498:
explained it in a coherent enough way that if I knew a little more about algorithms and circuits it would make perfect sense. I would work on some wording just to make the point of some sentences clear, for example I had to reread the part of your introduction that talked about polynomial speedups just because the phrasing was a bit confusing. I would also add a "Notes" title above all of your references (so many!) and add links within your article to other wikipedia pages. Overall, really well organized, great information, very thorough - I'll definitely be looking into reorganizing my article because I like the way you did yours. Read like an encyclopedia with acknowledgment of the skepticism without seeming like you were persuading the reader either way. Good work!
521:
The intention of google to prove quantum supremacy in 2017 is mentioned twice in the article, both times the sentence structure is virtually the same. The second mention of google's plans to build a 49 qubit quantum computer does not say anything new. Even though these sentences are in different sections, consider removing the second mention, or altering the sentence to mention the potential development in a new and interesting way.
833:. The Google Trends data is way too noisy to show anything beyond the fact that there's very few people searching for either term. The problem with "quantum advantage" is that it is a generic term, used for plenty of phenomena beyond the strict sense of a computational problem that can be solved by a quantum computer but not a classical one. I don't think it is a good choice for title when a more narrow term exists. As for
249:
693:
222:
317:
341:
424:
379:
896:
191:
1433:
I think insufficient attention has been paid to "quantum primacy" as a replacement. It captures some (rather than advantage's none) of the essence of the transcendent improvement quantum algorithms could have on classical ones that "quantum supremacy" was meant to evoke. Even though it doesn't answer
906:
of the article? I get the impression that "quantum supremacy" is a little bit more specific, and refers to the space-race-like competition to demonstrate achievement, while "quantum advantage" can refer more broadly to the potential advantages that quantum computers offer over classical machines. For
524:
This page presents information on the proposed supremacy of quantum computing in an unbiased manner. The page has all the information needed to be a good first source for researching quantum supremacy, but the language used in the page is a bit to dense to be the best first source that it could be.
1104:
of the article. I think I'd need to do some more reading to get a better sense of how often researchers talk about "quantum advantage" in this narrow sense versus the broad sense, but it seems like if both are relatively common, then an all-encompassing article would be more useful so that everyone
739:
for now there is no agreement to either change or keep this article's title. As is usual with a no-consensus outcome, editors can strengthen their arguments, discover new ones, and try again in a few months to garner consensus for a title change. Thanks and kudos to editors for your input; everyone
539:
Thanks for the feedback! I shortened the last paragraph of the lead to make it more of a summary and to avoid being repetitive when I mention Google's plans later on. As for density, I think that the level of knowledge required to read the article is similar to that needed for related articles like
516:
This page demonstrates a strong knowledge of quantum computing and both the results needed for, and the arguments for and against the supremacy of quantum computing to traditional computing methods. Factual, to the point, well organized. Tone is neutral, page does a good job discussing skepticism
520:
This article could use more explanation of the litany of technical terminology needed to understand the article. Sentences are dense, and at times tough to read. A simple alternative could be hyperlinking wikipedia pages that explain technical terminology, such as the wikipedia page for qubits.
383:
1081:
the article to be about generic quantum advantage, as opposed to simply renaming it. I don't see the motivation for such a rewrite, I think an article on the narrow subject of quantum supremacy is more useful. Moreover, your rewrite would still have a conflict with the vast literature that uses
497:
I thought this article did a really good job of organizing the relevant information into sections where each section had a decent amount of information and representation. I'm not familiar with this topic at all so there was definitely some information that went over my head, but I think you
582:
I mistakenly re-added this section without a corresponding message, but to explain my reasoning: I'm not particularly attached to the section, but I think it's a reasonably common criticism in the quantum computing community; looking at the extended list of signatories,
436:
153:
350:
1502:
483:
A good start on your
Quantum Supremacy summary, @Jamesonoreilly--this article will complement other related entries on Knowledge (XXG) (e.g. quantum computing, quantum mechanical phenomena, etc). --
540:
quantum computing. I added a lot of links to other
Knowledge (XXG) articles to keep mine connected to other related content and to make it easier to fill in the gaps not covered in this article.
1153:), but the current quantum supremacy race is about demonstrating that advantage experimentally, putting that theory into practice. I'm arguing to broaden the lead to be more inclusive of the
1401:
I don't know if any one of these arguments would be the deciding factor on its own, but together I think that they make a decent case for a page move. Does that answer your question? —
873:
It has 2330 hits for "quantum advantage" versus 2280 hits for "quantum supremacy". It's an insignificant difference. Moreover, just looking at the first page of results I found a paper
808:– As noted in the Criticism section, "Quantum Supremacy" evokes the racist "white supremacy". Over the past 12 months, "Quantum Advantage" has pulled ahead of "Quantum Supremacy" in
1116:
I'm afraid you misunderstood what quantum supremacy is. It's not about experimentally demonstrating a performance advantage, it's about solving a problem that classical computers
1482:
1497:
355:
147:
1149:; we've known since the 90s that some quantum algorithms give an exponential advantage over the best classical alternative (based on the kinds of theoretical arguments in
724:
1246:
No, I was talking about my personal recognitions, how I saw both terms in the reliable sources. My personal selection of sources may be not representative at all. --
856:
852:
307:
79:
837:, there are tons of papers from 2022 using the name "quantum supremacy", so it's not as if the scientific community has adopted "quantum advantage" instead.
1492:
1467:
297:
1477:
331:
595:
have all signed the petition, along with a good number of people at
Microsoft Quantum. I think it also has enough press coverage to justify inclusion.
460:
399:
44:
1389:
makes more sense, partly because the experiments make more sense with the theoretical background, and partly because then everyone who searches for
85:
273:
941:
measurable experiments, making it more inclusive of complexity theory advantages and other asymptotic (theoretical) performance advantages.
625:
30:
676:
Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a
1462:
1439:
1157:
advantages, and I'm arguing to restructure the rest of the article so that the experimental demonstrations are grouped together. —
1096:
It seems like if we're restricting to the narrow sense of experimentally demonstrating measurable performance advantages, then a lot of
640:
1472:
256:
227:
99:
326:
232:
104:
20:
610:
I concur. I think the whole drama is rather silly, but it did get some coverage, and plenty of serious researchers were involved.
809:
168:
74:
1507:
1269:
I guess I'll order an "advantageous pizza" for dinner tonight; don't want anybody thinking I've got a white supremacist streak
1120:. As such, the section on complexity theory is crucial in order to give evidence that the problem is in fact classically hard.
741:
1141:, and it seems like that would imply a demonstrated performance advantage. The distinction that I'm trying to draw is between
733:
See below that editors are unconvinced by the arguments related to Google Trends and
Scholar, as well as the racist angle. So
202:
135:
1487:
382:
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki
Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available
1312:
closed the discussion, so I'll reply here instead. The way I see it, there are currently three reasons for moving the page:
65:
525:
The concepts discussed could potentially be introduced in more accessible language. Overall, a really good wiki submission.
1292:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
667:
560:
788:
129:
1050:
703:
109:
762:
545:
677:
629:
208:
125:
563:
is in the scope of the article? If so, could you update the article with information about this new theorem?
1443:
644:
568:
1331:
834:
813:
1393:
would end up in the right place (unlike now, where people interested in the theory would end up on a page
1040:
864:
820:
530:
269:
175:
55:
503:
272:
on
Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
526:
391:
70:
1309:
749:
190:
1419:
1275:
995:(and others as well) so that the article isn't dominated by the single "Quantum supremacy" section.
680:
after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
541:
387:
161:
1054:
1035:
OK, but "Criticism of the name" should be linked from both the article lead and the section lead
564:
468:
427:
This article was the subject of a Wiki
Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between
407:
1358:
1101:
903:
141:
1390:
1382:
1377:
that suggest quantum computers will scale exponentially faster. The current article is titled
1351:
1224:
1202:
1198:
1194:
1150:
1097:
1036:
1014:
992:
985:
978:
974:
970:
963:
956:
952:
860:
816:
799:
699:
51:
24:
1134:
I don't understand the distinction you're drawing. The current lead describes a problem that
1251:
1210:
1125:
1087:
881:
842:
615:
499:
488:
440:
1413:
I appreciate your detailed response. Thank you, my question has been answered. Thank you.
1403:
1237:
1190:
1186:
1159:
1107:
1066:
1026:
1005:
600:
592:
1316:
1220:
1105:
finds the information they're looking for when they look up "quantum advantage". —
624:
Hans Wurst's suggestion of "quantum ascendancy" is thought to be unacceptably offensive.
1414:
1301:
1270:
874:
588:
1456:
464:
403:
692:
584:
452:
1385:. I think that grouping together the theory and experiments in one article titled
920:
1247:
1206:
1121:
1083:
1018:
877:
838:
611:
484:
448:
444:
423:
378:
340:
316:
248:
221:
1062:
1022:
1001:
596:
1339:
1320:
908:
265:
1447:
1426:
1407:
1282:
1255:
1241:
1214:
1163:
1129:
1111:
1091:
1070:
1044:
1030:
1009:
885:
868:
846:
824:
765:
648:
633:
619:
604:
572:
549:
534:
507:
492:
472:
411:
261:
736:
that constitutes a consensus to continue with the current article title.
1361:
of the article a bit broader and more well-defined. People tend to use
1354:
has pointed to additional evidence in Google Trends and Google
Scholar.
1082:"quantum advantage" in the same strict sense as "quantum supremacy".
921:
Information-Theoretic Bounds on
Quantum Advantage in Machine Learning
757:
1348:
a term that has now largely replaced the earlier 'quantum supremacy'
1058:
944:
Make a section called "Quantum supremacy" that's more focused on
909:
Quantum supremacy using a programmable superconducting processor
876:
that is about generic quantum advantage, not quantum supremacy.
687:
184:
15:
339:
315:
804:
780:
774:
708:
559:
Can anyone with more knowledge in the subject check if
1397:
the demonstrations, with some theoretical background).
160:
1503:
C-Class
Computer hardware articles of High-importance
418:
Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
373:
Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
260:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
1057:makes sense, as it should be pretty obvious in the
174:
1305:
966:into the new "Quantum supremacy" section as well.
1077:I'm not convinced. What you are proposing is to
33:for general discussion of the article's subject.
639:Could you provide a citation for that offense?
812:for search frequency, thus making it the new
8:
1483:C-Class software articles of High-importance
927:advantage (potentially for useful problems).
911:" seems in line with the current text about
1498:High-importance Computer hardware articles
1193:then, won't you? I heard before about the
919:advantage (for a contrived problem), but "
666:The following is a closed discussion of a
216:
1434:to the trends in academia, it is still a
1381:, but has a fair amount of the theory in
981:into the new "Quantum supremacy" section.
959:into the new "Quantum supremacy" section.
461:Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment
400:Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment
1021:, would these changes affect your vote?
953:§ Quantum supremacy in the 20th century
555:Quantum advantage with shallow circuits
459:Above undated message substituted from
398:Above undated message substituted from
218:
188:
1386:
1378:
1370:
1362:
1347:
1343:
1335:
1327:
1232:
1228:
1182:
1135:
938:
912:
698:It was proposed in this section that
282:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Computing
7:
1438:better term and deserves inclusion.
1181:, I did not buy your argument about
902:If we did this, would it expand the
254:This article is within the scope of
207:It is of interest to the following
23:for discussing improvements to the
1493:C-Class Computer hardware articles
1468:High-importance Computing articles
937:Broaden the lead to focus less on
432:
428:
14:
1478:High-importance software articles
988:to redirect into the new section.
50:New to Knowledge (XXG)? Welcome!
1326:There is reason to believe that
1288:The discussion above is closed.
1136:no classical computer can solve
934:, making the following changes:
894:
691:
435:. Further details are available
422:
377:
247:
220:
189:
45:Click here to start a new topic.
1373:for both these experiments and
1306:§ Requested move 3 January 2023
1049:I think that it makes sense to
302:This article has been rated as
1138:in any feasible amount of time
991:As a longer-term goal, expand
957:§ Progress in the 21st century
285:Template:WikiProject Computing
1:
1448:02:50, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
1267:What is this move rationale??
1205:is much more recognizable. --
859:, in the field of computing.
659:Requested move 3 January 2023
649:02:33, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
620:09:28, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
605:08:35, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
578:Criticism of the name section
348:This article is supported by
324:This article is supported by
276:and see a list of open tasks.
42:Put new text under old text.
1427:22:46, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
1408:15:01, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
1283:23:33, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
1256:23:28, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
1242:22:44, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
1215:22:38, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
1183:the racist "white supremacy"
930:I think I'm leaning towards
766:10:34, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
573:04:13, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
473:02:54, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
412:02:54, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
351:Computer hardware task force
1367:experimentally demonstrated
1164:16:17, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
1130:15:52, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
1112:14:23, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
1092:13:13, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
1071:12:52, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
1045:05:35, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
1031:03:04, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
1010:22:03, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
886:15:30, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
869:15:14, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
847:15:05, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
825:14:52, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
550:03:22, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
1524:
1463:C-Class Computing articles
1383:§ Computational complexity
1304:, you asked a question in
1235:on Google Scholar. —
1197:and never heard about the
1151:§ Computational complexity
1098:§ Computational complexity
993:§ Computational complexity
977:to "Challenges", and move
535:03:56, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
508:19:03, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
308:project's importance scale
1473:C-Class software articles
971:§ Susceptibility to error
946:the goal of demonstrating
939:the goal of demonstrating
913:the goal of demonstrating
855:has also pulled ahead of
493:01:59, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
347:
323:
301:
242:
215:
80:Be welcoming to newcomers
1290:Please do not modify it.
1017:, any thoughts on this?
789:subst:Requested move/end
673:Please do not modify it.
634:14:06, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
1219:Is this backed up by a
979:§ Criticism of the name
1508:All Computing articles
964:§ Proposed experiments
517:of quantum supremacy.
344:
320:
270:information technology
197:This article is rated
75:avoid personal attacks
1488:All Software articles
1375:theoretical arguments
1231:is slightly ahead of
1053:. I'm not sure if an
1051:summarize in the lead
1000:How does that sound?
513:Article Evaluation:
439:. Student editor(s):
386:. Student editor(s):
343:
319:
257:WikiProject Computing
201:on Knowledge (XXG)'s
100:Neutral point of view
1323:the use of the term.
1308:, but unfortunately
327:WikiProject Software
105:No original research
851:On Google Scholar,
787:This is template {{
1357:It would make the
447:. Peer reviewers:
437:on the course page
390:. Peer reviewers:
384:on the course page
345:
321:
288:Computing articles
203:content assessment
86:dispute resolution
47:
1391:quantum advantage
1387:quantum advantage
1379:quantum supremacy
1371:quantum advantage
1363:quantum supremacy
1344:quantum advantage
1336:quantum supremacy
1328:quantum advantage
1233:quantum supremacy
1229:quantum advantage
1203:Quantum supremacy
1199:quantum advantage
1195:Quantum supremacy
1059:table of contents
986:Quantum supremacy
955:heading and move
857:Quantum Supremacy
853:Quantum Advantage
805:Quantum advantage
800:Quantum supremacy
797:
796:
768:
721:
709:Quantum advantage
704:renamed and moved
700:Quantum supremacy
370:
369:
366:
365:
362:
361:
183:
182:
66:Assume good faith
43:
25:Quantum supremacy
1515:
1423:
1417:
1406:
1317:Reliable sources
1279:
1273:
1240:
1162:
1110:
973:heading, rename
901:
898:
897:
807:
764:
760:
752:
737:
728:
719:
715:
711:
695:
688:
675:
636:Dieter Funicula
475:
434:
433:23 November 2020
430:
426:
414:
381:
290:
289:
286:
283:
280:
251:
244:
243:
238:
235:
224:
217:
200:
194:
193:
185:
179:
178:
164:
95:Article policies
16:
1523:
1522:
1518:
1517:
1516:
1514:
1513:
1512:
1453:
1452:
1421:
1415:
1402:
1369:advantage, but
1310:Paine Ellsworth
1299:
1294:
1293:
1277:
1271:
1236:
1221:reliable source
1191:White advantage
1187:White supremacy
1158:
1106:
1100:is outside the
899:
895:
803:
793:
784:
758:
750:
735:
726:
717:
707:
671:
661:
593:Andrew G. White
580:
557:
481:
458:
420:
397:
375:
356:High-importance
332:High-importance
304:High-importance
287:
284:
281:
278:
277:
237:High‑importance
236:
230:
198:
121:
116:
115:
114:
91:
61:
12:
11:
5:
1521:
1519:
1511:
1510:
1505:
1500:
1495:
1490:
1485:
1480:
1475:
1470:
1465:
1455:
1454:
1451:
1450:
1430:
1429:
1399:
1398:
1396:
1376:
1368:
1355:
1324:
1298:
1297:Move rationale
1295:
1287:
1286:
1285:
1263:
1262:
1261:
1260:
1259:
1258:
1185:. Try to move
1176:
1175:
1174:
1173:
1172:
1171:
1170:
1169:
1168:
1167:
1166:
1075:
1074:
1073:
998:
997:
996:
989:
982:
967:
960:
949:
942:
928:
892:
891:
890:
889:
888:
795:
794:
785:
771:
770:
751:P.I. Ellsworth
722:
713:
696:
684:
683:
682:
668:requested move
662:
660:
657:
656:
655:
654:
653:
652:
651:
626:96.235.138.158
589:Anne Broadbent
579:
576:
556:
553:
542:Jamesonoreilly
512:
480:
477:
429:20 August 2020
419:
416:
388:Jamesonoreilly
374:
371:
368:
367:
364:
363:
360:
359:
346:
336:
335:
322:
312:
311:
300:
294:
293:
291:
274:the discussion
252:
240:
239:
225:
213:
212:
206:
195:
181:
180:
118:
117:
113:
112:
107:
102:
93:
92:
90:
89:
82:
77:
68:
62:
60:
59:
48:
39:
38:
35:
34:
28:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1520:
1509:
1506:
1504:
1501:
1499:
1496:
1494:
1491:
1489:
1486:
1484:
1481:
1479:
1476:
1474:
1471:
1469:
1466:
1464:
1461:
1460:
1458:
1449:
1445:
1441:
1440:31.205.129.67
1437:
1432:
1431:
1428:
1425:
1424:
1418:
1412:
1411:
1410:
1409:
1405:
1394:
1392:
1388:
1384:
1380:
1374:
1372:
1366:
1364:
1360:
1356:
1353:
1349:
1345:
1341:
1337:
1333:
1329:
1325:
1322:
1318:
1315:
1314:
1313:
1311:
1307:
1303:
1296:
1291:
1284:
1281:
1280:
1274:
1268:
1265:
1264:
1257:
1253:
1249:
1245:
1244:
1243:
1239:
1234:
1230:
1227:pointed out,
1226:
1222:
1218:
1217:
1216:
1212:
1208:
1204:
1201:. For me the
1200:
1196:
1192:
1188:
1184:
1180:
1177:
1165:
1161:
1156:
1152:
1148:
1144:
1140:
1139:
1133:
1132:
1131:
1127:
1123:
1119:
1115:
1114:
1113:
1109:
1103:
1099:
1095:
1094:
1093:
1089:
1085:
1080:
1076:
1072:
1068:
1064:
1060:
1056:
1052:
1048:
1047:
1046:
1042:
1038:
1034:
1033:
1032:
1028:
1024:
1020:
1016:
1013:
1012:
1011:
1007:
1003:
999:
994:
990:
987:
983:
980:
976:
972:
968:
965:
961:
958:
954:
950:
947:
943:
940:
936:
935:
933:
929:
926:
922:
918:
914:
910:
905:
893:
887:
883:
879:
875:
872:
871:
870:
866:
862:
858:
854:
850:
849:
848:
844:
840:
836:
835:WP:COMMONNAME
832:
829:
828:
827:
826:
822:
818:
815:
814:WP:COMMONNAME
811:
810:Google Trends
806:
801:
792:
790:
783:
782:
779:
776:
769:
767:
763:
761:
755:
754:
753:
746:
743:
738:
732:
731:
730:No consensus.
729:
720:
710:
705:
701:
697:
694:
690:
689:
686:
681:
679:
674:
669:
664:
663:
658:
650:
646:
642:
641:31.205.129.67
638:
637:
635:
631:
627:
623:
622:
621:
617:
613:
609:
608:
607:
606:
602:
598:
594:
590:
586:
577:
575:
574:
570:
566:
565:Saung Tadashi
562:
554:
552:
551:
547:
543:
537:
536:
532:
528:
522:
518:
514:
510:
509:
505:
501:
495:
494:
490:
486:
478:
476:
474:
470:
466:
462:
456:
454:
450:
446:
442:
438:
425:
417:
415:
413:
409:
405:
401:
395:
393:
389:
385:
380:
372:
357:
354:(assessed as
353:
352:
342:
338:
337:
333:
330:(assessed as
329:
328:
318:
314:
313:
309:
305:
299:
296:
295:
292:
275:
271:
267:
263:
259:
258:
253:
250:
246:
245:
241:
234:
229:
226:
223:
219:
214:
210:
204:
196:
192:
187:
186:
177:
173:
170:
167:
163:
159:
155:
152:
149:
146:
143:
140:
137:
134:
131:
127:
124:
123:Find sources:
120:
119:
111:
110:Verifiability
108:
106:
103:
101:
98:
97:
96:
87:
83:
81:
78:
76:
72:
69:
67:
64:
63:
57:
53:
52:Learn to edit
49:
46:
41:
40:
37:
36:
32:
26:
22:
18:
17:
1435:
1420:
1400:
1352:Michaelmalak
1300:
1289:
1276:
1266:
1225:Michaelmalak
1178:
1154:
1146:
1142:
1137:
1117:
1078:
1037:Michaelmalak
1015:Michaelmalak
975:§ Criticisms
945:
931:
924:
916:
861:Michaelmalak
830:
817:Michaelmalak
798:
786:
781:target title
777:
775:source title
772:
748:
747:
744:
742:stay healthy
734:
725:
723:
716:
714:
685:
672:
665:
585:Debbie Leung
581:
558:
538:
527:Rothschild.e
523:
519:
515:
511:
496:
482:
457:
421:
396:
392:Rothschild.e
376:
349:
325:
303:
255:
209:WikiProjects
171:
165:
157:
150:
144:
138:
132:
122:
94:
19:This is the
1340:One article
1155:theoretical
1143:theoretical
925:theoretical
923:" is about
773:Move logs:
678:move review
500:Greenough.h
441:Mcatalano26
148:free images
31:not a forum
1457:Categories
1342:describes
1321:criticized
917:measurable
907:example, "
900:Question:
1302:Red Slash
1147:practical
969:Drop the
951:Drop the
727:Not moved
561:this news
279:Computing
266:computing
262:computers
228:Computing
88:if needed
71:Be polite
21:talk page
1436:superior
1330:is more
465:PrimeBOT
404:PrimeBOT
233:Software
56:get help
29:This is
27:article.
1079:rewrite
984:Change
932:support
718:result:
453:Jgus716
306:on the
199:C-class
154:WP refs
142:scholar
1350:, and
1332:common
1248:Smedja
1207:Smedja
1179:Oppose
1122:Tercer
1118:cannot
1084:Tercer
1055:anchor
1019:Tercer
878:Tercer
839:Tercer
831:Oppose
612:Tercer
485:Amyc29
449:ColeDU
445:Ctaitz
268:, and
205:scale.
126:Google
1422:Slash
1404:Freoh
1395:about
1359:scope
1334:than
1319:have
1278:Slash
1238:Freoh
1223:? As
1160:Freoh
1108:Freoh
1102:scope
1063:Freoh
1023:Freoh
1002:Freoh
962:Move
904:scope
597:Fawly
169:JSTOR
130:books
84:Seek
1444:talk
1365:for
1252:talk
1211:talk
1145:and
1126:talk
1088:talk
1067:talk
1041:talk
1027:talk
1006:talk
882:talk
865:talk
843:talk
821:talk
645:talk
630:talk
616:talk
601:talk
569:talk
546:talk
531:talk
504:talk
489:talk
479:Talk
469:talk
431:and
408:talk
298:High
162:FENS
136:news
73:and
1416:Red
1346:as
1272:Red
1189:to
759:ed.
706:to
702:be
463:by
402:by
176:TWL
1459::
1446:)
1338:.
1254:)
1213:)
1128:)
1090:)
1069:)
1061:.
1043:)
1029:)
1008:)
915:a
884:)
867:)
845:)
823:)
802:→
791:}}
756:,
712:.
670:.
647:)
632:)
618:)
603:)
591:,
587:,
571:)
548:)
533:)
506:)
491:)
471:)
455:.
451:,
443:,
410:)
394:.
358:).
334:).
264:,
231::
156:)
54:;
1442:(
1250:(
1209:(
1124:(
1086:(
1065:(
1039:(
1025:(
1004:(
948:.
880:(
863:(
841:(
819:(
778:·
745:!
643:(
628:(
614:(
599:(
567:(
544:(
529:(
502:(
487:(
467:(
406:(
310:.
211::
172:·
166:·
158:·
151:·
145:·
139:·
133:·
128:(
58:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
