 3706:MOS:BTW 3669:Feoffer 3576:Feoffer 3468:Feoffer 2956:my edit 2750:Neutral 2555:fiction 2285:Closing 2055:Density 1458:WP:NPOV 916:Zainker 831:Feoffer 778:Kolbasz 751:AngusCA 723:AngusCA 577:on the 529:science 338:on the 97:Process 35:archive 3694:theory 3116:(talk) 2831:, and 2825:tagged 2798:images 2772:Stable 2557:, and 2547:layout 1772:Цйфыву 1675:WP:RSN 330:Bottom 229:scale. 153:Listed 100:Result 3861:|ans= 3851:This 3701:think 3614:|ans= 3604:This 3541:|ans= 3531:This 3205:. 3149:|ans= 3139:This 3077:|ans= 3067:This 2806:audio 2804:, or 2802:video 2794:media 2577:with 2482:Rate 2448:from 1936:moon. 1858:from 822:talk. 3927:talk 3918:Done 3902:talk 3882:AND 3827:talk 3801:and 3778:talk 3763:talk 3743:talk 3734:Done 3719:talk 3673:talk 3664:Done 3648:talk 3640:talk 3580:talk 3565:talk 3505:talk 3487:talk 3472:talk 3458:Done 3445:Done 3430:Done 3415:Done 3400:Done 3387:Done 3372:Done 3354:Done 3339:Done 3316:Done 3288:Done 3275:Done 3249:Done 3226:Done 3213:Done 3186:talk 3179:Done 3096:talk 2931:talk 2917:talk 2621:are 2465:talk 2364:talk 2346:talk 2328:talk 2310:talk 2295:talk 2274:talk 2236:talk 2228:Done 2212:talk 2204:Done 2188:talk 2180:Done 2164:talk 2154:Done 2138:talk 2130:Done 2114:talk 2107:Done 2091:talk 2067:talk 2035:talk 2007:talk 1983:talk 1971:Done 1950:talk 1942:Done 1925:talk 1917:Done 1896:talk 1875:talk 1776:talk 1762:talk 1746:talk 1723:talk 1683:talk 1668:this 1658:talk 1643:talk 1616:talk 1579:talk 1552:talk 1530:talk 1514:talk 1486:talk 1466:talk 1456:per 1446:talk 1425:talk 1403:talk 1388:talk 1348:talk 1334:talk 1320:talk 1305:talk 1281:talk 1266:talk 1231:talk 1207:talk 1130:talk 1116:talk 1100:talk 1069:myth 1060:this 1045:talk 1030:talk 1007:talk 908:Link 864:talk 849:talk 835:talk 813:talk 798:talk 782:talk 755:talk 741:talk 727:talk 711:talk 691:talk 668:talk 612:talk 539:and 438:and 257:Moon 191:Kept 119:Kept 94:Date 3859:or 3817:). 3612:or 3539:or 3147:or 3075:or 3000:RfC 2970:to 2730:). 2671:or 2059:sup 1911:do. 1677:. 910:) ( 596:POV 569:Low 472:??? 3942:: 3929:) 3904:) 3865:no 3829:) 3780:) 3765:) 3745:) 3721:) 3699:I 3675:) 3650:) 3618:no 3582:) 3567:) 3545:no 3507:) 3489:) 3474:) 3238:No 3188:) 3153:no 3098:) 3081:no 3013:. 3008:}} 3004:{{ 2933:) 2919:) 2887:. 2883:. 2865:. 2855:6b 2839:. 2821:6a 2808:: 2800:, 2787:6. 2770:. 2747:. 2724:3b 2701:3a 2688:: 2683:3. 2675:. 2665:2d 2650:. 2644:2c 2617:. 2615:2b 2600:. 2594:2a 2581:: 2570:2. 2561:. 2553:, 2549:, 2545:, 2535:1b 2514:1a 2501:: 2496:1. 2473:) 2366:) 2348:) 2330:) 2312:) 2297:) 2276:) 2238:) 2214:) 2190:) 2166:) 2140:) 2116:) 2093:) 2069:) 2037:) 2009:) 1985:) 1952:) 1927:) 1898:) 1883:) 1778:) 1764:) 1748:) 1725:) 1685:) 1660:) 1645:) 1618:) 1581:) 1554:) 1532:) 1516:) 1488:) 1468:) 1448:) 1427:) 1405:) 1390:) 1350:) 1336:) 1322:) 1307:) 1283:) 1268:) 1233:) 1209:) 1132:) 1118:) 1102:) 1083:. 1047:) 1032:) 1009:) 994:) 914:). 866:) 851:) 837:) 815:) 800:) 784:) 757:) 743:) 729:) 713:) 693:) 670:) 614:) 535:, 531:, 390:). 366:). 259:/ 255:: 77:it 68:. 3925:( 3900:( 3825:( 3813:( 3776:( 3761:( 3741:( 3717:( 3671:( 3646:( 3638:( 3578:( 3563:( 3503:( 3485:( 3470:( 3236:? 3184:( 3094:( 3045:) 3041:( 3028:. 3021:. 2929:( 2915:( 2881:7 2768:5 2745:4 2468:· 2463:( 2362:( 2354:@ 2344:( 2336:@ 2326:( 2308:( 2293:( 2272:( 2234:( 2210:( 2186:( 2162:( 2136:( 2112:( 2089:( 2065:( 2033:( 2005:( 1981:( 1948:( 1923:( 1894:( 1878:· 1873:( 1774:( 1760:( 1744:( 1721:( 1681:( 1656:( 1641:( 1614:( 1577:( 1550:( 1528:( 1512:( 1484:( 1464:( 1444:( 1423:( 1401:( 1386:( 1346:( 1332:( 1318:( 1303:( 1279:( 1264:( 1229:( 1205:( 1128:( 1114:( 1098:( 1043:( 1028:( 1005:( 990:( 862:( 847:( 833:( 811:( 796:( 780:( 753:( 739:( 725:( 709:( 689:( 666:( 610:( 581:. 480:. 342:. 235:: 79:. 37:.

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

Index