Talk:Mob rule - Knowledge (XXG)

1322:

isolated small islands in some ocean; or always does with true Anarchism as distinct from theories falsely claiming to be Anarchist through, for instance, actually having a government but claiming it isn't really a government for one reason or another; or that Anarchism always carries an uncertain but unacceptably high risk of Ochlocracy; and so on. Plus there would probably also have to be arguments from people accepting that Ochlocracy was not a significant risk of Anarchism but arguing that this was irrelevant because Anarchism carried other far greater risks. But finding 'reputable' sources for any of this may not be too easy, if only because 'reputable' sources may not feel much need to argue about Anarchism, any more than they feel much need to argue about belief in a Flat Earth, or Satanism, or belief in Santa Claus, regardless of how unfair such analogies may seem to Anarchists. And, incidentally, I certainly wouldn't expect any 'reputable' source to carry my own views on the subject (which presumably means those views can't appear in the article, no matter how sensible they seem to me). For what little it's worth, my views are roughly that the world has never had a World Government, and consequently we've always lived in a relatively sophisticated form of anarchy, with anarchy turning out in practce to mean not absence of goverment, but absence of central government, leaving government by the strongest local bandits or warlords, currently named Barack Obama, Vadimir Putin, etc... Consequently Ochlocracy is at worst a fairly minor consequence of anarchy, except perhaps in its earliest stages, and being for or against anarchy is as pointless as being for or against gravity, as we're currently stuck with both. Plus it's probably all just that old cliche - an argument about deckchairs on the Titanic; because either humankind or civilisation self-destructs in the near future, or else, for better or worse, we will probably all soon be governed by benevolent and/or tyrannical quasi-super-intelligent machines or persons, who will presumably see little or no reason to pay much attention to our barely intelligent thoughts on the subject. But, as already mentioned, it seems that none of this can legitimately be mentioned in the article.

1410:

did try to resolve the situation through discussion, but without the remotest glimmer of success. The other editor simply didn't engage, and only quoted chapter and verse. You and I seem to me to be very much on the same page, which I find a relief. The "good men doing nothing" thing is sensitive to me at present. I am finding myself on the boot end of the nationalist surge in Europe and deafened by the silence coming from the "reasonable" and "fair-minded majority". Plus ca change! The issue seems common in all this and a question of balancing human with machine, justice with law, the spirit of the law v. the letter of the law. It is a process and ongoing struggle. There is no "answer" or silver bullet. The growing reliance and dependence of Western societies on the letter of the law is not delivering an increase in justice in them. Wiki is important to me because of the opportunity it provides to balance the history of the victors (which I suggest forms the preponderance of third party sources) and "the truth" - ie facts in balance. Education is not the answeer but learning is and wiki has become a central resource in this. In general I choose to see wiki succeeding in this role, however, the sort of over-zealousness which I recently encountered here powerfully pushes things in the opposite direction. IMO there needs to be some form of mediation to resolve matters in this area. Anarchy is a sweet dream but the reality is Somalia, and what flows from it.

1393:

instance, there's no suppression of truth or knowledge at issue, merely leaving in place bits of the truth that a perfectionist would remove on grounds that ideally they belonged elsewhere. I agree that in other instances in Knowledge (XXG), there often is a genuine problem of truth suppression - but, at least in my limited experience, that is usually the result of obeying Knowledge (XXG) rules regarding so-called reliable sources (or allegedly reliable sources) when those 'reliable' sources seem wrong to me, while it seems the truth is either only found in 'unreliable' sources or in my own 'original research'. But I don't see any easy fix for that kind of problem, because the 'cure' of getting rid of those rules, or just ignoring them, will in the long run probably almost always be worse than the disease, as well as usually failing to work even in the short run (because one's 'illegal' edits usually just get reverted). So to me it seems pragmatic, but not cynical, to try to concentrate my efforts to promote 'knowledge' and 'the truth' in those areas where they seem to have a reasonabe chance of being successful. That way hopefully I can avoid being 'a good man doing nothing'. But of course if that doesn't appeal to you, there are plenty of other ways for 'good men to do something' that do not require them to edit Knowledge (XXG) :)

1302:

Ochlocratic, but not what arguments they deploy, if they even think it necessary to reply to the charge. The charge was originally described as a 'popular misconception' (or some similar expression), but that seems unlikely, partly because Ochlocratic (as distinct from 'mob rule') is not a word in most people's vocabulary, and Anarchism is not a subject that greatly occupies most people's minds, and partly because the term 'anarchy' conjures up in most people's minds many problems far worse than mere mob rule, such as tyranny by local bandits or warlords, economic collapse followed by starvation, and so on. So anarchists may not necessarily feel any great need to answer that particular charge. And if they do answer it, they would quite likely avoid incomprehensible waffle about 'theories of structure and mutual support rooted in democracy and free association' in favour of something much simpler such as 'we anarchists object to being ruled, so what makes you think we are trying to get ourselves ruled by mobs?'. And that is what I would probably say if I were an anarchist (I'm not), but I'm not supposed to put that in Knowledge (XXG) without a reference to back it up.

1361:

to be a small price to pay for reducing my risk of finding myself in an edit war which I would probably lose through lack of ideological fervour on my part compared to my opponent, with consequences that might seriously disimprove the article. The French allegedly have a saying 'Le mieux est l'ennemi du bien' - 'Better is the enemy of good', and I guess this is the kind of situation they have in mind; English equivalents are 'If it ain't broke, don't fix it', 'It's often best to leave well enough alone', and 'Let sleeping dogs lie'. Of course, if you feel strongly about the suggested changes, then there's nothing to stop you making them yourself, though in that case you probably need to be willing to put up a fight to defend them if the original editor decides to object and scream censorship, etc, as seems a stronger than usual possibility in this particular instance, since the original editor's entry at least reads like it's partly motivated by his or her own ideological commitment.

1197:(2) Returning to the entire sentence: 'In ancient Greek political thought ochlocracy was considered as one of the three "bad" forms of government tyranny, oligarchy and ochlocracy) as opposed to the three "good" forms of government (monarchy, aristocracy and democracy).' Wrong again. First, there was no agreed meaning of democracy in 'ancient Greek thought', but rather differing opinions. However, more importantly, if we mean the leading thinkers, such as Plato and Aristotle, NEITHER of them calls 'democracy' a 'good' form. Plato constantly condemns it as a degenerate form, and Aristotle sees it as fundamentally defective. The best that either of them say about democracy is that it is the 'least worst', which is something very different from 'good', a description they never use. 1378:

the results that come from referring to wiki in the first place. Sad but there it is. Wiki is an oddity, another dead cat bounce from the 60's, something to watch in fascination, like a formicary. Perhaps facts and truth should be held as secondary to pragmatism, something politicians routinely do while maintaining the reverse, but I don't think this is the most valuable contribution of French culture. "If it 'ain't broke etc" refers to something completely different imo and also depends on what you see as "it". Perhaps a little OTT if one doesn't see the significance of knowledge but: "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." seems pertinent. I therefore take comfort in my own withdrawal in the plurality of Burke's observation!

1314:

democracy' article is all that much of an improvement, and ideally it should link to an articke on 'theories of democracy', or 'anarchist theories of democracy', but no such article currently exists. Perhaps I should have linked the two instances to either one or two such non-existant articles to indicate a possible need for such articles, but I'll leave that decision to somebody else. There may or may not be a similar need for linking 'self-realizing' to a currently non-existant article on 'theories of self-realization', or 'anarchist theories of self-realization', but I've put no link at present (the current 'self-realization' article is about spirituality and Eastern religion, not Anarchism).

1050:. It prompted me to examine my own behaviour, and I began to redden. So I read on to find the error of my ways and absolution. Then the writings of Wittgenstein and Chomsky, who I had been reading here popped into my mind. It seemed to me that their "frank" mode of expression fitted firmly into the definition of "dickheads". I suggest that the "social" aspect of the web, even if still resonating with echoes of West Coast geniality, is actually simply an Ochlocracy. It shuns misfits of one type or another, and, from 1346:

reverting all that doesn't precisely fit some literally interpreted "regulation" (actually of course, guidance). But I also believe that bowing to the feelings of "original editors" is bad practice. Of course it is very hard to let go of one's creations, but it is necessary nonetheless. Wiki is a community SERVICE imo. Perhaps the most substantial part of being a parent is letting go of your child. Otherwise its life is smothered. Creating an article is making a gift to the community, not claiming a stake.

422:

history to suit himself. I quoted from Mr. Muller, a very famous classical scholar of ancient Greece. Do you not think that this man is quite capable of knowing what the word means. I also quoted from Eric von Kuehnelt-Leddihn who uses the same term in the same way as Mr. Muller does 100 years later. Isn't that being pretty good evidence of the meaning of the term? I need help here to resolve this issue. I really do believe that Mr. Tudoreanu is not being honest in his edits and is playing games.

1295:, and inaccuracies such as the statement that Anarchism is a Socialist movement aiming at the destruction of capitalist governments (it's actually many movements, which don't always see themselves as socialist, don't want rid of only capitalist governments, and would often prefer to 'replace' them, which sounds less violent than 'destruction', which matters if we wish to remain NPOV). I've also thrown in a few links to seemingly relevant Wiki articles. 74: 53: 84: 1194:(1) The article states: 'In ancient Greek political thought ochlocracy was considered as one of the three "bad" forms of government...' However, in the preceding paragraph, the article states: 'The term appears to have been coined by Polybius in his Histories (6.4.6).' How could the term have been considered at all by ancient Greeks if they never had any such term, it being coined only later by Polybius? 277:

combat situation, and it tends to mirror a point of view broadcast in the first hours of the PLA's action, which were quickly repudiated when accurate accounts of the battle were available. For better or worse, the myth of a massacre in the square, or of a "slaughter," is often repeated without comparison to similar actions, such as those of United States armed forces in Panama City later that year.

22: 179: 158: 189: 574:. Your idea seems even better however, since WHEELER felt (and I feel legitimately) that there is a special need for a page to focus on the classical meaning. So long as the two link to each other, I see no disadvantage to splitting the classic term "Ochlocracy" (which I'd never heard before finding this article) off from the modern concept of " 1468:, and while they are more clearly referred to as such later in the article, it seems a bit weird to me to present them first without any sort of reference or citation, giving the impression that Aristotle's views qualify as neutral facts or the current consensus in political science or something like that. 1360:

Thanks for the compliments, LookingGlass. You're probably right in principle that bowing to the feelings of "original editors" is bad practice. But what makes sense in principle doesn't necessarily always make sense in practice. In this case, a few true words that ideally belong elsewhere seems to me

1247:

Perhaps the similitudes of "ochlocracy" with the "advanced capitalist democracies" of our times can be better evidenced, instead of focusing on "arabian spring and angry mobs elsewere" that it is my humble opinion will be in future revealed to what they really are: grand scale manipulations of entire

1409:

I think there may have been a wire crossed Tlhslobus. I appreciate your reply. My frustration was in coming up against a rule-enforcer whose obduracy, in the face of facts which s/he acknowledged, prevented information central to the article being included. I didn't get involved in an edit war. I

872:

Angry Mob The Angry Mob is a large group of people that are upset or angry with something. They can be Men, Women, children of any height, religeion, gender, culture and status. These people, frustrated and angry, by an event or person, find they have strenght in numbers and they therfore do things

328:

Milnea Trudenau seems to think that censorship is his purview. The prestigious Oxford English Dictionary puts in occurences of the word in actual instances to prove the point of its defintion of the word. It is to make a reference to all instances in proving actual usage--historical usage. Milnea

1514:

I returned to this article today and found it in a poor state of repair compared to what I recall from the past. Haven't reviewed the edit history but maybe there is material that one can go back to. The Spanish article is infinitely better. This article is very thin on the ancient Greek origins of

1305:

2) Incomprehensible waffle: 'autonomous self-realizing democratic structures' and 'theories of structure and mutual support rooted in democracy and free association' are two examples. I'd like to get rid of them, but I don't really know what to put in their place. Ironically that may well be why it

1270:

Well, demos is a group of people with citizenship. Being citizen means being hard bound to a) rights and b) obligations. Democracy is rule of the country by this group. So whoever controls citizenship and sets these obligations and rules, controls country. This is certaintly not "public rule", but

1054:

et seq seems proud of the fact. That is a short term view as the loss in the end is to the diversity and viablity of the Ochlocracy itself. Just a thought. The thought that follows that is then: Are the people who "invent" things that significantly impact upon the whole of society, and the people

1377:

Sounds like pragmatic cynicism to me Tlhslobus, and a view I share in darker moments. For myself, I've begun a process of withdrawal both from editing and subscription. I hadn't really noticed that until now. It is really a remarkable waste of copious quantities of time trying to share via wiki

276:

Did you have a complaint about the original point of view, that described the government's battle to regain its capitol city as "slaughter"? That description does not seem to align with typical military science documents describing the likelihood of high-casualties among both parties in any urban

1392:

Perhaps you're right, LookingGlass. But I don't normally equate pragmatism with cynicism. To me it doesn't seem cynical to say that a little good achieved in practice is preferable to a lot of harm achieved through the unwise pursuit of unachievable perfection. And, at least in this particular

1345:

Nothing constructive, I just had to say: Hear, Hear! Great points Tlhslobus, imo both well made and founded. And especially your conclusion. I only wish that sort of sanity could be codified in some way, so that other editors could be encouraged to follow suit, instead of merely deleting or

1135:

While the term "Monster Mob" does not show up in dictionaries and encyclopedias, I think that this phenomenon occurs so often in world culture that it needs- and deserves- a term to describe it, even if a neologism needs to be coined; I think the only reason that such a term doesn't show up is

421:

and found other historical examples on the way it has been used. Tudoreanu deletes the lot of them. I think it would be NPOV if he found his own references of the word and added them also but he deletes them all. This is not right. He doesn't seem to acknowledge history but wants to change

1321:

presumably requires giving various counter-arguments from 'reputable' sources. Presumably these would include people claiming that Anarchism always leads to Ochlocracy (or 'mob rule'); or always does except in irrelevant circumstances such as small scattered Inuit populations in the Arctic or

1313:

4) I've linked the words 'democracy' and 'democratic' to the Wiki 'direct democracy' article, because the Wiki 'democracy' article begins by describing democracy as a system of government, whiich is obviously not what anarchists mean by the term. But I'm not sure that the link to the 'direct

1301:

1) No references: there is still no authority for the claim that Anarchists argue that Anarchism is not inherently Ochlocratic because it includes theories of structure and mutual support rooted in democracy and free association. Common sense tells us that they reject the accusation of being

1094:

I went ahead and removed California from this article's See Also list. If you want to link to a specific historical entry about California where Ochlocracy is directly visible, please do so. However, I think linking directly to the California article with no insight as to why or what you're

280:

I propose that your lack of expertise might incline you to see information that contradicts an uninformed point of view as not being from a neutral point of view. This might be because a neutral examination of mob activities requires a person to re-examine myths perpetrated by mobs with no

1763:

on the DAB page should be moved to the "See also" section on that page, since "mob rule" never refers to the mafia, the Irish mob, etc. (Even if it did, there is zero chance that is the primary topic). The handful of pop-culture entries are all derivative uses, of no lasting encyclopedic

1437:

to back you up. If you like, you can point me to the Talk Page where your dispute was if you wanted an unofficial (and very unauthoritative) second opinion from me - though you might prefer to look for an official and authoritative second opinion, presumably from an admin, via

482:

What evidence, what scholary book refutes the instances of the word "Ochlocracy" that I have put in? Of course, the word "Ochlocracy" is derogatory towards democracy. Every Aristocrat calls democracy an Ochlocracy. This is NPOV. Let the Aristocrats have their

1074:

The last events 07.04.09, occurred in Moldavian capital Chişinău, may be an example of installation of a interesting form of government which is much closer to ochlocracy than any other forms of government. who is interested could study this phenomena in detail.

738:

back into a redirect for now. The page there was extremely specious, and this article actually discusses it in some depth. Until someone's prepared to actually write a decent separate article about mob rule, I think it's best this page remain the one people see.

490:

I again ask Mr. Tudoreanu for any evidence. Two people have come back on and restored the occurences of the word. Mr. Tudoreanu reverts it again and has not responded at all on the talk page. Can Mr. Tudoreanu please supply the reasons why he is reverting the

824:

I don't know the IPA, but -ch- in Greek words borrowed into English is generally pronounced as /k/, as in monarchy, chronic, chrome, christ, chrysanthemum, and for that matter kilometer. So now, if you know the IPA, you can deploy your own decency and do it.

1306:

is incomprehensible - anarchists want to get rid of governments but many probably don't really know what to put in their place, so perhaps they deal with this by trying to hide their uncertainty and the flaws in their thinking behind incomprehensible waffle.

332:

That is why I am putting back the occurences, because the historical usage of the term refutes what is written in the article itself and points out the slant of Knowledge (XXG) and the way users are using it to slant information their way of course.

1131:

I have added a section to this article to refer to a cliche that pervades literature and cinema; namely, that paranoid, ignorant, and irascible villagers- who often wield torches- assemble to confront someone whom they perceive as a monster.

267:

I'm not an expert on this topic, but this article seems to imply a very spefic sense of "mob rule" (cf. the Tianmen paragraph). I put a POV message on top, in the hope that someone with more knowledge wants to sort this article out a bit. --

601:

is perhaps my most favored political figure, and he felt regular revoloution (Ochlogarchy, if you will), enabled by the right to bear arms, was a necessary component of true democracy and protection from tyranny. God I wish I could vote

1309:

3) The stuff about Anarchism not necessarily being Socialist properly belongs in the Anarchism article. I've only left it in here to try to reduce the risk of a row with the original author who asserted it was Socialist.

1325:

That said, none of this means that I think the section should simply be deleted. It always has violated quite a few Wiki rules, and currently still does (though hopefully rather fewer than before), but, as made clear by

704:

The technical term is "Ochlocracy" it is a slang term used for democracies because that is what they slide into. It is about pandering to the biggest block or biggest group in order to gain power and keep it. The

1432:

and argue that the rules should be ignored to improve the encyclopedia, though I suspect you would still have a near-impossible task trying to get stuff 'likely to be disputed' into Knowledge (XXG) without a

1603:

Although this was seen as "pure opinion" by the editor it does seem to be an interesting statement and sources could be found to support it. This could be moved to another page about governments in general.

1892:

There are citations and sections and paragraphs but any discussion of mob rule that thinks it started in the 17th century and solely focuses on recent English and American experiences is so incomplete and

892:, rocks, torches, pitchforks and scythes. Mobs seek only to destroy and disrupt, and although they are comprised only of civilians, they can do a very large amount of damage in a very short time. 1516: 1244:

The article avoid remarking the main differences between "democracy" and "ochlocracy", like the massive power of demagogues and the systemic exploitation of the general ignorance of the masses.

968:

In popular culture Mobs are a strong symbol of uprising or revelution, so they can be seen widely in the Media, on the news, in movies, in books and in video games. Two such examples are:

460:

Waiting for a response Mr. Tudorneau of why the deletions. Do you have any evidence of why you deleted the occurences or did you just delete because you didn't like the meaning of the word?

1298:

But the section remains unsatisfactory in many ways, and I'm not sufficiently interested to fix it, so I'm just going to list some of the issues in case anybody else wants to tackle them:

910:

Weakness The Mob is almost impossible to tame, lead and co-ordinate. They are irrational and spontaious, often turning on one another. Because they are so undisiplined an small number of

341:

On the contrary, I am a firm believer in absolute freedom of speech. You are most welcome to create your own website and write on it whatever you wish. But don't try to insert your POV on

431:

Here's the deal: Let's just put in the occurences that are given in the Oxford English Dictionary. I think we can all agree that they are appropriate. But leave the other ones out. --

1330:(one of the five pillars of Knowledge (XXG)), that is not in itself a reason for deletion unless deletion would improve the article, and I don't think deletion would improve it. 1142:

While a Monster Mob is not technically an example of government, it is nonetheless one of the most prominent examples of an angry mob, and "angry mob" redirects to Ochlocracy. --

504:

I'm still expanding my limited exposure to Chinese history, but the Tianamen Square portion completely ignores the Red Guard, whose actions appear to consist mainly of mob rule.

815:

Could somebody have the decency to put a pronunciation in IPA for the word ochlocracy so we know how to pronounce it. A sound file would be nice too but its up to you guys. TY

614:

You are aware, of course, that Jefferson was closer to being a deist than a Christian. He wrote his own version of the New Testament removing all the "supernatural" elements.

717:"Ochlocracy" is in my Webster's dictionary. It's the current term (not just the ancient one) for a system of mob rule. So I agree with Wheeler. Surprised, Wheeler? :) — 637:

I find a lot of Americans are under the illusion that their country is founded on 'Christian principles" or that the Founding Fathers were Christian when neither is true.

1658:

Athenian democracy was about citizens at a time when slaves without citizen status were a reality. You could argue that there are still non-citizens in this day and age.

964: 1139:

I have cited at five noteworthy examples of and references to a Monster Mob, and I'm sure a survey of classic and contemporary horror films would produce many more.

1529:

I concur, there was a whole paragraph on Brexit that had no citations and tried to claim that thin majority wins in contested votes are an example of ochlocracy.

1428:. So far I've never used it, so I don't know how well it works in practice, especially if the rulebook is against you - though even then you can presumably quote 1812:

which serve as main title headers of Knowledge (XXG) entries. Most of those may not have a succinct word or term such as "mob rule", which can become their

140: 895:

History Angy Mobs have been prevelent scince biblical times, and there are many references to them in hisorical manuscrips. Even today in places such as

245: 1929: 130: 1944: 235: 386:

Historical use of a term can be posed as an arguement. Just about anything can be posed as an arguement, so your post makes no sense. Robert Claypool

1934: 1924: 1491:

Just was looking at these two articles and trying to figure out the difference to help improve them. Trying to start a discussion over at the

352:

And what is your authority on Knowledge (XXG), that your POV reigns on Knowledge (XXG)? Your user page is of no help whasoever. Robert Claypool

774: 106: 1949: 1939: 850: 1623:

variety in that), I am extremely skeptical this could be sourced. It's well said, but is basically op-ed writing not encyclopedic writing.

709:

uses the term in its dictionary. Really, I need to get Polybius and read him to find out what he really meant by it for he coined the term.

211: 1536: 1469: 1225: 758: 1693:

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

1827: 1645: 1272: 1204: 1520: 796: 393: 359: 1775: 1634: 1255: 314: 307:

Review my changes, and if it is objective enough, remove the tag. Of course it can always be edited again to make it more objective.

97: 58: 413:

Before going higher in the steps, Milnea Tudoreanu seems intent on deleting "Occurences of the word "Ochlocracy" from the article

520: 202: 163: 1176: 1424:

Sorry, I seem to have missed your above reply, LookingGlass. There is a form of mediation to resolve matters in this area, at

33: 1007: 1714:

was not notified in this MR. No prejudice against a new bold move, technical request, or full discussion on that move. --

1881:

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

1111: 1809: 980: 1684: 539:

I'm not taking Wheeler's side, but I cursory glance at the article suggests a division of the topic into two articles:

1759:"ochlocracy" is a word virtually no one has ever seen or will even be able to guess at the meaning of. The entry for 1495:

page. This talk page doesn't seem particularly active recently but wanted to see if anyone here wanted to join there.

914:, police or solders can easliy fight off and disperse a mob, due to their superior training,discipline and weapons. 839:

Seriously. In a way, it sometimes seems that way, and I'm not a burned out "this place sucks, I quit" user. ;-)

687:

is a horse, and a rather fine one at that. As fine a troll as you make, I think you made a better editor. Cheers,

375:

How can historical use of a term (any term) serve as a "refutation" for anything? I was under the impression that

1707: 1752: 289:

The Oxford English Dictionary has Ochlocracy not mob rule. This needs to be changed over to the classical term.

1229: 1038:

It seems to me that there is a link or overlap between Ochlocracy and the "social web". I've just come across

854: 1694: 1540: 1473: 762: 39: 21: 1649: 1276: 1208: 1823: 1572: 1484: 1464:

The ideas in second paragraph of the introductory text seems to be more or less straight out of Aristotle's

1848: 1813: 1532: 1259: 1251: 1221: 1200: 1099: 995: 976:, an Angry mob comprised of villegers with torches and pitchforks come to destroy the scientists lebrotory. 792: 754: 508: 476: 432: 389: 380: 355: 346: 318: 310: 1663: 1609: 1415: 1383: 1351: 1147: 1060: 800: 397: 363: 1080: 1843:

the other definitions are unlikely or non-notable. If it is decided it should stay then it should go to

1772: 1631: 210:

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

105:

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

1143: 1107: 329:

Trudenau is a democrat, he wants to cover over by censorship things that disagree with his orthodoxy.

1902: 1584: 516: 1816:

replacement, but when there is such a term, as in this case, it should be used as the main header. —

1515:

the term but full of what appears to be original research that doesn't even belong in this article.

1076: 1697:

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

1500: 1447: 1398: 1366: 1335: 1169: 1756: 1103: 710: 492: 484: 461: 454: 443: 423: 334: 290: 281:

well-organized or coherent dialectic other than repetition of self-interested versions of events.

1817: 1719: 1124: 1003: 973: 1644:

Demos are not "people", demos are "citizens", entitled people. Democracy is "rule of entitled".

678: 638: 631: 615: 697:

How do you break wikipedia's association of the term "mob rule" with the article "Ochlocracy"?

1862: 1659: 1605: 1411: 1379: 1347: 1056: 889: 778: 718: 590: 567:

I suggested something similar on my talk very recently, myself suggesting a move of this page

560: 297: 1896: 1620: 1318: 1292: 1767: 1626: 598: 1439: 1429: 1425: 1327: 1055:

most "skilled" in their use, the people who should control the use made of those things?

932: 826: 698: 512: 304: 89: 1434: 1158: 1496: 1443: 1394: 1362: 1331: 1162: 1025: 688: 670: 660: 656: 650: 623: 607: 579: 194: 83: 73: 52: 1918: 1715: 999: 874: 740: 586:

Wow, we actually agree on something. (Does this mean we are budding ochlogarchs? ;-)

475:

I'm not on Knowledge (XXG) every day, you know... sorry for keeping you waiting. --

1858: 1790: 1551:

Paragraph distinguishing ochlocracy, democracy, oligarchy, aristocracy and monarchy

1492: 816: 587: 557: 282: 1839:

The disambiguation page is unnecessary and should simply be overwritten. Besides

1808:

per nomination and Calidum. There are a number of Greek and/or Latin terms under

789:

There are some orthographical faults in the ancient Greek! - Be careful with it!

1760: 1580: 1568: 911: 646: 269: 1730: 840: 549: 414: 184: 79: 849:

It is. The alternative is an oligarchy like the Encyclopedia Britannica ;) --

1852: 1576: 1564: 1039: 866: 677:

I'm more interested in finding consensus than concensus (whatever that is).

684: 178: 157: 1844: 1840: 1739: 1734: 1711: 1592: 1051: 1047: 1043: 735: 575: 571: 543: 533: 102: 207: 1136:

because it has yet to be coined and introduced into popular lexicon.

921:

of a Mob, follow this simple rule: The IQ of the Smartest Member (SM)

669:

So how about splitting off this new page, now that we have consensus?

1596: 1588: 1024:

I think we should split this article into Ochlocracy and Angry Mob.--

206:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of 1710:

per Zxcvbnm's observation that the ambiguous title is capped, but

988: 900: 885: 904: 896: 453:

I am waiting for a response and a discussion from Mr. Tudorneau.

442:

I am waiting for a response and a discussion from Mr. Tudorneau.

1910: 1868: 1831: 1800: 1780: 1723: 1667: 1653: 1639: 1613: 1544: 1524: 1504: 1477: 1451: 1419: 1402: 1387: 1370: 1355: 1339: 1280: 1263: 1233: 1212: 1183: 1151: 1115: 1084: 1064: 1028: 1011: 858: 843: 829: 819: 804: 766: 524: 401: 367: 322: 984: 706: 418: 15: 1291:

I've tried to improve this section, to remove violations of

1901:

ed that it is a stub discussion of the topic regardless. —

918: 622:

He also made it a habit of F***ing his slaves, what of it?

751:

Or can we take off the neutrality? It seems fair to me.

1744: 1556: 935: 303:

I have edited the article to make it more objective--

1619:

There's so much original research (of more than one

1271:

is a subset of minority group controlling majority.

101:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 1218:You're exactly right. But no one here will care. 958: 296:Would not the term mobocracy be more pertinent?-- 1575:", and the rule of passion over reason, just as 884:Armament They can be armed with anything, from 1563:Ochlocracy ("rule of the general populace") is 1510:This article needs thorough review or rewriting 552:- for the Greek word and ancient ideas about it 8: 873:that as an idividual they could never do. A 987:you can trian Angry Mobs and arm them with 19: 1683:The following is a closed discussion of a 1530: 152: 47: 942: 934: 379:are normally used to refute things. -- 154: 49: 1517:2601:583:8205:9C20:4549:C62A:D5BC:6F8A 1048:http://davidgerard.co.uk/fsckhead.html 417:. I have taken two examples from the 7: 1702:The result of the move request was: 1046:" of Knowledge (XXG) there and then 835:Would Knowledge (XXG) be "Mob Rule"? 200:This article is within the scope of 115:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Politics 95:This article is within the scope of 907:there is continualy Mob Violence. 220:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject History 38:It is of interest to the following 1567:("rule of the people") spoiled by 1095:referencing is a little weasely. 630:Just thought you might not know:) 14: 1930:High-importance politics articles 1877:The discussion above is closed. 1706:with the disambiguation going to 1945:High-importance history articles 1583:("rule of the best") spoiled by 187: 177: 156: 82: 72: 51: 20: 1676:Requested move 21 November 2020 240:This article has been rated as 135:This article has been rated as 1234:04:21, 10 September 2014 (UTC) 604:Thomas Jefferson for President 1: 1935:WikiProject Politics articles 1925:Start-Class politics articles 1869:12:52, 22 November 2020 (UTC) 1832:05:03, 22 November 2020 (UTC) 1801:00:06, 22 November 2020 (UTC) 1781:17:11, 21 November 2020 (UTC) 1765: 1724:13:41, 28 November 2020 (UTC) 1668:03:55, 15 February 2024 (UTC) 1640:17:16, 21 November 2020 (UTC) 1624: 1614:00:08, 29 November 2016 (UTC) 1545:18:47, 9 September 2016 (UTC) 1371:22:34, 26 February 2013 (UTC) 402:00:50, 10 November 2004 (UTC) 368:00:53, 10 November 2004 (UTC) 214:and see a list of open tasks. 118:Template:WikiProject Politics 109:and see a list of open tasks. 1950:WikiProject History articles 1940:Start-Class history articles 1911:13:56, 16 January 2024 (UTC) 1837:Support first, oppose second 1810:Category:Forms of government 1654:13:10, 2 November 2023 (UTC) 1493:Tyranny of the Majority Talk 1356:11:20, 5 February 2013 (UTC) 1340:00:59, 4 February 2013 (UTC) 1281:13:07, 2 November 2023 (UTC) 1184:20:22, 3 December 2010 (UTC) 1152:17:42, 3 December 2010 (UTC) 1065:19:59, 3 February 2008 (UTC) 981:Command and Conquer Generals 929:the amount of Weapons (W) 830:09:46, 3 December 2005 (UTC) 820:18:08, 2 December 2005 (UTC) 747:Do the objections still hold 323:06:48, 25 October 2004 (UTC) 223:Template:WikiProject History 1287:Ochlocracy versus anarchism 877:ensuses. Angry mobs are an 859:10:51, 17 August 2021 (UTC) 578:". I second Ed's proposal. 546:- for the modern phenomenon 1966: 1116:17:20, 6 August 2009 (UTC) 1085:09:40, 19 April 2009 (UTC) 979:In the popular video game 805:17:37, 6 August 2005 (UTC) 767:06:13, 13 March 2005 (UTC) 246:project's importance scale 141:project's importance scale 1755:. The obtuse ivory-tower 1745:Mob rule (disambiguation) 1708:Mob Rule (disambiguation) 1525:18:54, 25 July 2016 (UTC) 1505:09:01, 25 June 2015 (UTC) 1420:08:43, 7 March 2013 (UTC) 1403:23:14, 6 March 2013 (UTC) 1388:20:11, 5 March 2013 (UTC) 1240:Comparison to "democracy" 1213:09:17, 9 March 2011 (UTC) 1029:02:53, 12 July 2006 (UTC) 1012:23:17, 30 June 2006 (UTC) 844:02:33, 1 March 2006 (UTC) 743:01:42, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC) 713:18:21, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC) 701:19:04, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC) 525:16:40, 14 July 2005 (UTC) 487:18:18, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC) 337:16:50, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC) 293:16:22, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC) 272:15:49, 17 Mar 2004 (UTC) 239: 172: 134: 67: 46: 1879:Please do not modify it. 1690:Please do not modify it. 1452:13:00, 15 May 2013 (UTC) 1264:16:15, 29 May 2012 (UTC) 925:by Number of people (N) 917:Mob IQ To work out the 785:20:15, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC) 725:20:14, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC) 681:16:41, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC) 673:14:18, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC) 653:14:14, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC) 641:04:38, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC) 634:03:29, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC) 618:23:52, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC) 593:20:32, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC) 563:18:58, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC) 495:01:17, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC) 479:10:45, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC) 457:19:34, 3 Nov 2004 (UTC) 446:19:18, 2 Nov 2004 (UTC) 426:18:11, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC) 383:10:45, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC) 349:10:45, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC) 300:22:20, 1 Oct 2004 (UTC) 285:16:36, 17 Mar 2004 (UTC) 1847:and that article go to 1573:tyranny of the majority 1485:Tyranny of the Majority 1478:12:33, 9 May 2014 (UTC) 1034:Fuckheads and dickheads 691:16:59, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC) 663:14:17, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC) 626:01:04, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC) 610:19:57, 2 Nov 2004 (UTC) 597:Actually I may be one, 582:20:08, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC) 464:21:36, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC) 435:10:45, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC) 1601: 960: 959:{\displaystyle SM/N-W} 28:This article is rated 1849:Mob Rule (video game) 1579:("rule of a few") is 1561: 1090:See Also: California? 1070:Moldavian ”democracy” 961: 659:, knock yerself out. 32:on Knowledge (XXG)'s 1483:Differences between 933: 98:WikiProject Politics 1751:– Patently obvious 1595:spoiled by lack of 1042:'s page and found " 645:You remind me of a 203:WikiProject History 1851:and possibly have 1190:Inaccurate history 956: 888:to baseball bats, 881:destrucive force. 781:Stevie is the man! 721:Stevie is the man! 34:content assessment 1866: 1830: 1547: 1535:comment added by 1254:comment added by 1224:comment added by 1203:comment added by 1119: 1102:comment added by 1015: 998:comment added by 890:Molotov cocktails 865:From the article 795:comment added by 757:comment added by 730:Mob rule blanking 556:Just my 2 cents. 528: 511:comment added by 392:comment added by 358:comment added by 313:comment added by 260: 259: 256: 255: 252: 251: 151: 150: 147: 146: 121:politics articles 1957: 1908: 1907: 1900: 1899: 1857: 1822: 1798: 1779: 1747: 1692: 1638: 1266: 1236: 1215: 1181: 1174: 1167: 1118: 1096: 1014: 992: 965: 963: 962: 957: 946: 807: 783: 769: 723: 599:Thomas Jefferson 527: 505: 477:Mihnea Tudoreanu 433:Mihnea Tudoreanu 404: 381:Mihnea Tudoreanu 370: 347:Mihnea Tudoreanu 325: 228: 227: 226:history articles 224: 221: 218: 197: 192: 191: 190: 181: 174: 173: 168: 160: 153: 123: 122: 119: 116: 113: 92: 87: 86: 76: 69: 68: 63: 55: 48: 31: 25: 24: 16: 1965: 1964: 1960: 1959: 1958: 1956: 1955: 1954: 1915: 1914: 1905: 1903: 1895: 1894: 1890: 1885: 1867: 1855:merged into it. 1791: 1753:WP:PRIMARYTOPIC 1743: 1688: 1678: 1553: 1512: 1489: 1462: 1435:reliable source 1289: 1249: 1242: 1219: 1198: 1192: 1177: 1170: 1163: 1129: 1123:The idea of a " 1097: 1092: 1072: 1036: 1022: 993: 983:As the faction 931: 930: 870: 851:212.239.229.161 837: 813: 790: 779: 752: 749: 732: 719: 649:I read once... 537: 506: 387: 353: 343:Knowledge (XXG) 308: 305:Robert Claypool 265: 242:High-importance 225: 222: 219: 216: 215: 193: 188: 186: 167:High‑importance 166: 137:High-importance 120: 117: 114: 111: 110: 90:Politics portal 88: 81: 62:High‑importance 61: 29: 12: 11: 5: 1963: 1961: 1953: 1952: 1947: 1942: 1937: 1932: 1927: 1917: 1916: 1889: 1886: 1884: 1883: 1873: 1872: 1871: 1856: 1834: 1803: 1764:significance. 1749: 1748: 1737: 1727: 1700: 1699: 1685:requested move 1679: 1677: 1674: 1673: 1672: 1671: 1670: 1642: 1552: 1549: 1537:148.75.193.112 1511: 1508: 1488: 1487:and Ochlocracy 1481: 1470:88.235.150.215 1461: 1458: 1457: 1456: 1455: 1454: 1407: 1406: 1405: 1375: 1374: 1373: 1288: 1285: 1284: 1283: 1248:populations. 1241: 1238: 1226:67.182.244.103 1191: 1188: 1187: 1186: 1128: 1121: 1091: 1088: 1071: 1068: 1035: 1032: 1021: 1018: 1017: 1016: 977: 955: 952: 949: 945: 941: 938: 869: 863: 862: 861: 836: 833: 812: 809: 787: 786: 759:67.175.244.224 748: 745: 731: 728: 727: 726: 695: 694: 693: 692: 667: 666: 665: 664: 628: 627: 612: 611: 584: 583: 554: 553: 547: 536: 531: 530: 529: 502: 501: 500: 499: 498: 497: 496: 473: 472: 471: 470: 469: 468: 467: 466: 465: 440: 439: 438: 437: 436: 411: 410: 409: 408: 407: 406: 405: 287: 286: 278: 264: 261: 258: 257: 254: 253: 250: 249: 238: 232: 231: 229: 212:the discussion 199: 198: 195:History portal 182: 170: 169: 161: 149: 148: 145: 144: 133: 127: 126: 124: 107:the discussion 94: 93: 77: 65: 64: 56: 44: 43: 37: 26: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 1962: 1951: 1948: 1946: 1943: 1941: 1938: 1936: 1933: 1931: 1928: 1926: 1923: 1922: 1920: 1913: 1912: 1909: 1898: 1887: 1882: 1880: 1875: 1874: 1870: 1864: 1860: 1854: 1850: 1846: 1842: 1838: 1835: 1833: 1829: 1825: 1821: 1820: 1819:Roman Spinner 1815: 1814:WP:COMMONNAME 1811: 1807: 1804: 1802: 1799: 1797: 1796: 1788: 1785: 1784: 1783: 1782: 1777: 1774: 1771: 1770: 1762: 1758: 1754: 1746: 1741: 1738: 1736: 1732: 1729: 1728: 1726: 1725: 1721: 1717: 1713: 1709: 1705: 1698: 1696: 1691: 1686: 1681: 1680: 1675: 1669: 1665: 1661: 1657: 1656: 1655: 1651: 1647: 1646:85.197.12.198 1643: 1641: 1636: 1633: 1630: 1629: 1622: 1618: 1617: 1616: 1615: 1611: 1607: 1600: 1598: 1594: 1590: 1586: 1582: 1578: 1574: 1570: 1566: 1560: 1558: 1550: 1548: 1546: 1542: 1538: 1534: 1527: 1526: 1522: 1518: 1509: 1507: 1506: 1502: 1498: 1494: 1486: 1482: 1480: 1479: 1475: 1471: 1467: 1459: 1453: 1449: 1445: 1441: 1436: 1431: 1427: 1423: 1422: 1421: 1417: 1413: 1408: 1404: 1400: 1396: 1391: 1390: 1389: 1385: 1381: 1376: 1372: 1368: 1364: 1359: 1358: 1357: 1353: 1349: 1344: 1343: 1342: 1341: 1337: 1333: 1329: 1323: 1320: 1315: 1311: 1307: 1303: 1299: 1296: 1294: 1286: 1282: 1278: 1274: 1273:85.197.12.198 1269: 1268: 1267: 1265: 1261: 1257: 1253: 1245: 1239: 1237: 1235: 1231: 1227: 1223: 1216: 1214: 1210: 1206: 1205:90.198.166.20 1202: 1195: 1189: 1185: 1182: 1180: 1175: 1173: 1168: 1166: 1160: 1156: 1155: 1154: 1153: 1149: 1145: 1140: 1137: 1133: 1126: 1122: 1120: 1117: 1113: 1109: 1105: 1101: 1089: 1087: 1086: 1082: 1078: 1069: 1067: 1066: 1062: 1058: 1053: 1049: 1045: 1041: 1033: 1031: 1030: 1027: 1019: 1013: 1009: 1005: 1001: 997: 990: 986: 982: 978: 975: 972:In the movie 971: 970: 969: 966: 953: 950: 947: 943: 939: 936: 928: 924: 920: 915: 913: 908: 906: 902: 898: 893: 891: 887: 882: 880: 876: 875:Mob mentality 868: 864: 860: 856: 852: 848: 847: 846: 845: 842: 834: 832: 831: 828: 822: 821: 818: 811:Pronunciation 810: 808: 806: 802: 798: 794: 784: 782: 776: 772: 771: 770: 768: 764: 760: 756: 746: 744: 742: 737: 729: 724: 722: 716: 715: 714: 712: 708: 702: 700: 690: 686: 683: 682: 680: 676: 675: 674: 672: 662: 658: 655: 654: 652: 648: 644: 643: 642: 640: 635: 633: 625: 621: 620: 619: 617: 609: 605: 600: 596: 595: 594: 592: 589: 581: 577: 573: 570: 566: 565: 564: 562: 559: 551: 548: 545: 542: 541: 540: 535: 532: 526: 522: 518: 514: 510: 503: 494: 489: 488: 486: 481: 480: 478: 474: 463: 459: 458: 456: 452: 451: 450: 449: 448: 447: 445: 441: 434: 430: 429: 428: 427: 425: 420: 416: 412: 403: 399: 395: 391: 385: 384: 382: 378: 374: 373: 372: 371: 369: 365: 361: 357: 351: 350: 348: 344: 340: 339: 338: 336: 330: 326: 324: 320: 316: 312: 306: 301: 299: 294: 292: 284: 279: 275: 274: 273: 271: 262: 247: 243: 237: 234: 233: 230: 213: 209: 205: 204: 196: 185: 183: 180: 176: 175: 171: 165: 162: 159: 155: 142: 138: 132: 129: 128: 125: 108: 104: 100: 99: 91: 85: 80: 78: 75: 71: 70: 66: 60: 57: 54: 50: 45: 41: 35: 27: 23: 18: 17: 1891: 1878: 1876: 1836: 1818: 1805: 1794: 1792: 1786: 1768: 1750: 1703: 1701: 1689: 1682: 1660:JamesPoulson 1627: 1606:JamesPoulson 1602: 1562: 1554: 1531:— Preceding 1528: 1513: 1490: 1465: 1463: 1412:LookingGlass 1380:LookingGlass 1348:LookingGlass 1324: 1316: 1312: 1308: 1304: 1300: 1297: 1290: 1250:— Preceding 1246: 1243: 1220:— Preceding 1217: 1196: 1193: 1178: 1171: 1164: 1144:MonkeyPundit 1141: 1138: 1134: 1130: 1093: 1073: 1057:LookingGlass 1037: 1023: 967: 926: 922: 916: 909: 894: 883: 878: 871: 838: 823: 814: 797:128.231.88.4 788: 780: 750: 733: 720: 703: 696: 668: 636: 629: 613: 603: 585: 568: 555: 538: 394:66.213.15.15 376: 360:66.213.15.15 342: 331: 327: 302: 298:Numerousfalx 295: 288: 266: 241: 201: 136: 96: 40:WikiProjects 1769:SMcCandlish 1761:Mob (crime) 1695:move review 1628:SMcCandlish 1581:aristocracy 1569:demagoguery 1256:79.12.95.19 1199:—Preceding 1125:Monster Mob 1098:—Preceding 994:—Preceding 974:Van Helsing 912:riot police 791:—Preceding 773:Go ahead. 753:—Preceding 647:Chick tract 507:—Preceding 491:occurences. 388:—Preceding 354:—Preceding 315:64.40.46.38 309:—Preceding 30:Start-class 1919:Categories 1731:Ochlocracy 1585:corruption 1460:Aristotle? 827:Flounderer 734:I changed 699:Hackwrench 657:Here ya go 591:(El Dunce) 588:--Uncle Ed 561:(El Dunce) 558:--Uncle Ed 550:ochlocracy 513:Hackwrench 415:Ochlocracy 270:till we *) 1853:Mob Rules 1828:contribs) 1789:per nom. 1577:oligarchy 1565:democracy 1497:XinJeisan 1444:Tlhslobus 1395:Tlhslobus 1363:Tlhslobus 1332:Tlhslobus 1077:Kalatorul 867:Angry mob 685:Concensus 377:arguments 1904:Llywelyn 1845:Mob Rule 1841:Mob Rule 1740:Mob rule 1735:Mob rule 1716:JHunterJ 1712:Mob Rule 1593:monarchy 1557:revision 1533:unsigned 1466:Politics 1252:unsigned 1222:unsigned 1201:unsigned 1112:contribs 1100:unsigned 1052:The Rule 1044:The Rule 1008:contribs 1000:Dfrg.msc 996:unsigned 879:extremly 793:unsigned 755:unsigned 736:Mob rule 576:Mob rule 572:Mob rule 544:mob rule 534:Mob rule 521:contribs 509:unsigned 390:unsigned 356:unsigned 311:unsigned 263:Untitled 112:Politics 103:politics 59:Politics 1897:WP:BIAS 1859:ZXCVBNM 1806:Support 1795:Calidum 1787:Support 1621:WP:AEIS 1589:tyranny 1319:WP:NPOV 1293:WP:NPOV 1104:Rekutyn 923:divided 817:Lincher 775:Be bold 711:WHEELER 493:WHEELER 485:WHEELER 462:WHEELER 455:WHEELER 444:WHEELER 424:WHEELER 335:WHEELER 291:WHEELER 283:Nudder1 244:on the 217:History 208:History 164:History 139:on the 1757:jargon 1597:virtue 1587:, and 1440:WP:DRR 1430:WP:IAR 1426:WP:DRR 1328:WP:IAR 989:AK-47s 886:AK-47s 483:voice. 36:scale. 1824:(talk 1704:moved 1159:WP:OR 1026:Taida 1020:Split 927:minus 901:Yemen 841:Bobak 679:AndyL 639:AndyL 632:AndyL 616:AndyL 345:. -- 1888:Stub 1863:TALK 1720:talk 1664:talk 1650:talk 1610:talk 1555:See 1541:talk 1521:talk 1501:talk 1474:talk 1448:talk 1416:talk 1399:talk 1384:talk 1367:talk 1352:talk 1336:talk 1277:talk 1260:talk 1230:talk 1209:talk 1157:See 1148:talk 1108:talk 1081:talk 1061:talk 1040:Doug 1004:talk 905:Togo 903:and 897:Iraq 855:talk 801:talk 777:. — 763:talk 741:Deco 606:... 517:talk 398:talk 364:talk 319:talk 236:High 131:High 1793:-- 1778:😼 1637:😼 1591:is 1571:, " 1317:5) 1179:Dat 1172:Wuz 1165:Wuh 985:GLA 707:OED 689:Sam 671:Sam 661:Sam 651:Sam 624:Sam 608:Sam 580:Sam 419:OED 1921:: 1906:II 1826:• 1766:— 1742:→ 1733:→ 1722:) 1687:. 1666:) 1652:) 1625:— 1612:) 1604:-- 1559:. 1543:) 1523:) 1503:) 1476:) 1450:) 1442:. 1418:) 1401:) 1386:) 1369:) 1354:) 1338:) 1279:) 1262:) 1232:) 1211:) 1161:. 1150:) 1114:) 1110:• 1083:) 1075:-- 1063:) 1010:) 1006:• 951:− 919:IQ 899:, 857:) 803:) 765:) 569:to 523:) 519:• 400:) 366:) 321:) 1865:) 1861:( 1776:¢ 1773:☏ 1718:( 1662:( 1648:( 1635:¢ 1632:☏ 1608:( 1599:. 1539:( 1519:( 1499:( 1472:( 1446:( 1414:( 1397:( 1382:( 1365:( 1350:( 1334:( 1275:( 1258:( 1228:( 1207:( 1146:( 1127:" 1106:( 1079:( 1059:( 1002:( 991:. 954:W 948:N 944:/ 940:M 937:S 853:( 799:( 761:( 515:( 396:( 362:( 317:( 248:. 143:. 42::

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

Index