1211:
with this group of people for about 3 months when I realized that I was not sure what Crow's gender was. Few people ever used pronouns, preferring to simply use the nickname Crow. Crow did not dress in an especially gender identifying way usually jeans and baggy t-shirts with a modest amount make up which would not be noticed as makeup by anyone not looking closely. When pronouns were used he and she were used in about the same frequency. I finally did discover Crow's gender from a parking ticket that had Eir full name on it which was
Christopher. He, said he did not mind being called he or she and did not identify as transgender but as sort of androgenyous and indifferent to gender.
1163:
the "they"-derived forms. I also must confess that I was initially rather sceptical, too; especially since German is my native tounge, where the need for gender-neutral pronouns is less pronounced, since it retaines a grammatical gender. Then again, there are people who just do not like to be called either "he" or "she", and plain politeness demands than one does not give offense where it can be avoided. Besides, there is some debate over whether the sigular "they" can be used when speaking about a particular person of unknown gender. (As in "The IP that edited
644:
623:
1201:
contender for its seat out of all the synthetic pronouns. My money is on the eventual victory of indefinite, a.k.a. singular, "they", but that's another argument. And I do believe that conscious decisions about usage, based on local pressures, are in fact a major force in the evolution of a language (howbeit never by fiat, and never in the 'once and for all' sense, doubtless a disappointment to national language academies and hard-line
Esperanto campaigners); but that's another argument too.
1090:... Anyway, "er" isn't even a Spivak pronoun, and for "e" there is the newer alternative, which has been coined however not because of hearing problems, but to bring it in line with the forms of "they" from which they derive. I would assume that if you are as hard of hearing (as you state) as you are of writing and reading (as you demonstrate), anybody talking to you might already have adaped to the fact that maybe you need a bit more explanation then usual.
268:
247:
179:
741:
342:
158:
863:
22:
74:
1739:
shifty or somehow multiple. Hence the pluralization, but I think it would be "themself", as it does actually refer to one person (except when it does not, another point for criticism), and the generality is already covered by the 'they' part. But I have no sources for any of this, just experience, so it could not be currently incorporated in either the Spivak or singular they articles.
53:
84:
1284:. As such they are probably going to becomeincreasingly common in other science fiction too. Orion's Arm seems to use the shorter e form. I have myself used e form many times in short stories (not publicly available yet). Since I'm Finnish I'm used to gender-neutral pronouns and often forget that English has gender-specific ones - usually resulting in embarrassment on my part.
1118:
carefull, too. Anything related to sex/gender, religion and politics attracts so many trolls and idiots that sloppy questions like yours will most likely to be understood to be either the one or the other. And since the people who work on or watch such articles most likely had too many encounters with both sorts, the responses will be accordingly, too. We're all just human. --
2439:
2090:(copied from a user page comment) "Good job with the information you added. However, I think that you should either call your edit The Online Use of Spivak Pronouns because you only speak about people that use it when surfing the net or maintain the title but add some more details about the Spivak Pronouns in general.
1454:" is absurd because there was/is then no plural of "they"—their paradigms liv in two alternate universes—there are already fair solutions to the third-person singular pronouns so that no one needs Spivak pronouns: one and who. As these are rarere pronouns, one would need to fill out their declensions:
2479:
The state of this article seems wildly out of touch with the opening and assumed subject from the title. If the article is just about the usage of terms on a specific internet community, which itself seems a little trivial, then it doesn't need a running list of similar terms used throughout the last
1224:
I'm in the "Huh?" catagory but I'll try to keep an open mind. Being an encyclopedia and reflecting commonly held opinion, I don't think Spivak should be presented in a way that makes it seem accepted or established. This should probably be associated more closely with Peter Suber's page, maybe even
1132:
usually take a view of attempts to artificially modify any language as silly—this includes the whole of the French academy—especially in cases where the communication power of the language is restricted, damaged, or reduced for purely semantic or politically correct reasons. So, I had that affecting
1127:
After reading your user page and the areas of wikipedia that you edit I somewhat assumed that if you were prematurely hostile there was a good explanation. I admit that in all honesty the tone of my original question was probably too derisive (I was operating on about 10 hours of sleep for the three
921:
has been in use for centuries. Any way of framing this issue that calls the objective quality of this into question--"claim," "truly or falsely," "hypothetically"--is grossly misleading. And a departure from the real issue: whether historical usage should determine the appropriateness of contemporary
2050:
As a friendly comment, I think you need to add more explanations and some examples that can support your sentence, "This contact with genderless pronouns in virtual communities is sometimes a person's first experience and experimentation with genderqueer or trans presentation." Besides, if you don't
1939:
I would like to use sex-neutral language. But I find "she or he" and "his/her" to be barbaric constructions, and I cannot always arrange to use plurals and hide behind "they" and "them". My solution is to use "she" and "her" as generic pronouns; this is not sex-neutral, but it is compensatory. If we
2115:
I came here to
Knowledge (XXG) looking for the 2nd person, singular and plural forms. I'll bet I'm not the only one. Now I have to look somewhere else. The least that an article on Spivak pronouns can include is a complete table of the pronouns in question. That's probably the main reason why folks
1723:
No; this is a grammar singular, not a count of persons singular. For a single person, it would be "E loves eirself" or "Ey loves emself", here we have multiple people in the "they" -- although it acts like a singular (there's one group called "they") -- hence "They love themselves". Or so I'm told.
1190:
For what it's worth, I started using the Spivak pronouns in most if not all of my schoolwork starting in my second year of university or so, and plan to continue using them. I usually put an explanatory footnote on the first use, otherwise it might look like a typographical error. The response from
1162:
Well, real life does not only occur on speech, but also in writing, and there is much less room for misunderstanding there. Also, I think the "ey" is better to use (and more used, or at least more recently more used) than the "e" anyway, if only because it brings the form into line with the rest of
1073:
Well they don't really sound different enough to me to differentiate themselves and achieve gender neutrality. I mean when you say it doe Er really sound that different from Her? Especially in a sentence? Doe E sound different form He. I would just assume the person had a horrible accent or did
1210:
Now that I think about it I had a chance at one time to make actual use of such a thing as this in real speech though no one I was around at the time did. I was part of a group of friends that was very diverse and there was one person in the group who went by the name Crow. I had been hanging out
1167:
right now ...") I have not used them in speech, simply because I get rather less opportunity to speak
English these days, but in writing, even in IRC or similar direct communication, I must say that there seem to be few problems understanding them. I also had a good look at the alternatives, and I
1738:
I think the singular they is better described by it's (possessive) other moniker, indefinite they. Since the gender of the person being referenced is unknown or unclear (in binary terms), 'they' concludes (a point for criticism) the identity of the person is not defined, is indefinite, is hazy or
1103:
I was actually asking an honest question. Your insults are uncalled for. As for my sloppy spelling in my original post I only corrected them because I though they actually bothered you and not that you were taking delight in them as a means of insulting someone who finds the concept strange and
1093:
However, all the gender neutral pronouns will need some explanations when they are used with people who have never heard of that particular concept, or that particular set. Except for the old "e" form none of them could be confused with any other pronoun, though, unless somebody is a very sloppy
913:
Edited "Supporters of the singular they claim, truly or falsely, that the form has been in use for centuries, and thus it is hypothetically hardly a recent corruption of proper speech" to read "Supporters of the singular they argue that the form has been in use for centuries and thus is hardly a
2408:). Does that qualify as any kind of authoritative source? I was expecting a more substantial discussion or argument at the link. I could write my opinion on a chalk board, take a photo of it, put it online and then link to it a source in Knowledge (XXG), too. Would that qualify for a citation?
1294:
Chinese is also a language without any pronouns with genders. Thus, I have heard
Chinese speakers of English as a Second Language say things like, "I picked up Mary's coat and handed him to it," or "I picked up Mary's coat and handed him to her." Finnish is supposed to be related to some Asian
1117:
I actually asked a few people for their opinion on what they thought of your edits, and the results were not overy optimistic, either. If your edits were made in good faith, which seems likely when one sees what other edits you did tonight, then I must appologise - nevertheless, you have to be
1753:
The point is that it is saying it's multiple people; Robin and
Charlie love themselves, together, refered to together as one, they love themself; vs. Robin loving himself, Charlie loving herself. So they love themself, like E loves eirself. I'm going to go try to become unconfused myself now.
1200:
I came across them in games of Nomic (not surprising, given the close connection to Peter Suber). And yes, I understood both their meaning and their motivation almost at once, purely from context. If generic "he" is to be displaced from favor, the Spivak set is IMO just about the only serious
1168:
simply prefered the Spivak pronouns because they sound less outlandish than the others and are derived from an already existing set of words, making them easier to understand. But I would agree that changing language for political reasons can, and on occasions is simply overdone. --
1191:
my professors was usually positive, although one or two reacted with distaste. For myself, I first came across them in Peter Suber's book (also academic writing). Notwithstanding the sexist-usage debate, (a few) people do use them. Try them out sometime.
1400:
I don't think they are used in
Calculus on Manifolds, for the reason you state. That was also one of Spivak's earliest books, so he may not have adopted the system at that time. I don't remember them in the Differential Geometry series either. They
1323:
In
English, it is common to say something like "I am Dr. Johnson's patient," or "I am Professor Schmidt's student." There is no implication of ownership here. Far from it. Likewise, "Dr. Johnson is my doctor does not imply the ownership of another
759:
1395:
Are we sure they were used in "Calculus on
Manifolds"? I haven't read the entire book lately, but I can't find any third-person personal pronouns at all, except for a few instances of "he" and "his" to refer to male mathematicians.
283:
aims to improve the quality of articles dealing with gender studies and to remove systematic gender bias from
Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate in the project, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the
1652:
To me, the intro to this article gives the impression that these pronouns are in general everyday use by "some people", and that "some" is not a vanishingly small number. Is that really true? Matt 01:09, 23 July 2007 (UTC).
1369:
The remark "very rare compared to other solutions" is contained in all or most articles about alternative pronouns, and as such not very helpful. Could whoever wrote this please specify what ey means by "other solutions"?
1246:
since a group of people do not share the same face. Second seeing as I am confused by this it was probably an honest edit and so not vandalism (even if it was wrong which, it may be though I am still curious as to why).
1944:
So, an online edition of this book does not use Spivak pronouns, and according to this preface, neither does the 1990 print edition. Can someone verify whether an edition of this book exists with Spivak pronouns? ~
1149:. In any event you are correct I should have checked the tone of my original post, and I still wonder about the practicality of using these (or any other gender-neutral pronouns) in context of real life examples.
229:
1042:
Has anyone ever actually used these anywhere and had anyone understand them? Other than the creator. Incidentally they don't seem to imply no gender to mu they just sound like a really bad accent.
415:
518:
1780:
Professor of Linguistics at UCLA circa 1975 proposed use of "e" rather than he or she as a gender neutral pronoun to replace he or she. His name was Mc** Can someone remember his full name?
140:
2007:
The use of Elverson or Everson is inconsistent. I can't seem to find a reputable source to confirm which is correct. Could someone please research this and make the name consistent at
1987:
Another source would be ideal. Unfortunately, since Michael died earlier this year, he's no longer around to authenticate that post, or tell us if Professor MacKay was his source. ~
2073:
Thanks for the feedback! "Genderqueer" has an article on Knowledge (XXG) and will be linked to it. "Trans presentation" can also be linked to a relevant article for clarification. (
2447:
2508:
130:
1972:, who never made another edit, nor confirmed his identity. This obviously isn't a reliable source, so it'd be good to replace this with something more reputable, if we could. --
390:
828:
694:
365:
559:
106:
2563:
2513:
2503:
1435:
I cleaned it up a little. Criticisms are by their nature not very NPOV, and this whole article needs cites anyway, but it offers the opinions with a more reasoned voice.
595:
440:
319:
2553:
2523:
948:
Would it be appropriate to list here published books that use the Spivak pronouns? I first found out about them myself from some books on legal philosophy, for example.
790:
684:
219:
2318:
2314:
2300:
2210:
2206:
2192:
2538:
309:
2558:
2548:
2528:
2518:
777:
660:
195:
97:
58:
804:
773:
2543:
2533:
1319:"? I don't like the implication of the person making the statement (on the assumption that a being with sentience is producing said sentance) being owned.
815:
361:
1053:
Well, I've used the Spivak pronouns, as mood strikes me. Only online however. I believe others understood, I haven't seen any "Huh?? Ey? Em?! Eir?!" --
1624:
1603:
Not U as in lazy spelling of "you" but as in "upper-class" - see the link. Relevance is the "Trivia" section of the article, hence the section title. --
2480:
two hundred years. I'm not sure of a more appropriate article that the table describing said terms and the history section could be moved to however.
651:
628:
408:
186:
163:
1954:
917:
It is objectively true (as in, readily documented in texts the historical quality of which cannot be disputed by any sane person) that the singular
1295:
languages, rather than to European ones. I wonder about this "gender-free pronouns" issue in Estonian, which is supposed to be related to Finnish.
285:
275:
252:
1940:
do this for a few centuries, then we can switch back. Or perhaps by then English will have acquired an elegant set of neutral personal pronouns.
433:
2415:
1686:
These pronouns are obscure as hell, used by only an activist clique. To say they've been "popularized" is preposterous - they've never been
1225:
moved entirely to it. I really do not think Spivak should be on the regular grammer pages at all, except maybe as a link to invented words.
2431:
929:
2405:
766:
422:
1931:
I verified that Spivak's "The Joy of TeX" (1986 edition) and Shapiro's "Doom Patrols" do use Spivak pronouns, but when I checked Suber's
2123:
2058:
1787:
1328:
1299:
897:
504:
1405:
almost definitely in the Joy of TeX (I only say "almost" because I don't have a copy to check, but I remember them pretty clearly).
881:
469:
2296:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
873:
1964:
We've got the article quoting Spivak saying how "the original pronoun set was not created by me", but the only source for this is
1242:
I am wondering a few things. First why is the change wrong? In the case of they and Eir meaning plural they shouldn't it be face
1133:
the tone of my original post and also the fact that I am not sure that these specific choices of pronouns sound that genderless.
1060:
Yes, they have been used, yes, they have been understood. Maybe not by people, though, who already have a lousy accent when they
784:
753:
511:
354:
33:
1636:
1505:
I always shied away from using Spivak pronouns, because I want to be understood by as many readers as possible. If we wrote "
397:
2463:
2096:
Thanks for that feedback! I hadn't even noticed the online bias, so that is really helpful. I'll be sure to change that.
545:
1472:
And of course there are reasons why perfectly acceptable shifts in English pronoun usage (like the semantically singular
2361:
1691:
963:
89:
1657:
I use them :) and have seen them used in wikipedia - but yes, I think you could be right with the vanishingly small -
1897:
The article differentiates between new and old forms, but never says when the new form arose or who was behind it. —
1354:
Yes - see the 'Games' section of that page. Splat as a gender looks like *e,h*,h*,h*s,h*self,*E,H*,H*,H*s,H*self. --
1104:
unnecessary. I have some other thoughts on the issue but I suppose this is not the right place for discussing them.
383:
1468:
Then again there are reasons why some word-forms died out. (dumb people!) -lysdexia 03:05, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
1425:"The real problem is the arbitrary acceptance of completely untenable prescriptive grammar" -- how is that NPOV? --
877:
577:
2419:
2035:
1992:
1950:
1914:
1880:
1827:
486:
2317:
to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
2209:
to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
2101:
500:
2286:
1803:
933:
552:
280:
39:
21:
2127:
2116:
navigate to this Knowledge (XXG) article, to find out what the pronouns are and what their proper usage is.
1791:
2352:
2278:
2154:
2062:
2051:
mind, please give us brief definitions of "genderqueen" and "trans presentation". Thanks and great job! =)
1546:
1332:
1303:
891:
2411:
2119:
2054:
1818:
circa 1977. This seems a likely candidate for Spivak's source, given his capitalization of the pronouns in
1783:
1621:
Is it just me, or are these basically the stereotypical pronounciations of pronouns by the UK's citizenry?
1007:
951:
925:
458:
2274:
1426:
2097:
1675:
I changed the intro to make it clear that they are not in widespread use. Matt 13:17, 29 July 2007 (UTC).
525:
2336:
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
2324:
2248:
2228:
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
2216:
2078:
1969:
1857:
1744:
887:
659:
on Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
194:
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
2406:
https://web.archive.org/web/20140202215940/http://www.aetherlumina.com/gnp/technical.html#declensiongnp
2277:. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit
2153:. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit
1476:) are continually condemned and ridiculous alternatives proposed. (The answer is, again, dumb people!)
2450:
until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. —
2074:
1838:
1436:
643:
622:
2485:
2183:
2031:
1988:
1946:
1910:
1876:
1823:
1759:
1729:
102:
1612:
U is the interjection one makes when frisky, misspellen as "ooh". -lysdexia 22:49, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
447:
372:
1662:
1585:
1555:
I created a template to do just that. {{genderneutral|ey}}, {{genderneutral|eirs}}, ... will yield
1477:
531:
1604:
1464:
Who whomself is whom, has whoses, and does whose. Qui quoi-mĂŞme est quoi, a quiens, et fait quen.
1164:
480:
2020:
1977:
1713:
1632:
1570:
1569:, ... . Please feel free to use in talk pages. Try also hovering with the mouse over the word! —
1543:
1538:", would you understand this? Since people tend to recognize what they know, everybody would see
2321:
before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template
2213:
before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template
566:
2337:
2229:
2457:
1935:
of "The Paradox of Self-Amendment", the "Preface to the Print Edition" reproduced there says:
1909:
Ironically, the "new" form predates the "old" form. I updated the article to address this. ~
797:
538:
2244:
1740:
1054:
959:
496:
191:
2344:
2236:
2111:
A table including 1st person, 2nd person, and 3rd person, singular and plural would be nice
2481:
1926:
1870:
1755:
1725:
1381:
1371:
1266:
1261:
Spivak pronouns are singular, not plural, so "eir face" refers to one person's face. The
1461:
One omeself is ome, has onese, and does one's. On eun-mĂŞme est eun, a oiens, et fait Ĺ“n
2303:, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by
2270:
2195:, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by
2146:
2008:
1658:
1592:
No more than "Nite", and I especially don't see the relevance of the linked article. --
1285:
1252:
1226:
1216:
1154:
1109:
1079:
1047:
740:
341:
2343:
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
2310:
2235:
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
2202:
2497:
2016:
1973:
1709:
1705:
1687:
1628:
1593:
1458:
It imself is im, has itses, and does its. Ça çoi-même est çoi, a çiens, et fait çen.
1451:
1410:
1262:
491:
267:
246:
2451:
1355:
1281:
1202:
1030:
1018:
I believe I've seen it capitalized elsewhere, but I can't find that anything now. -
656:
178:
157:
1563:
1556:
1192:
955:
1485:
What are the perfectly acceptable shifts? -lysdexia 05:24, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
2443:
2309:. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
2201:. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
1932:
1898:
1169:
1119:
1095:
1065:
1019:
999:
583:
79:
1307:
1288:
872:
to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include
1248:
1212:
1150:
1105:
1075:
1043:
190:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to the
83:
2287:
https://web.archive.org/web/20130625120121/http://www.aetherlumina.com/gnp/
1708:
in the table of pronouns shouldn't the reflexive be 'They love themself'?
1688:
popular (regarded with favor, approval, or affection by people in general)
1584:
Granted it's mostly used in cryptic crossword clues nowadays, but doesn't
1406:
1347:
2438:
1927:
Suber's "The Paradox of Self-Amendment" seems not to use Spivak pronouns
73:
52:
2489:
2469:
2423:
2366:
2256:
2131:
2105:
2082:
2066:
2039:
2024:
1996:
1981:
1918:
1901:
1884:
1831:
1795:
1763:
1748:
1733:
1717:
1694:
1666:
1640:
1607:
1596:
1573:
1549:
1480:
1439:
1429:
1414:
1384:
1374:
1358:
1336:
1269:
1255:
1229:
1219:
1205:
1195:
1172:
1157:
1122:
1112:
1098:
1082:
1068:
1011:
967:
937:
819:
822:
to FA; Tag all articles you find with {{WikiProject Internet culture}}
2448:
Knowledge (XXG):Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 July 21#Neopronoun
2290:
2162:
1094:
speaker, and in writing they are even more obviously different. --
1806:
by Dennis Barron, psychologist Donald G. MacKay of UCLA proposed
1029:, all right. Never saw it thus. Nor, seemingly, has anyone else.
1026:
857:
15:
1141:
in a number of English accents (or speeds) the same goes for
2168:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the
1380:
No reply, so I'll just delete it. It was unsourced, anyway.
1839:"Psychology, Prescriptive Grammar, and the Pronoun Problem"
1804:
The Epicene Pronouns - A Chronology of the Word that Failed
2281:
for additional information. I made the following changes:
2157:
for additional information. I made the following changes:
1128:
previous days combined). All other things being equal I
870:
contributor may be personally or professionally connected
2150:
1965:
1240:
1088:
729:
724:
719:
714:
519:
Knowledge (XXG) requested photographs of gender studies
1960:
Michael Spivak quote sourced to a Knowledge (XXG) edit
2442:
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect
2385:, because the latter would be pronounced the same as
829:
Category:Internet culture articles needing attention
655:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
101:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
2313:using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
2205:using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
1588:count as a one-letter word? - Mikes42 2006-11-26
1313:Possessive pronoun implying ownership of a person
791:Category:Internet culture articles needing images
115:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Constructed languages
1937:
1317:Why is this phrased as "I am <whoever's: -->
2404:The citation here is to one person’s opinion (
2299:This message was posted before February 2018.
2191:This message was posted before February 2018.
1239:Regarding the most recent revert on the page
8:
2509:Low-importance constructed language articles
2093:Antzela (talk) 03:27, 10 August 2014 (UTC)"
760:View all requested internet culture articles
669:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Internet culture
204:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject English Language
900:) This user has contributed to the article.
816:Category:Internet self-classification codes
19:
2409:
2269:I have just modified one external link on
2145:I have just modified one external link on
2117:
1318:"? Can't it be "This is <whoever's: -->
1087:Nice try, correcting your old comment now
1005:
949:
923:
748:Here are some tasks awaiting attention:
702:
617:
366:Unknown-importance Gender studies articles
349:Here are some tasks awaiting attention:
327:
294:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Gender studies
241:
152:
118:Template:WikiProject Constructed languages
47:
2564:Articles edited by connected contributors
2514:WikiProject constructed language articles
2504:Start-Class constructed language articles
1346:Is the use of this term meant to lead to
982:, is the use of mid-phrase upper-casing (
596:Gender studies articles needing attention
441:Gender studies articles needing infoboxes
2554:Low-importance Internet culture articles
2524:Low-importance English Language articles
619:
243:
154:
49:
2539:Mid-importance Gender studies articles
1866:
1855:
1137:especially sounds almost identical to
2559:WikiProject Internet culture articles
2549:Start-Class Internet culture articles
2529:WikiProject English Language articles
2519:Start-Class English Language articles
2180:to let others know (documentation at
1265:similarly refers to a single person.
914:recent corruption of proper speech."
672:Template:WikiProject Internet culture
207:Template:WikiProject English Language
7:
2381:has been argued to be preferable to
2030:Corrected the one "Everson" typo. ~
649:This article is within the scope of
184:This article is within the scope of
95:This article is within the scope of
2544:WikiProject Gender studies articles
2534:Start-Class Gender studies articles
1280:Spivak pronouns are widely used in
706:WikiProject Internet culture To-do:
297:Template:WikiProject Gender studies
38:It is of interest to the following
1966:an edit to Knowledge (XXG) in 2006
362:Unassessed Gender studies articles
14:
2273:. Please take a moment to review
2149:. Please take a moment to review
505:Women's education in Saudi Arabia
98:WikiProject Constructed languages
2437:
2291:http://www.aetherlumina.com/gnp/
2163:http://www.aetherlumina.com/gnp/
861:
739:
642:
621:
340:
266:
245:
177:
156:
82:
72:
51:
20:
2446:. The discussion will occur at
2161:Corrected formatting/usage for
1446:another criticism from lysdexia
689:This article has been rated as
314:This article has been rated as
224:This article has been rated as
135:This article has been rated as
868:The following Knowledge (XXG)
1:
2490:00:09, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
2040:23:43, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
2025:21:12, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
1796:13:43, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
1550:19:51, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
1440:22:09, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
1375:22:50, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
663:and see a list of open tasks.
198:and see a list of open tasks.
121:constructed language articles
109:and see a list of open tasks.
2367:20:57, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
1997:02:42, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
1982:10:18, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
1955:17:24, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
1919:06:08, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
1893:No history of the "new" form
1885:06:23, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
1832:06:17, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
1764:22:30, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
1749:21:25, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
1641:05:53, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
1597:00:51, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
1574:06:18, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
1359:22:48, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
1289:13:51, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
1270:19:48, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
652:WikiProject Internet culture
187:WikiProject English Language
90:Constructed languages portal
2424:22:43, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
2106:17:30, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
1481:21:20, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
1385:22:25, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
1365:compared to other solutions
1337:22:30, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
1308:22:27, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
2580:
2330:(last update: 5 June 2024)
2266:Hello fellow Wikipedians,
2222:(last update: 5 June 2024)
2142:Hello fellow Wikipedians,
2132:12:00, 18 March 2016 (UTC)
2083:18:04, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
2067:07:36, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
2046:Spivak Pronouns and Gender
1837:MacKay, Donald G. (1980).
1734:18:27, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
1718:18:11, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
1648:Intro could be misleading?
1497:Question to those "in the
968:23:28, 13 April 2004 (UTC)
695:project's importance scale
320:project's importance scale
276:WikiProject Gender studies
141:project's importance scale
2470:00:04, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
2257:21:40, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
1902:09:38, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
1667:05:10, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
1608:23:54, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
1542:eir preferred pronoun. —
1499:
1430:12:40, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
1415:04:06, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
1230:06:46, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
1057:08:55, Jun 24, 2005 (UTC)
938:13:09, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
701:
688:
675:Internet culture articles
637:
487:Brannon Masculinity Scale
326:
313:
261:
223:
210:English Language articles
172:
134:
67:
46:
2432:Redirects for discussion
2389:in those contexts where
1695:20:41, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
1256:05:36, 24 May 2005 (UTC)
1220:05:32, 24 May 2005 (UTC)
1206:06:27, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
1196:09:52, 12 May 2005 (UTC)
1173:09:11, 12 May 2005 (UTC)
1158:03:48, 12 May 2005 (UTC)
1123:10:23, 11 May 2005 (UTC)
1113:02:54, 11 May 2005 (UTC)
1099:17:09, 10 May 2005 (UTC)
1083:10:16, 10 May 2005 (UTC)
1069:08:38, 10 May 2005 (UTC)
1033:21:48, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
1012:23:32, 12 May 2004 (UTC)
998:) deliberate or a tyop?
501:Michael Kaufman (author)
273:This article is part of
2430:"Neopronoun" listed at
2262:External links modified
2138:External links modified
1692:The Dissident Aggressor
1450:Besides the fact that "
1022:03:26, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)
300:Gender studies articles
1942:
803:All stubs are located
28:This article is rated
1846:American Psychologist
1627:comment was added by
1391:Calculus on Manifolds
882:neutral point of view
772:Pick an article from
416:/Sexuality and gender
288:for more information.
112:Constructed languages
103:constructed languages
59:Constructed languages
32:on Knowledge (XXG)'s
2311:regular verification
2203:regular verification
2003:Elverson Or Everson?
980:Spivak (alternative)
874:conflict of interest
546:Gender studies stubs
2401:loses its h sound.
2372:“has been argued” …
2301:After February 2018
2193:After February 2018
2172:parameter below to
1275:
532:History of feminism
2355:InternetArchiveBot
2306:InternetArchiveBot
2198:InternetArchiveBot
1970:User:Michaelspivak
1865:Unknown parameter
1700:They Love themself
1074:not know English.
909:"Supporters Claim"
34:content assessment
2426:
2414:comment added by
2331:
2255:
2223:
2134:
2122:comment added by
2057:comment added by
1786:comment added by
1774:Name of professor
1704:In the entry for
1644:
1492:How about (th)em?
1014:
970:
954:comment added by
940:
928:comment added by
906:
905:
856:
855:
852:
851:
848:
847:
844:
843:
840:
839:
818:(!?); Try to get
616:
615:
612:
611:
608:
607:
604:
603:
240:
239:
236:
235:
151:
150:
147:
146:
2571:
2441:
2365:
2356:
2329:
2328:
2307:
2251:
2250:Talk to my owner
2246:
2221:
2220:
2199:
2187:
2069:
1874:
1868:
1863:
1861:
1853:
1843:
1798:
1622:
1568:
1566:
1561:
1559:
1541:
1523:
1516:
1509:
1025:I reckon it's a
865:
864:
858:
754:Article requests
743:
736:
735:
703:
677:
676:
673:
670:
667:
666:Internet culture
657:internet culture
646:
639:
638:
633:
629:Internet culture
625:
618:
497:Media and gender
409:Deletion sorting
344:
337:
336:
328:
302:
301:
298:
295:
292:
270:
263:
262:
257:
249:
242:
230:importance scale
212:
211:
208:
205:
202:
201:English Language
192:English language
181:
174:
173:
168:
164:English Language
160:
153:
123:
122:
119:
116:
113:
92:
87:
86:
76:
69:
68:
63:
55:
48:
31:
25:
24:
16:
2579:
2578:
2574:
2573:
2572:
2570:
2569:
2568:
2494:
2493:
2477:
2435:
2416:131.215.226.107
2374:
2359:
2354:
2322:
2315:have permission
2305:
2279:this simple FaQ
2264:
2254:
2249:
2214:
2207:have permission
2197:
2181:
2155:this simple FaQ
2140:
2113:
2052:
2048:
2032:Robin Lionheart
2005:
1989:Robin Lionheart
1962:
1947:Robin Lionheart
1929:
1911:Robin Lionheart
1895:
1877:Robin Lionheart
1864:
1854:
1841:
1836:
1824:Robin Lionheart
1781:
1776:
1702:
1684:
1650:
1623:—The preceding
1619:
1582:
1564:
1557:
1539:
1521:
1514:
1507:
1494:
1448:
1423:
1393:
1367:
1344:
1315:
1278:
1237:
1040:
976:
946:
944:Published books
911:
862:
836:
734:
674:
671:
668:
665:
664:
631:
600:
590:Needs attention
299:
296:
293:
290:
289:
255:
209:
206:
203:
200:
199:
166:
120:
117:
114:
111:
110:
88:
81:
61:
29:
12:
11:
5:
2577:
2575:
2567:
2566:
2561:
2556:
2551:
2546:
2541:
2536:
2531:
2526:
2521:
2516:
2511:
2506:
2496:
2495:
2476:
2473:
2434:
2428:
2403:
2402:
2373:
2370:
2349:
2348:
2341:
2294:
2293:
2285:Added archive
2271:Spivak pronoun
2263:
2260:
2247:
2241:
2240:
2233:
2166:
2165:
2147:Spivak pronoun
2139:
2136:
2112:
2109:
2098:FrancesChapman
2089:
2087:
2086:
2047:
2044:
2043:
2042:
2012:
2009:Spivak pronoun
2004:
2001:
2000:
1999:
1961:
1958:
1933:online edition
1928:
1925:
1924:
1923:
1922:
1921:
1894:
1891:
1890:
1889:
1888:
1887:
1820:The Joy of TeX
1775:
1772:
1771:
1770:
1769:
1768:
1767:
1766:
1701:
1698:
1683:
1680:
1679:
1678:
1677:
1676:
1670:
1669:
1649:
1646:
1618:
1615:
1614:
1613:
1610:
1600:
1599:
1581:
1578:
1577:
1576:
1493:
1490:
1489:
1488:
1487:
1486:
1466:
1465:
1462:
1459:
1447:
1444:
1443:
1442:
1422:
1419:
1418:
1417:
1392:
1389:
1388:
1387:
1366:
1363:
1362:
1361:
1343:
1340:
1326:
1325:
1314:
1311:
1297:
1296:
1277:
1274:
1273:
1272:
1236:
1235:Face vs. Faces
1233:
1188:
1187:
1186:
1185:
1184:
1183:
1182:
1181:
1180:
1179:
1178:
1177:
1176:
1175:
1091:
1058:
1039:
1036:
1035:
1034:
1023:
1010:comment added
975:
972:
945:
942:
930:96.250.131.242
910:
907:
904:
903:
902:
901:
866:
854:
853:
850:
849:
846:
845:
842:
841:
838:
837:
835:
834:
833:
832:
823:
807:
793:
780:
762:
747:
745:
744:
733:
732:
727:
722:
717:
711:
708:
707:
699:
698:
691:Low-importance
687:
681:
680:
678:
661:the discussion
647:
635:
634:
632:Low‑importance
626:
614:
613:
610:
609:
606:
605:
602:
601:
599:
598:
586:
573:
562:
548:
534:
521:
507:
476:
465:
454:
443:
429:
418:
404:
393:
391:/Collaboration
379:
368:
348:
346:
345:
333:
332:
324:
323:
316:Mid-importance
312:
306:
305:
303:
291:Gender studies
271:
259:
258:
256:Mid‑importance
253:Gender studies
250:
238:
237:
234:
233:
226:Low-importance
222:
216:
215:
213:
196:the discussion
182:
170:
169:
167:Low‑importance
161:
149:
148:
145:
144:
137:Low-importance
133:
127:
126:
124:
107:the discussion
94:
93:
77:
65:
64:
62:Low‑importance
56:
44:
43:
37:
26:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
2576:
2565:
2562:
2560:
2557:
2555:
2552:
2550:
2547:
2545:
2542:
2540:
2537:
2535:
2532:
2530:
2527:
2525:
2522:
2520:
2517:
2515:
2512:
2510:
2507:
2505:
2502:
2501:
2499:
2492:
2491:
2487:
2483:
2475:Article scope
2474:
2472:
2471:
2467:
2466:
2461:
2460:
2455:
2454:
2449:
2445:
2440:
2433:
2429:
2427:
2425:
2421:
2417:
2413:
2407:
2400:
2396:
2392:
2388:
2384:
2380:
2377:The original
2371:
2369:
2368:
2363:
2358:
2357:
2346:
2342:
2339:
2335:
2334:
2333:
2326:
2320:
2316:
2312:
2308:
2302:
2297:
2292:
2288:
2284:
2283:
2282:
2280:
2276:
2272:
2267:
2261:
2259:
2258:
2252:
2245:
2238:
2234:
2231:
2227:
2226:
2225:
2218:
2212:
2208:
2204:
2200:
2194:
2189:
2185:
2179:
2175:
2171:
2164:
2160:
2159:
2158:
2156:
2152:
2148:
2143:
2137:
2135:
2133:
2129:
2125:
2124:184.97.43.192
2121:
2110:
2108:
2107:
2103:
2099:
2094:
2091:
2084:
2080:
2076:
2072:
2071:
2070:
2068:
2064:
2060:
2059:67.188.46.130
2056:
2045:
2041:
2037:
2033:
2029:
2028:
2027:
2026:
2022:
2018:
2013:
2010:
2002:
1998:
1994:
1990:
1986:
1985:
1984:
1983:
1979:
1975:
1971:
1967:
1959:
1957:
1956:
1952:
1948:
1941:
1936:
1934:
1920:
1916:
1912:
1908:
1907:
1906:
1905:
1904:
1903:
1900:
1892:
1886:
1882:
1878:
1872:
1859:
1851:
1847:
1840:
1835:
1834:
1833:
1829:
1825:
1821:
1817:
1813:
1809:
1805:
1802:According to
1801:
1800:
1799:
1797:
1793:
1789:
1788:81.129.128.20
1785:
1778:
1773:
1765:
1761:
1757:
1752:
1751:
1750:
1746:
1742:
1737:
1736:
1735:
1731:
1727:
1722:
1721:
1720:
1719:
1715:
1711:
1707:
1706:singular they
1699:
1697:
1696:
1693:
1689:
1681:
1674:
1673:
1672:
1671:
1668:
1664:
1660:
1656:
1655:
1654:
1647:
1645:
1642:
1638:
1634:
1630:
1626:
1616:
1611:
1609:
1606:
1602:
1601:
1598:
1595:
1591:
1590:
1589:
1587:
1579:
1575:
1572:
1554:
1553:
1552:
1551:
1548:
1545:
1537:
1533:
1529:
1525:
1518:
1511:
1504:
1501:
1498:
1491:
1484:
1483:
1482:
1479:
1475:
1471:
1470:
1469:
1463:
1460:
1457:
1456:
1455:
1453:
1452:singular they
1445:
1441:
1438:
1434:
1433:
1432:
1431:
1428:
1420:
1416:
1412:
1408:
1404:
1399:
1398:
1397:
1390:
1386:
1383:
1379:
1378:
1377:
1376:
1373:
1364:
1360:
1357:
1353:
1352:
1351:
1349:
1341:
1339:
1338:
1334:
1330:
1329:72.146.52.193
1322:
1321:
1320:
1312:
1310:
1309:
1305:
1301:
1300:72.146.52.193
1293:
1292:
1291:
1290:
1287:
1283:
1271:
1268:
1264:
1263:singular they
1260:
1259:
1258:
1257:
1254:
1250:
1245:
1241:
1234:
1232:
1231:
1228:
1222:
1221:
1218:
1214:
1208:
1207:
1204:
1198:
1197:
1194:
1174:
1171:
1166:
1161:
1160:
1159:
1156:
1152:
1148:
1144:
1140:
1136:
1131:
1126:
1125:
1124:
1121:
1116:
1115:
1114:
1111:
1107:
1102:
1101:
1100:
1097:
1092:
1089:
1086:
1085:
1084:
1081:
1077:
1072:
1071:
1070:
1067:
1063:
1059:
1056:
1052:
1051:
1050:
1049:
1045:
1037:
1032:
1028:
1024:
1021:
1017:
1016:
1015:
1013:
1009:
1004:
1003:
997:
995:
989:
987:
981:
973:
971:
969:
965:
961:
957:
953:
943:
941:
939:
935:
931:
927:
920:
915:
908:
899:
896:
893:
889:
888:michaelspivak
886:
885:
883:
879:
878:autobiography
875:
871:
867:
860:
859:
831:
830:
825:
824:
821:
817:
814:
812:
808:
806:
802:
800:
799:
794:
792:
789:
787:
786:
781:
779:
775:
771:
769:
768:
763:
761:
758:
756:
755:
750:
749:
746:
742:
738:
737:
731:
728:
726:
723:
721:
718:
716:
713:
712:
710:
709:
705:
704:
700:
696:
692:
686:
683:
682:
679:
662:
658:
654:
653:
648:
645:
641:
640:
636:
630:
627:
624:
620:
597:
593:
591:
587:
585:
582:
580:
579:
574:
571:
569:
568:
563:
561:
557:
555:
554:
549:
547:
543:
541:
540:
535:
533:
530:
528:
527:
522:
520:
516:
514:
513:
508:
506:
502:
498:
494:
493:
492:Holy Virility
488:
485:
483:
482:
477:
474:
472:
471:
466:
463:
461:
460:
455:
452:
450:
449:
444:
442:
438:
436:
435:
430:
427:
425:
424:
419:
417:
413:
411:
410:
405:
402:
400:
399:
394:
392:
388:
386:
385:
380:
377:
375:
374:
369:
367:
363:
359:
357:
356:
351:
350:
347:
343:
339:
338:
335:
334:
330:
329:
325:
321:
317:
311:
308:
307:
304:
287:
282:
278:
277:
272:
269:
265:
264:
260:
254:
251:
248:
244:
231:
227:
221:
218:
217:
214:
197:
193:
189:
188:
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:
2478:
2464:
2458:
2452:
2436:
2410:— Preceding
2398:
2394:
2390:
2386:
2382:
2378:
2375:
2353:
2350:
2325:source check
2304:
2298:
2295:
2268:
2265:
2242:
2217:source check
2196:
2190:
2177:
2173:
2169:
2167:
2144:
2141:
2118:— Preceding
2114:
2095:
2092:
2088:
2053:— Preceding
2049:
2014:
2006:
1963:
1943:
1938:
1930:
1896:
1858:cite journal
1849:
1845:
1819:
1815:
1811:
1807:
1779:
1777:
1703:
1685:
1682:Popularized?
1651:
1620:
1583:
1535:
1531:
1527:
1520:
1513:
1506:
1502:
1496:
1495:
1473:
1467:
1449:
1424:
1402:
1394:
1368:
1345:
1327:
1316:
1298:
1279:
1243:
1238:
1223:
1209:
1199:
1189:
1165:that article
1146:
1142:
1138:
1134:
1129:
1061:
1041:
1006:— Preceding
1001:
993:
991:
985:
983:
979:
977:
950:— Preceding
947:
924:— Preceding
918:
916:
912:
894:
869:
826:
810:
809:
796:
795:
783:
782:
765:
764:
752:
751:
690:
650:
589:
588:
576:
575:
565:
564:
560:/translation
551:
550:
537:
536:
524:
523:
510:
509:
490:
479:
478:
468:
467:
457:
456:
446:
445:
432:
431:
421:
420:
407:
406:
396:
395:
382:
381:
371:
370:
353:
352:
315:
286:project page
274:
225:
185:
136:
96:
40:WikiProjects
2184:Sourcecheck
2075:Flyingcat21
1782:—Preceding
1741:Arlo Barnes
1437:64.121.2.59
1282:Orion's Arm
1276:Orion's Arm
1055:AshyRaccoon
572:edit to see
475:edit to see
464:edit to see
453:edit to see
428:edit to see
403:edit to see
384:Collaborate
378:edit to see
331:To-do list:
281:WikiProject
30:Start-class
2498:Categories
2482:XeCyranium
2444:Neopronoun
2362:Report bug
1617:Precedence
1503:category":
1382:Common Man
1372:Common Man
1267:Factitious
984:Ey shaves
974:Upper case
584:Riot grrrl
459:Notability
2345:this tool
2338:this tool
2237:this tool
2230:this tool
1869:ignored (
1659:sbandrews
1571:Sebastian
1544:Sebastian
1421:Criticism
1286:Khokkanen
1227:Markspace
827:See also
553:Translate
2465:contribs
2412:unsigned
2351:Cheers.—
2243:Cheers.—
2120:unsigned
2055:unsigned
2017:Secarrie
1974:McGeddon
1784:unsigned
1710:Rykalski
1637:contribs
1629:Belg4mit
1625:unsigned
1594:Belg4mit
1534:", and "
1526:" — or "
1519:", and "
1348:Asterisk
1324:person."
964:contribs
952:unsigned
926:unsigned
898:contribs
398:Copyedit
279:. This
2453:Naddruf
2275:my edit
2253::Online
2170:checked
2151:my edit
1867:|month=
1605:Mikes42
1532:(th)eir
1356:Stevage
1203:eritain
1147:himself
1031:eritain
1008:undated
922:usage.
820:YouTube
720:history
693:on the
481:Orphans
434:Infobox
373:Cleanup
318:on the
228:on the
139:on the
2178:failed
1580:Trivia
1547:(talk)
1536:(th)em
1528:(th)ey
1427:Mr. A.
1193:Jeeves
1143:emself
988:irself
978:Under
956:Jeeves
880:, and
767:Expand
578:Verify
567:Update
423:Expand
355:Assess
36:scale.
2376:: -->
1899:Pengo
1842:(PDF)
1478:Strad
1342:Splat
1170:AlexR
1120:AlexR
1096:AlexR
1066:AlexR
1064:. --
1062:write
1020:Mairi
1002:Hajor
992:I am
811:Other
798:Stubs
785:Photo
730:purge
725:watch
539:Stubs
526:Split
512:Photo
448:Merge
2486:talk
2459:talk
2420:talk
2174:true
2128:talk
2102:talk
2079:talk
2063:talk
2036:talk
2021:talk
1993:talk
1978:talk
1951:talk
1915:talk
1881:talk
1871:help
1852:(5).
1828:talk
1822:. ~
1792:talk
1760:talk
1756:htom
1745:talk
1730:talk
1726:htom
1714:talk
1690:.
1633:talk
1567:eirs
1530:", "
1512:", "
1500:Huh?
1474:they
1411:talk
1333:talk
1304:talk
1253:Talk
1249:Dalf
1217:Talk
1213:Dalf
1155:Talk
1151:Dalf
1145:and
1110:Talk
1106:Dalf
1080:Talk
1076:Dalf
1048:Talk
1044:Dalf
1038:Huh?
1027:tyop
990:and
960:talk
934:talk
919:they
892:talk
805:here
778:here
774:here
715:edit
594:see
558:see
544:see
517:see
470:NPOV
439:see
414:see
389:see
364:and
360:see
2399:his
2395:him
2319:RfC
2289:to
2211:RfC
2188:).
2176:or
1968:by
1812:E's
1517:eir
1407:Phr
1403:are
996:irs
884:.
776:or
685:Low
310:Mid
220:Low
131:Low
2500::
2488:)
2468:)
2462:~
2422:)
2397:,
2393:,
2391:he
2387:he
2379:ey
2332:.
2327:}}
2323:{{
2224:.
2219:}}
2215:{{
2186:}}
2182:{{
2130:)
2104:)
2081:)
2065:)
2038:)
2023:)
2015:--
2011:?
1995:)
1980:)
1953:)
1917:)
1883:)
1875:~
1862::
1860:}}
1856:{{
1850:35
1848:.
1844:.
1830:)
1816:Em
1814:,
1810:,
1794:)
1762:)
1747:)
1732:)
1716:)
1665:)
1639:)
1635:•
1565:th
1562:,
1560:ey
1558:th
1540:th
1524:em
1522:th
1515:th
1510:ey
1508:th
1413:)
1350:?
1335:)
1306:)
1251:|
1215:|
1153:|
1139:He
1130:DO
1108:|
1078:|
1046:|
966:)
962:•
936:)
876:,
503:·
499:·
495:·
489:·
2484:(
2456:(
2418:(
2383:e
2364:)
2360:(
2347:.
2340:.
2239:.
2232:.
2126:(
2100:(
2085:)
2077:(
2061:(
2034:(
2019:(
1991:(
1976:(
1949:(
1913:(
1879:(
1873:)
1826:(
1808:E
1790:(
1758:(
1743:(
1728:(
1712:(
1663:t
1661:(
1643:.
1631:(
1586:U
1409:(
1331:(
1302:(
1244:s
1135:E
1000:–
994:E
986:E
958:(
932:(
895:·
890:(
813::
801::
788::
770::
757::
697:.
592::
581::
570::
556::
542::
529::
515::
484::
473::
462::
451::
437::
426::
412::
401::
387::
376::
358::
322:.
232:.
143:.
42::
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
