835:
property was under threat they were not convinced (that is, the case was not sufficiently made) that the listing was otherwise justified and sought a field visit to take that forward. Then that field visit never happened because they were refused permission and subsequently UNESCO passed a resolution inscribing the property onto the list of sites in danger based on what they had (ie what I just described). Locating secondary sources describing this might be a bit of a problem but I will have a go anyway. In the meantime, I directly linked the report (and the submissions) in the article text, at least people can read it for themselves (these are however, primary sources).
1203:, this nomination has now been open for over three months, and its time is running out. I see that you made a number of edits on April 14 (and one on April 15), but haven't done anything since. (There's a discussion from yesterday on the article's talk page about improving the article's lede, but it hasn't been incorporated into the article yet.) That's basically another week lost. Let's give a final deadline date of May 31; if this nomination isn't ready to go by then (allowing for some minor final details to be tied up), then we should close it. Thanks for your time.
769:“This time they decided that the Tomb of the Patriarchs in Hebron is a Palestinian site, meaning not Jewish, and that it’s in danger." it is this that is the POV position ie wrongly comparing Palestine with Jewish (a country with a religion). This mischaracterization is the basis of all of the Israeli complaints. Shrike, all sources are biased, should you actually have access to these mysterious non partisan sources then why not add them to the article or are you simply content to complain about the sources that don't agree with your own POV?
434:
UNESCO considers it as a World
Heritage Site. I think that first of all we need an "history" section where to put the info about the occupation, and then the article needs to be expanded, or to be renamed. Moreover, it is not completely neutral; for example, in the last sentence of the introduction, the source used (haaretz) is a liberal, left wing Israel newspaper. It would be good to know also the point of view of the government about the reason for the expulsion of the Temporary International Presence in Hebron.
636:, anyway, if, as you affirm, the "political and historical complexities" of Hebron are fully addressed in the article about the city, there is no need to repeat them here. Then I would focus the scope of this article on the historic center, writing more about the cultural and art treasures of the center itself, and maybe mentioning the controversy arisen because of the site recognition by UNESCO. Political and historical problems can be addressed through a redirect to the
753:" on this page solves the POV problem, since we cannot expect that a reader jumps by herself from this article to the one about Hebron: you should at least provide two redirects in the article explaining that if someone wants to know the Jewish history of the site and wants a non - POV explaination of the security measure by IDF should go to the main article (and, of course, it would be much better to have some information also here about these issues). Cheers,
160:
951:
430:
1179:(it drives every element of life there, including the huge depopulation, and the subsequent rehabilitation and UNESCO listing), and the nature of the occupation in Hebron's Old City differs from anywhere else in the conflict, and anywhere else in the world. If we are going to get this over the line we need to agree what is due weight here. Your views would be appreciated, ideally as specifically as possible.
982:
402:
394:
383:
358:
350:
342:
324:
292:
270:
259:
745:
533:
497:
461:
1222:
but when asked to be specific or to actually work on the article, he goes quiet. Anyway, I think we have run out of time, so I have no objection to closing the nomination. Thank you very much for your support throughout this time. The topic of the article is a fascinating subject, albeit it seems a surprisingly under-researched one.
303:
765:"Jewishness" is a religious thing (ie the comparative is Muslim/Christian). A listing is inscribed along with a nationality (usually, the Old City was proposed by Jordan and is not categorized under any country). In this case, that is Palestinian and not Israeli. So when Netanyahu is quoted as saying "[
985:
Nominator has made over twenty edits since the last post, and none of them were here or to the article. This nomination has been abandoned, and I am marking it for closure. If a response is made before this closes, the nomination can continue if there is clear intent to address the issues raised in a
834:
I had to read the ICOMOS report to try and verify the real reason for inscription so what follows is OR. If I had to summarize the report, ICOMOS were forced to consider the application on an expedited basis based on
Palestinian allegations of a threat to the site and while they did conclude that the
583:
for your comments. I focused my efforts when building this article on setting out the main sights, the divisions of the city, the current legal status, and finding good maps (the maps bit being the most time consuming...) All these points are good and fair, but this article is not up for WP:FA so it
1221:
thank you for the multiple chances you have given this nomination. I was hoping that
Yoninah or Shrike would engage with my comment above, as without discussion we will not resolve the concern they have raised. Shrike in particular is very enthusiastic about repeating his directional point of view,
730:
Nothing really has changed the article use the same POV language usage of partisan sites like +972 and
Betzelem while no sites with opposites POVs provide only half truths for example it does mention IDF security measures and the Hardship of Palestinian Arabs but didn't say why they where in force.
1178:
I think we need a discussion about due weight for the occupation side of the article. It is the most high profile element of the Old City, both in sources (put Hebron Old City into google books and you will see more than half of the top hits are about the settlement and occupation) and in practice
433:
The article complies with almost all the requirements for DYK, but I see two problems: the first is that at the moment it is out of scope: it does not deal about the historic center of Hebron, but above all about the Israel occupation of the historic center of Hebron. It is not even explained why
884:
and also the
Israeli "occupation" and "settlers". It also has only one paragraph talking about the actual buildings, while paragraph after paragraph decries the "occupation". If you are talking about the Old City of Hebron, you cannot ignore the millenia-old Jewish presence and rely on a link to
764:
There were two aspects to the listing, the listing itself and the contemporaneous "in danger" listing (which is supposedly why the listing was expedited). I will see what can be found for both aspects. I do think we should be a little careful that do not mix up religion with nationality. The
1060:
ok, thank you for clarifying. I hope you can understand how it can cause offense; imagine talking about 1980s South Africa and being perceived to be belittling "apartheid". I don't know if you have ever had the pleasure of visiting, but Hebron is a living advertisement for the depravity of
1149:
The issues were not solved by giving a green tick and saying it covered in some other article is not enough This should be included in the article.Also in my opinion TIPH part should be trimmed it current size article as it gives to much space compares to issues like archaeology
962:
since March 7, and a failure to address a ping on their talk page a week ago leads me to believe that this nomination has been abandoned. In any event, this is now the oldest extant DYK nomination, and significant action needs to be taken very soon to address the issues noted by
690:
I don't know what precisely you mean by "UNESCO controversy", do you refer to the U.S./Israel objection to the listing? If I recall there were only 3 votes against the proposal. However, I agree with the reviewer that it should be explained why UNESCO decided to list
651:
I agree I suggest removing the TIPH part, the UNESCO controversy should discussed from all angles also a connection to Jewish people should be mentioned explicitly.I think also if we want the hook about the Unesco the controversy should be part of the hook
1174:
I will implement your comments (add more on the history of all communities in the city (without overwhelming the article), remove sites like like +972 and
Btselem and Jerusalem Post where possible, add more on the archaeology and
1021:
to comment, it made things much more difficult. I found the use of inverted commas in
Yoninah's post to describe "occupation" and "settlers" to be poorly judged, as that type of writing is usually associated with extremist
1257:
The problem that I mention earlier still was not fixed. Right now article reads like political manifest about the conflict all the political staff should be trimmed if want this article to be ever ready for DYK
748:
I still don't see the reason why UNESCO inserted the historic center in the List of the heritage sites: this should be mentioned in the article. Moreover, I don't think that writing "covered adequately at
866:
I located a couple of secondary sources to document the above, I think that should clarify the "why" of the listing, that it was essentially a political decision based on the information available at the
1008:
I think this is the right decision unfortunately. This has been gnawing away at me for a while now, but the debates needed to get there would need more time and effort than I should allow at this point.
93:
893:, which itself is a very long section in the latter article.) The third paragraph under "UNESCO nomination" seems to be talking about another issue, "Controversy". It also makes no sense to quote
180:
1068:
a number of editors he disagrees with. And lo and behold, after I commented here 10 hours ago, he turns up at the article and deletes a large chunk of it without discussion.
1328:
606:
679:
be included in the proposed annexation map being drawn up by an
Israeli-US committee, it seems pertinent to retain the TIPH material in some (perhaps amended) form.
200:
1107:
about overall coverage. Shall we still go ahead and close this, or would you like to try to address the issues over the next few days? Please let me know. Thanks.
88:
584:
isn’t expected to be a fulsome account of all the political and historical complexities. These points are all addressed in great detail in the parent article at
591:
How can we address your POV concerns without turning this into a very long and complex article and without duplicating all the information at Hebron?
605:
The point of view of the government about the reason for the expulsion of the
Temporary International Presence in Hebron seems to be explained
36:
676:
916:, which I refer to often in my writing. This is a much better example of an "Old City" article—history, archaeology, buildings, population,
766:
523:
It give POV explanation to the security measure by IDF from one side POV source without mention terrorist activities by
Palestinian groups.
880:
Hi, I was asked to come over and have a look at this nomination. Politics aside, the article seems terribly slanted toward the so-called
675:
The observer group was originally set up following the well known massacre at the Ibrahimi mosque and since Israel is now insisting that
1064:
The one other reason I was reticent to work on achieving neutrality here is because in the last couple of months a new editor has been
17:
1042:
huh? I was just pulling words out of the article and separating them off with quote marks. Next time I'll put them in green, okay?
310:
318:
44:
1099:, the problematic editor, whom you reverted, has been blocked as a sock. But the issues don't disappear for all that, as
1281:
1013:'s comments could have been resolved on their own, despite his stated unwillingness to work on the article, but when
807:
I try to make it less POV but I think its nominator responsibility to make the article to meet the DYK standards. --
286:
143:
450:
388:
336:
264:
253:
483:
It only gives a small one sentence about Jewish community while omitting its rich history and what happened to
159:
83:
449:
The article it doesn't mention all the controversy and criticism surrounding of site recognition by UNESCO
40:
716:
would you mind taking a look at the revised article and let me know if you would like any further changes?
314:
1305:
1227:
1186:
1131:
1075:
1029:
801:
758:
721:
645:
598:
549:
513:
473:
439:
229:
214:
113:
767:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jul/07/unesco-recognises-hebron-as-palestinian-world-heritage-site
1241:
1208:
1112:
991:
972:
872:
840:
774:
696:
684:
614:
118:
65:
1065:
913:
484:
628:, then this point of view can be added (with its reference) to the article, and a point is solved.
881:
172:
377:
1301:
1233:
1223:
1200:
1182:
1127:
1096:
1071:
1047:
1037:
1025:
1014:
959:
925:
902:
797:
754:
717:
711:
641:
631:
594:
574:
545:
509:
469:
435:
225:
210:
103:
1082:
297:
1276:
1263:
1237:
1216:
1204:
1155:
1121:
1108:
1090:
1003:
987:
968:
955:
868:
836:
812:
796:, why don't you work together with the author of the article and try to reach a compromise?
783:
770:
736:
692:
680:
657:
623:
610:
564:
61:
1269:
This nomination should be closed. It no longer fits any reasonable definition of "new".
1322:
98:
950:
429:
29:
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below.
1165:
1104:
1055:
1043:
1018:
964:
921:
898:
981:
1271:
1259:
1169:
1151:
1100:
1086:
1010:
808:
791:
732:
653:
578:
560:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as
744:
609:. I say "seems to be" because it is "a liberal, left wing Israel newspaper":)
1061:
ethnonationalism. It is widely considered a microcosm of the entire conflict.
186:
123:
890:
886:
750:
637:
585:
538:
502:
47:), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page.
1236:, thank you for letting me know. I'll close the nomination shortly.
370:
Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
1126:
I appreciate the encouragement. OK I will have a quick go now.
1103:'s comment would seem to indicate, and the issues raised by
187:
Palestine: Properties inscribed on the World Heritage List
954:
There have been no significant edits to the article since
967:
on April 11 if the nomination is to continue. Thank you.
731:
IMO in current form the article could not be promoted --
148:
363:
239:
108:
217:). Self-nominated at 11:07, 20 February 2020 (UTC).
958:'s back on March 9, and no post here by nominator
537: Per discussion below, covered adequately at
501: Per discussion below, covered adequately at
986:timely manner. I'm sorry this hasn't worked out.
446:There are severe POV problems with this article:
1300:I have no objection to closing the nomination.
201:Template:Did you know nominations/Tayseer Sboul
181:World Heritage Site in the State of Palestine
8:
49:No further edits should be made to this page
71:
1329:Failed DYK nominations from February 2020
74:
889:. (Anyway, I don't even see a link to
246:Article is new enough and long enough
788:, I wanted to ask the same: ;-)
7:
24:
45:Knowledge (XXG) talk:Did you know
18:Template:Did you know nominations
980:
949:
743:
648:) 17:56, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
640:article or one of its sections.
617:) 14:29, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
601:) 13:15, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
531:
495:
459:
442:) 11:49, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
428:
400:
392:
381:
356:
348:
340:
322:
301:
290:
268:
257:
158:
699:) 18:53, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
687:) 18:30, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
660:) 18:03, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
567:) 13:02, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
232:) 08:00, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
68:) 00:09, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
32:Please do not modify this page.
1:
739:) 16:51, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
928:) 18:25, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
905:) 18:22, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
875:) 13:25, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
804:) 17:20, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
777:) 14:29, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
761:) 10:22, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
724:) 16:39, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
1266:) 14:07, 23 May 2020 (UTC)
1230:) 21:59, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
1211:) 13:44, 23 May 2020 (UTC)
1158:) 18:48, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
1115:) 17:33, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
1093:) 09:26, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
1078:) 09:17, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
843:) 19:25, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
815:) 17:33, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
552:) 16:37, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
516:) 16:37, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
476:) 16:37, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
411:
37:this nomination's talk page
1345:
1308:) 21:54, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
1244:) 00:05, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
1189:) 19:05, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
1134:) 18:42, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
1050:) 23:21, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
1032:) 23:14, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
465: Now added to article
994:) 15:00, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
975:) 14:36, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
119:Find sources (notability)
94:Earwig's Copyvio Detector
1287:03:25, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
41:the article's talk page
109:A Simple Word Counter
89:Reviewer instructions
1017:in good faith asked
914:Old City (Jerusalem)
311:copyright violations
114:Reviewers' template
895:The Jerusalem Post
882:State of Palestine
319:close paraphrasing
281:Policy compliance:
173:Old City of Hebron
164:Old City of Hebron
135:Old City of Hebron
487:along the history
422:
421:
410:
409:
331:Hook eligibility:
287:Adequate sourcing
278:
277:
224:Starting review:
218:
189:
179:became the third
132:
131:
1336:
1286:
1220:
1173:
1125:
1059:
1041:
1007:
984:
953:
897:so extensively.
795:
787:
747:
715:
635:
627:
582:
543:
535:
534:
507:
499:
498:
467:
463:
462:
432:
412:
404:
403:
399:Clear at 100px:
396:
395:
385:
384:
364:
360:
359:
355:Other problems:
352:
351:
344:
343:
326:
325:
305:
304:
294:
293:
272:
271:
261:
260:
240:
208:
184:
162:
72:
56:The result was:
34:
1344:
1343:
1339:
1338:
1337:
1335:
1334:
1333:
1319:
1318:
1317:
1270:
1214:
1163:
1119:
1053:
1035:
1001:
920:UNESCO status.
912:Take a look at
789:
781:
709:
629:
621:
572:
532:
530:
496:
494:
460:
458:
401:
393:
389:Used in article
382:
378:Freely licensed
357:
349:
341:
323:
302:
291:
269:
258:
167:
166:
165:
155:
153:
149:Article history
137:
128:
104:Character count
69:
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
1342:
1340:
1332:
1331:
1321:
1320:
1316:
1315:
1314:
1313:
1312:
1311:
1310:
1309:
1291:
1290:
1289:
1288:
1254:
1253:
1252:
1251:
1250:
1249:
1248:
1247:
1246:
1245:
1193:
1192:
1191:
1190:
1180:
1176:
1148:
1147:
1146:
1145:
1144:
1143:
1142:
1141:
1140:
1139:
1138:
1137:
1136:
1135:
1069:
1062:
1023:
996:
995:
977:
976:
946:
945:
944:
943:
942:
941:
940:
939:
938:
937:
936:
935:
934:
933:
932:
931:
930:
929:
907:
906:
891:Hebron#History
853:
852:
851:
850:
849:
848:
847:
846:
845:
844:
823:
822:
821:
820:
819:
818:
817:
816:
751:Hebron#History
707:
706:
705:
704:
703:
702:
701:
700:
688:
666:
665:
664:
663:
662:
661:
569:
568:
557:
556:
555:
554:
553:
539:Hebron#History
525:
524:
520:
519:
518:
517:
503:Hebron#History
489:
488:
480:
479:
478:
477:
453:
452:
420:
419:
408:
407:
406:
405:
397:
386:
372:
371:
362:
361:
353:
345:
328:
327:
307:
295:
276:
275:
274:
273:
262:
248:
247:
238:
237:
236:
235:
233:
206:
205:
204:
203:
191:
190:
163:
157:
156:
152:
151:
146:
144:Back to T:TDYK
140:
138:
136:
133:
130:
129:
127:
126:
121:
116:
111:
106:
101:
96:
91:
86:
80:
77:
76:
54:
53:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1341:
1330:
1327:
1326:
1324:
1307:
1303:
1299:
1298:
1297:
1296:
1295:
1294:
1293:
1292:
1285:
1284:
1280:
1279:
1275:
1274:
1268:
1267:
1265:
1261:
1256:
1255:
1243:
1239:
1235:
1232:
1231:
1229:
1225:
1218:
1213:
1212:
1210:
1206:
1202:
1199:
1198:
1197:
1196:
1195:
1194:
1188:
1184:
1181:
1177:
1171:
1167:
1162:
1161:
1160:
1159:
1157:
1153:
1133:
1129:
1123:
1117:
1116:
1114:
1110:
1106:
1102:
1098:
1095:
1094:
1092:
1088:
1084:
1080:
1079:
1077:
1073:
1070:
1067:
1063:
1057:
1052:
1051:
1049:
1045:
1039:
1034:
1033:
1031:
1027:
1024:
1020:
1016:
1012:
1005:
1000:
999:
998:
997:
993:
989:
983:
979:
978:
974:
970:
966:
961:
957:
952:
948:
947:
927:
923:
919:
915:
911:
910:
909:
908:
904:
900:
896:
892:
888:
883:
879:
878:
877:
876:
874:
870:
865:
864:
863:
862:
861:
860:
859:
858:
857:
856:
855:
854:
842:
838:
833:
832:
831:
830:
829:
828:
827:
826:
825:
824:
814:
810:
806:
805:
803:
799:
793:
785:
779:
778:
776:
772:
768:
763:
762:
760:
756:
752:
746:
742:
741:
740:
738:
734:
729:
725:
723:
719:
713:
698:
694:
689:
686:
682:
678:
674:
673:
672:
671:
670:
669:
668:
667:
659:
655:
650:
649:
647:
643:
639:
633:
625:
619:
618:
616:
612:
608:
604:
603:
602:
600:
596:
592:
589:
587:
580:
576:
566:
562:
558:
551:
547:
542:
540:
529:
528:
527:
526:
522:
521:
515:
511:
506:
504:
493:
492:
491:
490:
486:
482:
481:
475:
471:
466:
457:
456:
455:
454:
451:
448:
447:
445:
444:
443:
441:
437:
431:
426:
417:
414:
413:
398:
390:
387:
379:
376:
375:
374:
373:
369:
366:
365:
354:
347:Interesting:
346:
338:
335:
334:
333:
332:
320:
316:
312:
308:
299:
296:
288:
285:
284:
283:
282:
266:
263:
255:
252:
251:
250:
249:
245:
242:
241:
234:
231:
227:
223:
222:
221:
220:
219:
216:
212:
202:
198:
195:
194:
193:
192:
188:
182:
178:
175:
174:
170:... that the
169:
168:
161:
150:
147:
145:
142:
141:
134:
125:
122:
120:
117:
115:
112:
110:
107:
105:
102:
100:
97:
95:
92:
90:
87:
85:
82:
81:
79:
78:
73:
70:
67:
63:
59:
52:
50:
46:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
1302:Onceinawhile
1282:
1277:
1272:
1234:Onceinawhile
1224:Onceinawhile
1201:Onceinawhile
1183:Onceinawhile
1128:Onceinawhile
1097:Onceinawhile
1081:Please read
1072:Onceinawhile
1038:Onceinawhile
1026:Onceinawhile
1022:nationalism.
1015:Alessandro57
960:Onceinawhile
917:
894:
727:
726:
718:Onceinawhile
712:Alessandro57
708:
632:Onceinawhile
595:Onceinawhile
593:
590:
575:Alessandro57
570:
546:Onceinawhile
536:
510:Onceinawhile
500:
470:Onceinawhile
464:
424:
423:
415:
367:
330:
329:
280:
279:
243:
211:Onceinawhile
207:
196:
176:
171:
57:
55:
48:
31:
28:
1238:BlueMoonset
1217:BlueMoonset
1205:BlueMoonset
1122:BlueMoonset
1109:BlueMoonset
1066:WP:HOUNDING
1004:BlueMoonset
988:BlueMoonset
969:BlueMoonset
956:Selfstudier
869:Selfstudier
837:Selfstudier
784:Selfstudier
771:Selfstudier
693:Selfstudier
681:Selfstudier
624:Selfstudier
611:Selfstudier
265:Long enough
209:Created by
124:Hook length
75:DYK toolbox
62:BlueMoonset
1175:buildings)
315:plagiarism
254:New enough
183:in 2017?
177:(pictured)
99:QPQ check
84:DYK check
1323:Category
798:Alex2006
755:Alex2006
642:Alex2006
436:Alex2006
418:: Done.
309:Free of
244:General:
226:Alex2006
197:Reviewed
185:Source:
58:rejected
1166:Yoninah
1105:Yoninah
1083:WP:SOAP
1056:Yoninah
1044:Yoninah
1019:Yoninah
965:Yoninah
922:Yoninah
899:Yoninah
780:Thanks
728:Comment
620:Thanks
571:Thanks
425:Overall
298:Neutral
1260:Shrike
1170:Shrike
1152:Shrike
1101:Shrike
1087:Shrike
1011:Shrike
887:Hebron
809:Shrike
792:Shrike
733:Shrike
654:Shrike
638:Hebron
586:Hebron
579:Shrike
561:Shrike
368:Image:
317:, and
867:time.
337:Cited
16:<
1306:talk
1278:uidh
1264:talk
1242:talk
1228:talk
1209:talk
1187:talk
1168:and
1156:talk
1132:talk
1113:talk
1091:talk
1076:talk
1048:talk
1030:talk
992:talk
973:talk
926:talk
903:talk
873:talk
841:talk
813:talk
802:talk
775:talk
759:talk
737:talk
722:talk
697:talk
685:talk
658:talk
646:talk
615:talk
607:here
599:talk
577:and
565:talk
550:talk
514:talk
474:talk
440:talk
230:talk
215:talk
66:talk
1118:Hi
918:and
691:it.
485:her
416:QPQ
306:- n
60:by
43:or
1325::
1258:--
1150:--
1085:--
677:it
588:.
559:--
544:.
508:.
468:.
427::
391::
380::
339::
321::
313:,
300::
289::
267::
256::
199::
139:(
39:,
1304:(
1283:e
1273:b
1262:(
1240:(
1226:(
1219::
1215:@
1207:(
1185:(
1172::
1164:@
1154:(
1130:(
1124::
1120:@
1111:(
1089:(
1074:(
1058::
1054:@
1046:(
1040::
1036:@
1028:(
1006::
1002:@
990:(
971:(
924:(
901:(
871:(
839:(
811:(
800:(
794::
790:@
786::
782:@
773:(
757:(
735:(
720:(
714::
710:@
695:(
683:(
656:(
652:-
644:(
634::
630:@
626::
622:@
613:(
597:(
581::
573:@
563:(
548:(
541:.
512:(
505:.
472:(
438:(
228:(
213:(
154:)
64:(
51:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
