553:""Lovebird" sold fewer than 600 copies upon its release, failing to attain one of the top 200 chart positions on the UK Singles Chart. However, it did peaked at number 22 on the South Korea Gaon Single Chart due to strong digital download sales." Ok, having some trouble with this. It sold few copies and didn't chart in the UK, but, if I understand correctly, it wasn't actually released as a single? Or was it? In the background section, you say that it was publicised as the second single, but then say that "In the United Kingdom, "Lovebird" was not released as a digital download single, but was released with an "impact date" of 9 December 2012." Further down, it's implied that it
801:"Lewis informs her lover in the lyrics – with the lines "But the time went on, the wind has blown, and I have grown" – that enough time has passed since their relationship started for her to have developed as a person." This doesn't read that well. Also, it implies that she is still in a relationship with this person, while the lead's "The lyrics of "Lovebird" focus on how Lewis informs her lover that enough time has passed since their relationship ended for her to have developed as a person." implies that the relationship is over. On a related note, surely he's not her lover if they're no longer together?
917:"Lewis leaves wearing an ivory sleeved dress and long skirt while she is trapped in the cage along with "jewelled eye decorations" in the video." This is very strangely written. I know we've covered this before, but is she wearing that in the whole video? If so, why not just say that? And are the "jewelled eye decorations" sitting in the cage next to her, also trying to escape? That's what's implied...
666:"according to Digital Spy, the reason cited for its commercial failure was due to not receiving airplay support from radio stations." According to Digital Spy the reason is cited by whom? Clumsy. Are you meaning to say something like "Writers for Digital Spy speculated that the single was a commercial failure as it received no airplay support from radio stations."?
280:" Lewis wears an ivory sleeved dress and long skirt while she is trapped in the cage. Lewis wears "jewelled eye decorations" in the video.[" Could these facts not be brought together? That would also help cut the repetition of "Lewis". Also, does she wear something different once she leaves the cage? If not, why specify that's what she wears in the case?
42:
858:"People always comment on what women wear more ... So no, it's neither sexist nor patronising." Wow. I'm not really interested in arguing about sexism, but the fact that the detail is trivial and the source not ideal remains. What Lewis wore at a particular interview is not important as regards this song.
1119:
Based on the problems I've identified above, I still feel that this article is not ready for GA status, and so I'm going to close it. The article seemingly contradicts itself, has a few instances of very poor writing and problems with sourcing/BLP concerns. These are not things we should be happy to
1203:
As a corollary, and although I'm not the reviewer, I agree this article doesn't make the grade. I've made a few changes to it. I find that there's a bit too much glitz and chintz and the prose could do with quite a bit more work. I've done all the copyediting I want to do because I have no interest
1188:
I was thorough. Many of the problems remain from earlier readthroughs or have arrived since the earlier readthroughs. I have also spent longer reviewing articles (often only to fail them anyway) but it's incredibly frustrating to review an article that acquires new problems when you're not looking,
1004:
I still really hate the fact you're citing a YouTube video from nobody in particular. Sure, Lewis is in the video, but is everything she ever says a reliable source? I don't know. I doubt it. This seems to be especially true considering (maybe- as above, I'm still not sure) what she said turned out
775:
Ok, let's run it like this. I'm not a particularly dimwitted person, and I've closely read this article several times. However, I'm still really struggling to understand whether the song was released as a single, not least because the article says "In the United
Kingdom, "Lovebird" was not released
560:
It is the official second single, yes. It was given an Impact day, so a day where it was sent to radio and you could download it from the album, but not as a standalone single like you could with "Trouble". Rihanna's "Stay" was also given an Impact day release and could only be downloaded from the
715:
There's still this huge ambiguity: "she introduced "Lovebird" as the second single and performed it for the first time", but "In the United
Kingdom, "Lovebird" was not released as a digital download single". Was she wrong, then, and in fact it wasn't the second single? You also write that "As of
841:
Yeah, probably. People always comment on what women wear more. It's exactly the same in media, commenting on what designer dress women wear to events and award shoes. Men are sometimes mentioned because they only wear suits. So no, it's neither sexist nor patronising. I actually find that quite
1001:. The former barely makes any sense at all. I've checked the source to see what you're trying to say (as it's not at all clear). Presumably, you're drawing on the "source" who said "Crucially, it didn't capture the imagination of radio bosses and got little airplay." This needs to be reworked.
804:"Lewis wore a figure-hugging red dress with black high heel shoes, had a "coating" of red lipstick on and "heavy" black eye makeup." Again, this is trivial, and borderline sexist. You've got potential BLP problems here. I'm currently being dragged over the coals for using the
633:"Lewis wore a figure-hugging red dress with black high heel shoes, had a "coating" of red lipstick on and "heavy" black eye makeup." Who cares? This feels a little too gossip mag, and is perhaps even a little sexist. Would we list what male singers were wearing? Probably not.
758:
I've never said it wasn't released as a single. It evidently was. Impact day is the day from when it is played on radio and you can download it from the album and is the day promotion of the single is implemented. Could also be seen as limited release in one respect.
966:
You said "Reworded to saying that she leaves the cage wearing that the dress, so yes she was wearing inside too." You did not say that she wore anything other than this in the video. Why are these other outfits not discussed in the article if this one is?
198:"While critics praised Lewis' vocal performance, the musical structure of the song was heavily compared to one of her previous singles, "Bleeding Love", along with songs by Adele." Why "while"? Are these things somehow contrary to one another?
1093:
what precisely does the 'both' refer to? The text seems to imply that it is SING Mastering and SING Technology, yet NBC is already mentioned as being in
Atlanta. My guess SING Technology is not an entity nor a locale, hence my bewilderment.
989:"according to Digital Spy, the reason cited for its commercial failure was due to not receiving airplay support from radio stations." Again, this is very poorly written- it does not say what you think it says. The reason was not due to
712:"The lyrics of "Lovebird" focus on how Lewis informs her lover that enough time has passed since their relationship ended for her to have developed as a person." This is poor writing. The lyrics do not focus on her method of informing.
743:
Yes, but you say that this is different from it being released as a single. The article seems to say (and, indeed, you seem to say in this review) both that it was and that it wasn't released as a single in the UK. This is a problem.
1153:
The second time I've done what? Closed a GAC review when the article wasn't ready? I've done that a lot of times. The article's not ready for GA status; I'm not going to promote it. Meanwhile, I'm going through it for the
707:
I'm starting to feel that this review has taken its fair share of my time, but I'm still seeing real problems. While some old problems still remain, I'm seeing new problems based on how the article is changing.
639:
No, we're not obliged to report on every little thing reviewers pick up on. This point struck me as being not only sexist but of little relevance. I removed it a few minute ago, before even seeing this comment.
1266:
Agreed. I've never come across an academic publication which cites the publisher of periodicals (like newspapers or academic journals). I don't know why so many pop music editors are so keen on doing this.
1172:
Maybe you should have been more thorough first time round. There's hardly 50 bullet points. I've spent much longer reviewing articles of the same length and writing more to address but not failed it. —
1032:
released as the second single". Was it released as a single, or wasn't it? This is the question. The article says both, you say both. Can we work out which is correct and straighten out the article?
1242:' filled in. When they are, I find it's too much clutter, especially when the majority of these are linked. That was the case here, and when I attempted to remove them I was met with resistance. --
448:
I don't think the fact that someone who uploaded it should come into it, it's the content of the video we are interested in, and Leona confirms the song as the second single for the first time. —
219:"Lewis tells her lover that that time has gone by in their relationship and how she has developed as a person in the lyrics "But the time went on, the wind has blown, and I have grown"." Clumsy
827:
Would we write what a male singer was wearing? Almost certainly not. It's implying that we should be judging Lewis based on how well she's dressed and how nice she looks; this is patronising.
204:
It wasn't given a single release, it just impact radio that day. If you wanted to download it, you had to do it from the album, not from the single page on iTunes as one didn't exist. —
238:
It's jargon- it's not clear what it means to someone who isn't familiar with the subject matter. Is there something that can be linked to? Are they particularly heavy beats? Slow beats?
1091:"Lovebird" was mixed by Phil Tan at the Ninja Beat Club in Atlanta, Georgia and mastered by Colin Leonard at SING Mastering using SING Technology, both located in Atlanta.
80:
776:
as a digital download single". Even if the article doesn't contradict itself, it needs clarification- if I'm coming away confused and unclear, I think readers will too.
1046:
No, I've said it was released as the second single, but you could only download it from the album, not as a separate release on iTunes with its own dedicated page. —
296:
Yes, but was she wearing that only in the cage, or in the whole of the video? Your wording implies the former, to which the immediate question is "what was she wearing
274:
I don't like the "John Smith for Music
Publication" format- "John Smith, writing for Music Publication," or "Writing in Music Publication, John Smith..." are a better
201:"In the United Kingdom, "Lovebird" was not released as a digital download single, but was released with an "impact date" of 9 December 2012." What's the difference?
47:
70:
669:
No, that
Digital Spy reported that was the reason. Media outlets rarely go on to to say by whom. According to and speculated are kinda the same thing. —
550:"and how she has to fly away." Could we put this in quote marks or something? Metaphors don't gel well with the impartial tone of an encyclopedia article
557:
released as a single- "As of
December 2012, "Lovebird" is Lewis' lowest selling single, and her first to not chart in the UK". What's going on here?
126:
336:
I've put an
External link section at the bottom of the article. External links for music videos in the Info box I find look rather untidy. —
277:"due to the inclusion of "big heartfelt ballads" such as "Lovebird" and "Fireflies" being included on Glassheart" The inclusion was included?
122:
52:
351:"looked "positively mournful" in the video, and that while it may not be the best advert for feminism, she looks "beautiful"." Tense switch
808:
as a source about a living person in one of my articles- this just reeks of gossip, and I'm not sure how it's relevant to this article.
585:"informs her lover ... since their relationship" He's her lover, but time has passed since their relationship? Or do you mean since the
107:
920:
Again I've said this before, no, she does not wear that one dress for the entire video, hence why I say in this clip of the video. —
527:
Not a bad article- well sourced, answers all the questions. The writing's a little choppy in places, but I'm sure that can be fixed.
75:
464:
Very well, we can let this slide for now- finish off dealing with the other points, and I'll take another look through the article.
99:
156:
354:"the reason given was due to not receiving airplay support from radio stations." Could this be rephrased? Also, given by whom?
375:
Who's the person whose video you cite as "Leona Lewis- Oxford Street Xmas Lights Switch on 2012 - Trouble and LoveBird"?
1028:
Now you're contradicting yourself. You said above that "It wasn't given a single release", but now you're saying "it
716:
December 2012, "Lovebird" is Lewis' lowest selling single, and her first to not chart in the UK". This implies it
405:
It's NME who reported it and embedded it to their site, so NME is the primary source here. The URL is nme.com —
391:
The uploader, I mean. Is this just some user-submitted video by some guy? If so, it's hardly an ideal source.
225:
Well, the sort of big beats you hear in power ballads lol. It's how it was described by a critic I think. —
720:
released in the UK; if it wasn't, surely the fact it didn't chart is a truism? I'm just not following this.
432:
I don't know, just someone who video Leona her performance and her saying that it is her second single. —
314:
Reworded to saying that she leaves the cage wearing that the dress, so yes she was wearing inside too. —
1254:
1216:
1106:
652:
617:
1137:
This is the second time you've done this. Last time you AFD an article which passed GNG and NSONGS. —
333:
Do we have the video uploaded somewhere by an official source? Worth an external link in the infobox?
115:
17:
1272:
1194:
1181:
1163:
1146:
1125:
1067:
1055:
1037:
1021:
972:
959:
941:
929:
904:
892:
863:
851:
832:
820:
781:
768:
749:
736:
693:
678:
601:
570:
532:
499:
487:
469:
457:
441:
423:
414:
396:
387:
369:
345:
323:
305:
292:
261:
243:
234:
213:
189:
170:
150:
1232:
1012:
released as the second single, and "Fireflies" was never released. It came from her mouth. —
1245:
1207:
1097:
643:
608:
92:
1268:
1190:
1173:
1159:
1138:
1121:
1063:
1047:
1033:
1013:
968:
951:
937:
921:
900:
884:
859:
843:
828:
812:
777:
760:
745:
728:
689:
670:
593:
562:
528:
495:
479:
465:
449:
433:
419:
406:
392:
379:
361:
337:
315:
301:
284:
253:
239:
226:
205:
181:
166:
146:
592:
Since it ended, obviously! That's why she has to let him, her lovebird, fly away. —
1062:
In what way is this "release" any different from a non-single track on the album?
1090:
357:
Why are you crediting the lyric video to "Log nu in om een reactie te plaatsen"?
688:
Still not quite there. The question mark hanging over its UK release is a pain.
605:
I had exactly the same query myself. It's ambiguous and needs clarification. --
1276:
1261:
1223:
1198:
1183:
1167:
1148:
1129:
1113:
1071:
1057:
1041:
1023:
976:
961:
945:
931:
908:
894:
867:
853:
836:
822:
785:
770:
753:
738:
697:
680:
659:
624:
572:
536:
503:
489:
473:
459:
443:
427:
400:
309:
247:
191:
174:
160:
1120:
see in a GA. I recommend you fix these issues and then renominate. Sorry.
727:
released as an impact day release. And I've explained what that means. —
636:
We always include what they were if a critic has picked up on it.
1238:
template documentation states that periodicals do not need the '
880:"while others are light and colourful." Do you mean "well lit"?
1228:
And oh, BTW, I find the citations section too heavy. The
494:
Great- I'll have another look through the article soon.
134:
103:
1204:
in reading all the background citations. Good luck. --
579:"the song is about how Lewis informs her lover" Clumsy
936:You have not said that before- at least not to me.
589:of their relationship? Could this be clarified?
252:Linked to Downtempo which talks about beats. —
1189:or retains problems you've already identified.
165:Happy to offer a review. Thoughts to follow.
8:
546:Time for a second look through the article.
950:It's above in the first read-through... —
30:
61:
33:
1239:
7:
899:It is not clear what is meant here.
478:I've done all the other points. —
1158:and still finding major problems.
703:Third read through; closing review
24:
222:What are "power ballad beats"?
723:I've told you this before. It
418:I'm referring to footnote 13.
1:
1089:I can't parse this sentence:
582:"that time enough time" Ditto
561:album, not as a single. —
1305:
283:Because it's sourced. —
1277:10:26, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
1262:03:37, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
1224:03:37, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
1199:22:30, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
1184:22:03, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
1168:20:46, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
1149:20:34, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
1130:20:16, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
1114:03:09, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
1072:22:30, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
1058:22:03, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
1042:20:46, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
1024:20:34, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
977:22:30, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
962:22:03, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
946:20:46, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
932:20:34, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
909:22:30, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
895:20:34, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
868:22:30, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
854:22:03, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
837:20:46, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
823:20:34, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
786:22:30, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
771:22:03, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
754:20:46, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
739:20:34, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
698:00:22, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
681:17:06, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
660:03:24, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
625:03:24, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
573:17:06, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
537:16:26, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
504:12:36, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
490:09:52, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
474:09:47, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
460:10:33, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
444:18:51, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
428:18:28, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
401:17:38, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
360:I've got no idea lol —
310:17:38, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
271:"The song's hook" Jargon
248:17:38, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
192:16:03, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
175:15:39, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
161:15:39, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
811:How it is sexist?? —
18:Talk:Lovebird (song)
542:Second read through
999:not the same thing
1253:
1215:
1105:
651:
616:
89:
88:
1296:
1252:
1249:
1243:
1241:
1237:
1231:
1214:
1211:
1205:
1178:
1143:
1104:
1101:
1095:
1092:
1052:
1018:
1005:not to be true.
956:
926:
889:
848:
817:
765:
733:
675:
650:
647:
641:
615:
612:
606:
598:
567:
484:
454:
438:
411:
384:
366:
342:
320:
289:
258:
231:
210:
186:
139:
130:
111:
43:Copyvio detector
31:
1304:
1303:
1299:
1298:
1297:
1295:
1294:
1293:
1258:
1247:
1244:
1235:
1229:
1220:
1209:
1206:
1174:
1139:
1110:
1099:
1096:
1048:
1014:
952:
922:
885:
844:
813:
798:début or debut?
761:
729:
705:
671:
656:
645:
642:
621:
610:
607:
594:
563:
544:
480:
450:
434:
407:
380:
362:
338:
316:
285:
254:
227:
206:
182:
120:
97:
91:
85:
57:
29:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
1302:
1300:
1292:
1291:
1290:
1289:
1288:
1287:
1286:
1285:
1284:
1283:
1282:
1281:
1280:
1279:
1256:
1226:
1218:
1117:
1116:
1108:
1083:
1082:
1081:
1080:
1079:
1078:
1077:
1076:
1075:
1074:
1002:
987:
986:
985:
984:
983:
982:
981:
980:
979:
915:
914:
913:
912:
911:
883:No, light. —
878:
877:
876:
875:
874:
873:
872:
871:
870:
802:
799:
796:
795:
794:
793:
792:
791:
790:
789:
788:
713:
704:
701:
686:
685:
684:
683:
664:
663:
662:
654:
637:
631:
630:
629:
628:
627:
619:
583:
580:
577:
576:
575:
551:
543:
540:
525:
524:
523:
522:
521:
520:
519:
518:
517:
516:
515:
514:
513:
512:
511:
510:
509:
508:
507:
506:
373:
372:
371:
355:
352:
349:
348:
347:
331:
330:
329:
328:
327:
326:
325:
300:of the cage?"
278:
275:
272:
269:
268:
267:
266:
265:
264:
263:
220:
217:
216:
215:
199:
195:
194:
140:
87:
86:
84:
83:
78:
73:
67:
64:
63:
59:
58:
56:
55:
53:External links
50:
45:
39:
36:
35:
28:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1301:
1278:
1274:
1270:
1265:
1264:
1263:
1260:
1259:
1251:
1250:
1234:
1227:
1225:
1222:
1221:
1213:
1212:
1202:
1201:
1200:
1196:
1192:
1187:
1186:
1185:
1182:
1179:
1177:
1171:
1170:
1169:
1165:
1161:
1157:
1152:
1151:
1150:
1147:
1144:
1142:
1136:
1135:
1134:
1133:
1132:
1131:
1127:
1123:
1115:
1112:
1111:
1103:
1102:
1088:
1085:
1084:
1073:
1069:
1065:
1061:
1060:
1059:
1056:
1053:
1051:
1045:
1044:
1043:
1039:
1035:
1031:
1027:
1026:
1025:
1022:
1019:
1017:
1011:
1007:
1006:
1003:
1000:
996:
993:; the reason
992:
988:
978:
974:
970:
965:
964:
963:
960:
957:
955:
949:
948:
947:
943:
939:
935:
934:
933:
930:
927:
925:
919:
918:
916:
910:
906:
902:
898:
897:
896:
893:
890:
888:
882:
881:
879:
869:
865:
861:
857:
856:
855:
852:
849:
847:
840:
839:
838:
834:
830:
826:
825:
824:
821:
818:
816:
810:
809:
807:
803:
800:
797:
787:
783:
779:
774:
773:
772:
769:
766:
764:
757:
756:
755:
751:
747:
742:
741:
740:
737:
734:
732:
726:
722:
721:
719:
714:
711:
710:
709:
702:
700:
699:
695:
691:
682:
679:
676:
674:
668:
667:
665:
661:
658:
657:
649:
648:
638:
635:
634:
632:
626:
623:
622:
614:
613:
604:
603:
602:
599:
597:
591:
590:
588:
584:
581:
578:
574:
571:
568:
566:
559:
558:
556:
552:
549:
548:
547:
541:
539:
538:
534:
530:
505:
501:
497:
493:
492:
491:
488:
485:
483:
477:
476:
475:
471:
467:
463:
462:
461:
458:
455:
453:
447:
446:
445:
442:
439:
437:
431:
430:
429:
425:
421:
417:
416:
415:
412:
410:
404:
403:
402:
398:
394:
390:
389:
388:
385:
383:
377:
376:
374:
370:
367:
365:
359:
358:
356:
353:
350:
346:
343:
341:
335:
334:
332:
324:
321:
319:
313:
312:
311:
307:
303:
299:
295:
294:
293:
290:
288:
282:
281:
279:
276:
273:
270:
262:
259:
257:
251:
250:
249:
245:
241:
237:
236:
235:
232:
230:
224:
223:
221:
218:
214:
211:
209:
203:
202:
200:
197:
196:
193:
190:
187:
185:
179:
178:
177:
176:
172:
168:
163:
162:
158:
155:
152:
148:
145:
141:
138:
137:
133:
128:
124:
119:
118:
114:
109:
105:
101:
96:
95:
82:
79:
77:
74:
72:
69:
68:
66:
65:
60:
54:
51:
49:
46:
44:
41:
40:
38:
37:
32:
26:
19:
1255:
1246:
1217:
1208:
1175:
1155:
1140:
1118:
1107:
1098:
1086:
1049:
1029:
1015:
1009:
998:
997:. These are
994:
990:
953:
923:
886:
845:
842:absurd. —
814:
805:
762:
730:
724:
717:
706:
687:
672:
653:
644:
618:
609:
595:
586:
564:
554:
545:
526:
481:
451:
435:
408:
381:
378:I don't? —
363:
339:
317:
297:
286:
255:
228:
207:
183:
164:
153:
143:
142:
135:
131:
117:Article talk
116:
112:
93:
90:
81:Instructions
1240:|publisher=
104:visual edit
1257:¿que pasa?
1219:¿que pasa?
1156:third time
1109:¿que pasa?
655:¿que pasa?
620:¿que pasa?
180:Thanks —
48:Authorship
34:GA toolbox
1269:J Milburn
1191:J Milburn
1160:J Milburn
1122:J Milburn
1064:J Milburn
1034:J Milburn
969:J Milburn
938:J Milburn
901:J Milburn
860:J Milburn
829:J Milburn
778:J Milburn
746:J Milburn
690:J Milburn
587:beginning
529:J Milburn
496:J Milburn
466:J Milburn
420:J Milburn
393:J Milburn
302:J Milburn
240:J Milburn
167:J Milburn
147:J Milburn
144:Reviewer:
71:Templates
62:Reviewing
27:GA Review
1233:citation
157:contribs
76:Criteria
1087:Comment
1008:But it
127:history
108:history
94:Article
1176:AARON
1141:AARON
1050:AARON
1016:AARON
995:was x
954:AARON
924:AARON
887:AARON
846:AARON
815:AARON
763:AARON
731:AARON
673:AARON
596:AARON
565:AARON
482:AARON
452:AARON
436:AARON
409:AARON
382:AARON
364:AARON
340:AARON
318:AARON
287:AARON
256:AARON
229:AARON
208:AARON
184:AARON
136:Watch
16:<
1273:talk
1248:Ohc
1210:Ohc
1195:talk
1164:talk
1126:talk
1100:Ohc
1068:talk
1038:talk
973:talk
942:talk
905:talk
864:talk
833:talk
782:talk
750:talk
694:talk
646:Ohc
611:Ohc
533:talk
500:talk
470:talk
424:talk
397:talk
306:talk
244:talk
171:talk
151:talk
123:edit
100:edit
1030:was
1010:was
759:—
725:was
718:was
555:was
298:out
1275:)
1236:}}
1230:{{
1197:)
1180:•
1166:)
1145:•
1128:)
1094:--
1070:)
1054:•
1040:)
1020:•
975:)
958:•
944:)
928:•
907:)
891:•
866:)
850:•
835:)
819:•
806:DM
784:)
767:•
752:)
735:•
696:)
677:•
640:--
600:•
569:•
535:)
502:)
486:•
472:)
456:•
440:•
426:)
413:•
399:)
386:•
368:•
344:•
322:•
308:)
291:•
260:•
246:)
233:•
212:•
188:•
173:)
159:)
125:|
106:|
102:|
1271:(
1193:(
1162:(
1124:(
1066:(
1036:(
991:x
971:(
940:(
903:(
862:(
831:(
780:(
748:(
692:(
531:(
498:(
468:(
422:(
395:(
304:(
242:(
169:(
154:·
149:(
132:·
129:)
121:(
113:·
110:)
98:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.