656:
bagpipe bands, oh... and that the only type of
Highland bagpipe bands are P&D Corps that compete. I'd also strongly recommend that this be kept to only largely recognized bands, and not just competition bands unless the name of the article is also going to reflect this as well, otherwise this list could insanely long and any old rinky-dink band could add their name. Ooh, maybe I should add the ManOnPipes Pipe Band, a little-known band in my area consisting of one piper ... oh, and then there's the rinky-dink get-together galaday band I have with a few friends, I could add that name to, 'cause why not since we have a MySpace profile we must be established ... see my point?
243:
222:
336:
315:
191:
709:
also gives more specific guidelines on lists. Basically they all must have a criterion that restricts the contents of the list and does not allow it to become a collection of indiscriminant information or list of external links. Grade I pipe bands are mostly encyclopedic, and some lower grade bands
1049:
OC, I became the "primary editor" of the List page by default. I was a pitiful failure in trying to get more editors involved and develop a consensus on what the List should be. The last changes I made were more to "shake the tree" than to independently decide which bands are "worthy" to be listed.
805:
That is a good point, and I wholeheartedly agree with your catagorization - like my userpage says, I'm a snare drummer for the Weston McEwen Pipe Band, and we are fairly recognized within the area of Oregon and
Washington, but we have played in Washington DC on several occasions representing Oregon
1157:
The RAF band doesn't seem to be currently listed. However one difference is that a RAF pipe band (the same one?) is currently participating in the competition scene, but the
British Army bands haven't competed for some years. The latter are still notable, but perhaps not appropriate for this list.
978:
Well, either you take a drastic action and remove all the none grade one pipe bands from this article, or you accept any pipe bands and in that case the introductionnary paragraph should be changed. An other way would be to have a special section in this article for the Grade I pipe bands and left
675:
Why would you choose to have a list of pipe bands attached to articles about bagpipes and pipe bands, which does not include as many pipe bands as possible? You are choosing to decide which pipe bands are "good enough" to be listed on your list, and that is biased and prejudice. If you feel that
1114:
With deference to those who know infinitely more about these matters than I do, I would suggest there is a certain inconsistency here surrounding military pipe bands. You allow the Royal Air Force pipe band to be listed, yet there is no mention of the
Scottish Highland regiments, which even after
1020:
There is no mention anymore in the introduction, about "competitive pie-bands" so it looks like any pipe band can be listed there. But, it seems you introduced a new way of selection because you allow only the bands having an entry in
Knowledge. So that's almost the same kind of selection because
655:
I think this page should be changed -- if it's going to be about
Highland pipe & drum bands, then it should reflect that in the tile ... otherwise this is helping to perpetuate the misconception that "bagpipes" are only "Highland bagpipes" and that the only type of bagpipe bands are Highland
834:
problem. Competive bands may or may not meet the "notability" criterion (a clouded issue in the limited universe of pipe bands). Non-competive bands, in my understanding, would not. My hope is that more people (editors) would join in this discussion. As, always, conflicted.
1115:
amalgamation and defence cuts must still include a piper or two? Or the pipe band of the Scots Guards? Pipers with the Irish regiments of the
British Army? (These military professionals must surely count as "grade one and two bands" for this purpose?)
427:
page; the information contained within is notable and very useful to those interested in bagpipe bands. The presence of links does not detract from the page's usefulness, it enhances it in that users are able to find more information about each band.
447:
I am going to begin writing articles about bands that are important and/or provide enough information on their websites', and deleting bands that have little information and/or are unimportant. I will remove the deletion tag when I start.
722:
Appears the "List of Pipe Bands" is degrading (no pun intended-well, maybe intended) from the intended content. Perhaps the article could be retitled to "List of
Internationally Recognized Pipe Bands" to further support the list
640:
has a section for bands that feature the bagpipes which includes more popular folk bands as well as pop/rock groups that have a piper. Please feel welcome to create articles about traditional style bands then list them on
153:
676:
this should be a list of certain bands which you feel are prominent enough, you should relable the lish to
Musaabdulrashid's list of the best pipe bands in the world that I think are good, not list of pipe bands.
710:
may be relevant, but it is easy to tell what is spam. If you are really concerned that erversions of listings are arbitrary, we could change the criterion to only include grade one and two bands on this list.
876:"The following is a list of competitive bands that have gained international recognition at the World Championships (and other "Major" competitions in Scotland), including Grade I and Grade II bands."
386:
411:
i do believe that their should be a list of pre eminent pipe bands; that would include the military bands with a history, and the pipes bands that have won national or international competitions.
1054:
to add your band to the list. Personally, I would like to see, as a minimum standard, every band listed have a wikipedia article. If that's the direction you want to go, I'd be glad to help.
1021:
only the top bands have an article in
Knowledge. For instance I would like to put our band in the list, but I do not think that's worth making an article about our band in Knowledge. --
848:"list of competitive bands that have gained international recognition at the World Championships (and other "Major" competitions in Scotland), including Grade I and Grade II bands."
408:
i do not have a problem with deleting the page. otherwise it will be an external link to every pipe band in the world. and there are websites that already contain world lists.
622:
I think it should be considered the different types of traditional pipe bands, like Galician and Portuguese ones, which differs in their compositions, but indeed traditional
147:
780:'s logic that the "List of Pipe Bands" should have limited crieria otherwise it would become an out off control list. However, there are three basic levels of Pipe Bands:
1329:
Looks like the AU/NZ table has been absorbed into the US table - I'm not quite sure how to fix it so if someone could please do it or teach me how that would be great :)
879:
seems to me some of the bands recently added do not belong to this category. So can we put any pipe band now in that list ? if yes, the article start should be changed.
1271:
1267:
1253:
955:(with articles) but the list has taken on "a life of its own" and become somewhat of a "link farm." I was hoping for a lot more input before I went into a
79:
44:
1372:
376:
1199:. If defunct bands are to be included, it ought to be as a supplementary list, noted as such, but I think it would be worthwhile to note them here.
1094:
Thats right, i just removed it. By the way, when having conversations in the talk space, it is better to use :'s to indent rather than using *'s--
882:
813:
does not give any criteria in its name that it is a competitive list, so I still think my previous suggestion would be good, except expanded as:
440:
page; Articles can be written about all of the important bands here, and the unimportant ones (non-competitive, grade 5, etc...) can be deleted.
297:
1367:
1357:
287:
85:
1362:
1121:
352:
959:
mode. I'm going to sit on this for a couple of days because I really don't know what would help other than changing the list title to
850:
I don't want to make any changes to the opening paragraph until there is some kind of a consensus on the criteria for a band listing.
705:
to promote the understanding that wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information, nor a collection of external links.
1352:
1249:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
263:
168:
135:
99:
30:
1196:
692:
343:
320:
104:
20:
951:
As you can tell from the previous discussion, it has been my feeling that the list should, at the very least, be limited to
74:
1314:
831:
818:
592:
202:
259:
255:
250:
227:
65:
814:
753:
525:
As this should not be a list of every pipe band world wide, I have inserted the word "notable" behind world wide. --
129:
830:
I,obviously, agree with the competitive/non-competive band list designations. However, we may be now faced with a
714:
646:
414:
wouldnt it great if if could include management and musical stategies that allowed bands to achievve celebrity.
1270:
to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
773:
894:
489:
125:
1125:
1305:
1231:
605:
as a general policy, bands on the page that have empty links for more than about a week should be deleted.--
109:
1227:
822:
764:
734:
175:
1289:
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
1277:
1204:
1185:
1163:
794:
At this point, my off hand thought, is that "competitive" may be the key to the list. Still conflicted.
208:
1239:
1230:. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit
588:
1334:
777:
711:
680:
661:
606:
596:
579:
570:
561:
537:
526:
466:
page; As per Musaabdulrashid's comments, I will also help assist writing articles (time permitting).
449:
1180:
Should the list include notable historical bands such as Red Hackle and Lothian and Borders Police?
933:
So, can we start to register "any pipe-bands" ? Will somebody modify the introduction this article ?
501:
161:
55:
1040:
You're welcome. But a question still remain: Can I write the name of my Pipe Band in that list ?--
351:
on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
1223:
1144:
1099:
810:
757:
688:
70:
24:
1274:
before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template
141:
1290:
637:
415:
51:
1118:
Nations such as Canada and Nepal also retain pipers as part of their military establishment.
996:
Since I have have only been able to "scare up" limited input I am going to, as a first step:
1200:
1181:
1159:
1297:
1330:
657:
760:
is converted to a universal list containing all matters of pipe bands — small to large.
1256:, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by
1136:
706:
494:
429:
1296:
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
846:
It appears the List has become "all inclusive," however, the opening paragraph states
1346:
1140:
1095:
702:
684:
627:
485:
1081:
890:
642:
636:
Thats a good idea, but not for this article which has the criterion at the top.
1263:
1055:
1031:
1008:
965:
924:
851:
836:
795:
733:
Indeed. I second that, srebob, and I believe this should be an all-around list.
724:
467:
1262:. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
806:
as well as our trip to Scotland, so I would place us in the middle catagory.
701:
There are actually very clear guidelines on this. I would first direct you to
587:
articles on this list must conform to wikipedia guidelines (duh), including:
1338:
1319:
1208:
1189:
1167:
1148:
1129:
1103:
1085:
1058:
1044:
1034:
1025:
1011:
983:
968:
945:
927:
898:
854:
839:
825:
798:
767:
737:
727:
717:
665:
649:
630:
609:
599:
582:
573:
564:
540:
529:
509:
470:
452:
432:
418:
335:
314:
242:
221:
348:
1077:
1041:
1022:
980:
942:
886:
560:
article about it and plan on doing so in a reasonable amount of time--
809:
But you have to see my logic the confiction behind the naming here -
536:
Criterion has now been furthur adapted, that obviously wasn't enough
1240:
https://web.archive.org/web/20141006073805/http://www.pipe-band.com/
772:
I'm a tad conflicted. After a minor "go-around" with regard to
184:
15:
1243:
1076:
A new red link just appeared :-) To be removed I guess ? --
1234:
for additional information. I made the following changes:
262:, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the
160:
347:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
1266:using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
962:Every Pipe Band Known and Unknown in the Universe.
33:for general discussion of the article's subject.
1000:1. Remove all "Red Links" keeping "blue links."
1252:This message was posted before February 2018.
578:Sort bands in alphabetical order by country--
174:
8:
873:At the beginning of the article it is said:
552:DO NOT add a band unless you are capable of
979:the others in the "by country" ordering. --
254:, an attempt to structure and organize all
1222:I have just modified one external link on
309:
216:
190:
188:
569:never put "the" in front of a band name--
1195:The list currently includes the defunct
752:I suggest that this article is moved to
258:. If you wish to help, please visit the
311:
218:
784:Competitive/Internationally Recognized
7:
920:you are correct about the opening.
341:This article is within the scope of
248:This article is within the scope of
1007:I would appreciate any thoughts...
207:It is of interest to the following
23:for discussing improvements to the
819:List of non-competitive pipe bands
14:
1226:. Please take a moment to review
787:Competitive/Regionally Recognized
1373:Top-importance Bagpipes articles
334:
313:
241:
220:
189:
45:Click here to start a new topic.
381:This article has been rated as
292:This article has been rated as
1197:Dysart and Dundonald Pipe Band
815:List of competitive pipe bands
754:List of competitive pipe bands
650:08:27, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
631:01:54, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
361:Knowledge:WikiProject Bagpipes
1:
1325:Australasia merged with US???
1059:19:13, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
1045:12:24, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
1035:10:16, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
1026:09:39, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
1012:22:08, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
1003:2. Restate opening paragraph.
984:10:04, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
969:11:09, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
946:09:38, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
928:23:23, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
899:14:34, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
826:00:13, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
799:23:28, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
768:21:37, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
738:01:31, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
728:13:12, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
666:19:44, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
364:Template:WikiProject Bagpipes
355:and see a list of open tasks.
42:Put new text under old text.
1368:List-Class Bagpipes articles
1358:Low-importance List articles
1209:22:26, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
1190:16:17, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
1168:09:27, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
1149:16:56, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
1130:16:47, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
1030:OC, thanks for you input...
855:13:08, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
840:02:20, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
832:Knowledge:Notability (music)
718:02:48, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
593:Knowledge:Notability (music)
486:Knowledge is not a link farm
1320:10:54, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
1052:do not need my "permission"
748:Suggested move and solution
541:03:57, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
272:Knowledge:WikiProject Lists
50:New to Knowledge? Welcome!
1389:
1363:WikiProject Lists articles
1283:(last update: 5 June 2024)
1219:Hello fellow Wikipedians,
908:In answer to "unsigned" -
774:City of Rockford Pipe Band
298:project's importance scale
275:Template:WikiProject Lists
1339:04:39, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
1244:http://www.pipe-band.com/
1104:10:51, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
1086:09:27, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
869:Top pipe bands ? really ?
610:09:46, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
600:08:35, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
583:09:46, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
574:09:46, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
565:09:46, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
530:08:52, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
510:18:28, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
471:12:56, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
453:08:12, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
433:03:04, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
419:21:02, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
380:
329:
291:
236:
215:
80:Be welcoming to newcomers
1353:List-Class List articles
1215:External links modified
256:list pages on Knowledge
953:Competitive Pipe Bands
520:Introductory Paragraph
197:This article is rated
75:avoid personal attacks
885:comment was added by
790:Non-Competitive Bands
595:, and all the rest.--
404:Deletion conversation
100:Neutral point of view
1264:regular verification
992:Pipe Band List Edits
912:the list has become
763:Any other thoughts?
344:WikiProject Bagpipes
105:No original research
1254:After February 2018
1308:InternetArchiveBot
1259:InternetArchiveBot
1224:List of pipe bands
823:Bagpiping Scotsman
811:List of pipe bands
765:Bagpiping Scotsman
758:List of pipe bands
203:content assessment
86:dispute resolution
47:
25:List of pipe bands
1284:
922:Any suggestions?
902:
776:, I began to see
735:BagpipingScotsman
697:
683:comment added by
638:List of bagpipers
506:
492:on this issue. •
401:
400:
397:
396:
393:
392:
367:Bagpipes articles
308:
307:
304:
303:
251:WikiProject Lists
183:
182:
66:Assume good faith
43:
1380:
1318:
1309:
1282:
1281:
1260:
1139:and add them. --
880:
696:
677:
671:Other Pipe Bands
589:Knowledge:Vanity
508:
504:
500:
497:
387:importance scale
369:
368:
365:
362:
359:
338:
331:
330:
325:
317:
310:
280:
279:
276:
273:
270:
245:
238:
237:
232:
224:
217:
200:
194:
193:
192:
185:
179:
178:
164:
95:Article policies
16:
1388:
1387:
1383:
1382:
1381:
1379:
1378:
1377:
1343:
1342:
1327:
1312:
1307:
1275:
1268:have permission
1258:
1232:this simple FaQ
1217:
1178:
1112:
994:
881:—The preceding
871:
778:Musaabdulrashid
750:
678:
673:
647:Musaabdulrashid
620:
618:Diversification
607:Musaabdulrashid
597:Musaabdulrashid
580:Musaabdulrashid
571:Musaabdulrashid
562:Musaabdulrashid
549:
538:Musaabdulrashid
527:Musaabdulrashid
522:
502:
495:
493:
450:Musaabdulrashid
406:
366:
363:
360:
357:
356:
323:
277:
274:
271:
268:
267:
230:
201:on Knowledge's
198:
121:
116:
115:
114:
91:
61:
12:
11:
5:
1386:
1384:
1376:
1375:
1370:
1365:
1360:
1355:
1345:
1344:
1326:
1323:
1302:
1301:
1294:
1247:
1246:
1238:Added archive
1216:
1213:
1212:
1211:
1177:
1174:
1173:
1172:
1171:
1170:
1152:
1151:
1111:
1108:
1107:
1106:
1091:
1090:
1089:
1088:
1071:
1070:
1069:
1068:
1067:
1066:
1065:
1064:
1063:
1062:
1050:You certainly
1005:
1004:
1001:
993:
990:
989:
988:
987:
986:
973:
972:
939:
938:
937:
936:
935:
934:
870:
867:
866:
865:
864:
863:
804:
792:
791:
788:
785:
749:
746:
745:
744:
743:
742:
741:
740:
672:
669:
653:
652:
619:
616:
614:
603:
602:
585:
576:
567:
548:
545:
544:
543:
521:
518:
517:
516:
515:
514:
513:
512:
474:
473:
460:
459:
457:
456:
455:
442:
441:
435:
405:
402:
399:
398:
395:
394:
391:
390:
383:Top-importance
379:
373:
372:
370:
353:the discussion
339:
327:
326:
324:Top‑importance
318:
306:
305:
302:
301:
294:Low-importance
290:
284:
283:
281:
246:
234:
233:
231:Low‑importance
225:
213:
212:
206:
195:
181:
180:
118:
117:
113:
112:
107:
102:
93:
92:
90:
89:
82:
77:
68:
62:
60:
59:
48:
39:
38:
35:
34:
28:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1385:
1374:
1371:
1369:
1366:
1364:
1361:
1359:
1356:
1354:
1351:
1350:
1348:
1341:
1340:
1336:
1332:
1324:
1322:
1321:
1316:
1311:
1310:
1299:
1295:
1292:
1288:
1287:
1286:
1279:
1273:
1269:
1265:
1261:
1255:
1250:
1245:
1241:
1237:
1236:
1235:
1233:
1229:
1225:
1220:
1214:
1210:
1206:
1202:
1198:
1194:
1193:
1192:
1191:
1187:
1183:
1176:Defunct Bands
1175:
1169:
1165:
1161:
1156:
1155:
1154:
1153:
1150:
1146:
1142:
1138:
1134:
1133:
1132:
1131:
1127:
1123:
1122:86.177.210.96
1119:
1116:
1109:
1105:
1101:
1097:
1093:
1092:
1087:
1083:
1079:
1075:
1074:
1073:
1072:
1060:
1057:
1053:
1048:
1047:
1046:
1043:
1039:
1038:
1036:
1033:
1029:
1028:
1027:
1024:
1019:
1018:
1017:
1016:
1015:
1013:
1010:
1002:
999:
998:
997:
991:
985:
982:
977:
976:
975:
974:
970:
967:
964:
963:
958:
954:
950:
949:
948:
947:
944:
932:
931:
929:
926:
923:
919:
915:
914:all inclusive
911:
907:
906:
905:
904:
903:
900:
896:
892:
888:
884:
877:
874:
868:
862:
859:
858:
856:
853:
849:
845:
844:
843:
841:
838:
833:
828:
827:
824:
820:
816:
812:
807:
802:
800:
797:
789:
786:
783:
782:
781:
779:
775:
770:
769:
766:
761:
759:
755:
747:
739:
736:
732:
731:
729:
726:
721:
720:
719:
716:
713:
708:
704:
700:
699:
698:
694:
690:
686:
682:
670:
668:
667:
663:
659:
651:
648:
644:
639:
635:
634:
633:
632:
629:
625:
617:
615:
612:
611:
608:
601:
598:
594:
590:
586:
584:
581:
577:
575:
572:
568:
566:
563:
559:
555:
551:
550:
546:
542:
539:
535:
534:
533:
532:
531:
528:
519:
511:
507:
505:
498:
491:
487:
483:
480:
479:
478:
477:
476:
475:
472:
469:
465:
462:
461:
458:
454:
451:
446:
445:
444:
443:
439:
436:
434:
431:
426:
423:
422:
421:
420:
417:
412:
409:
403:
388:
384:
378:
375:
374:
371:
354:
350:
346:
345:
340:
337:
333:
332:
328:
322:
319:
316:
312:
299:
295:
289:
286:
285:
282:
278:List articles
265:
261:
257:
253:
252:
247:
244:
240:
239:
235:
229:
226:
223:
219:
214:
210:
204:
196:
187:
186:
177:
173:
170:
167:
163:
159:
155:
152:
149:
146:
143:
140:
137:
134:
131:
127:
124:
123:Find sources:
120:
119:
111:
110:Verifiability
108:
106:
103:
101:
98:
97:
96:
87:
83:
81:
78:
76:
72:
69:
67:
64:
63:
57:
53:
52:Learn to edit
49:
46:
41:
40:
37:
36:
32:
26:
22:
18:
17:
1328:
1306:
1303:
1278:source check
1257:
1251:
1248:
1221:
1218:
1179:
1120:
1117:
1113:
1051:
1006:
995:
961:
960:
956:
952:
940:
921:
917:
913:
909:
878:
875:
872:
860:
847:
829:
808:
803:
793:
771:
762:
751:
674:
654:
623:
621:
613:
604:
557:
553:
524:
523:
499:
481:
463:
437:
424:
413:
410:
407:
382:
342:
293:
260:project page
249:
209:WikiProjects
171:
165:
157:
150:
144:
138:
132:
122:
94:
19:This is the
1201:Mutt Lunker
1182:Lavateraguy
1160:Lavateraguy
679:—Preceding
148:free images
31:not a forum
1347:Categories
1331:TreeReader
1315:Report bug
1110:More bands
723:criterion.
658:ManOnPipes
490:the policy
264:discussion
199:List-class
1298:this tool
1291:this tool
756:and that
496:Freechild
430:Badagnani
88:if needed
71:Be polite
21:talk page
1304:Cheers.—
1141:Muhandes
1135:Then go
1096:Jac16888
895:contribs
883:unsigned
693:contribs
685:Grim0107
681:unsigned
628:Tonyjeff
558:original
556:a good,
358:Bagpipes
349:Bagpipes
321:Bagpipes
56:get help
29:This is
27:article.
1228:my edit
1037:srebob
1014:srebob
930:srebob
916:...and
857:srebob
842:srebob
801:srebob
730:srebob
707:WP:LIST
626:bands.
554:writing
385:on the
296:on the
154:WPÂ refs
142:scholar
1061:srebob
1056:Srebob
1032:Srebob
1009:Srebob
971:srebob
966:Srebob
925:Srebob
852:Srebob
837:Srebob
796:Srebob
725:Srebob
703:WP:ENC
547:Notice
488:. See
482:Delete
468:gummAY
205:scale.
126:Google
861:HELP!
643:WP:PB
503:'sup?
269:Lists
228:Lists
169:JSTOR
130:books
84:Seek
1335:talk
1205:talk
1186:talk
1164:talk
1145:talk
1137:BOLD
1126:talk
1100:talk
1082:talk
957:BOLD
918:YES!
910:YES!
891:talk
817:and
689:talk
662:talk
624:pipe
464:Keep
438:Keep
425:Keep
162:FENS
136:news
73:and
1272:RfC
1242:to
712:M i
416:joe
377:Top
288:Low
176:TWL
1349::
1337:)
1285:.
1280:}}
1276:{{
1207:)
1188:)
1166:)
1147:)
1128:)
1102:)
1084:)
1078:OC
1042:OC
1023:OC
981:OC
943:OC
941:--
897:)
893:•
887:OC
821:.
695:)
691:•
664:)
645:.
591:,
484:-
448:--
156:)
54:;
1333:(
1317:)
1313:(
1300:.
1293:.
1203:(
1184:(
1162:(
1143:(
1124:(
1098:(
1080:(
901:.
889:(
715:c
687:(
660:(
389:.
300:.
266:.
211::
172:·
166:·
158:·
151:·
145:·
139:·
133:·
128:(
58:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
