408:(1). Major coverage (multiple outlets) in English, Hebrew, Arabic, as well as some coverage in multiple Latin script (easy to find, might extend to non Latin) European languages (beyond what is reffed - which excludes pieces that were distributed via wire or pieces that added little information). Coverage is sustained - e.g. added this week refs to a Bosnian piece and coverage of an Israeli pol waving the book in a Knesset speech (and using it as a rhetorical prop in the speech). Few Israeli (or non Arabic for that matter) books get reviews in multiple Arab newspapers which this title did (highly scathing and critical). While this may be an old ploy as well as an old arguement (famously dating back to Golda Meir denying Palestinian existence a few years after the formation of the PLO) - it is a notable instance of said ploy. And as a weak OTHERSTUFF arguement (this book clearly passes on WP policy),
687:
land of Canaan and justifies Israel’s mistreatment of the
Palestinians. I subject Sand’s approach to critique, but it should be noted that the right has produced its own share of origin stories that can be critiqued on the same grounds. I just read a report about a book called A History of the Palestinian People that was a best-seller on Amazon last week before it was removed from the site. What was offensive about the book is that it is completely blank, the author’s way of arguing that the Palestinians are not a real people and have no real history—an argument that other scholars have made in more conventional ways. This is Sand’s argument in reverse, applied to the Palestinians instead of the Jews, and it is wrong for very similar methodological and historical reasons even though it is coming from the other side of the political spectrum and makes its argument in a different way.
647:
freedom of speech / commercial dispute / taking sides on politics by Amazon - we will probably see more coverage and mentions in the coming months (as an example for a call for ethnic cleansing, hypocrisy calls regarding other amazon sales, and probably legal action vs. Amazon (seems there is also a question of proceeds)). Frankly - if it wasn't banned and if pro-Palestinian/liberal outlets had chosen to ignore it at the time - I wouldn't have written an article (I started on 27 June - after the ban and coverage wave following it, though I was aware of the book from the initial coverage wave) and it would've been less notable (maybe still notable, maybe not). The banning/censorship + extremely detailed responses (positive & negative) to the thesis laid in the book (in a
915:-- plenty of reliable sources mention the book, as farcical as it may be, and in fact the sources added to "improve NPOV" do the job of highlighting that the controversy, and hence the book, were notable enough. The nominator seems to be confusing various policies, amounting to theory that "neutral coverage of an idea that I find distasteful (and racist and so on) violates NPOV". Basically, this is an attempt to make the ever-stretching rules of PC pass for a wikipedia policy.
508:, "Brief bursts of news coverage may not sufficiently demonstrate notability". That this book has already been delisted by the world's two largest online booksellers only a few days after going on sale speaks volumes about its lack of enduring notability. That the book has also been described as a racist prank is another reason not to reward it with an article here. It's basically nothing more than a blip in the news cycle.
684:) is that there is no history - and his blunt presentation of said thesis, offensive to some, and even described as as a means for "subjugation and ethnic cleansing" - is an empty tome. This is a serious claim - perhaps wrong and offensive - but serious. I stick to the sources - for instance professor Steven Weitzman treats Voll's thesis in one breath with Sand's:
666:
themselves to the topic of what might be called "Palestinian denialism" rather than the book itself, which is just treated as the latest example of the phenomenon - what, after all, can be said about an empty book? As
Colapeninsula noted above, there is a case to be made for an article on the broader topic, but hardly I think on one particular example of it.
52:. The issue is whether this book (whatever its merits may be) is notable as measured by its coverage in reliable third-party sources. There is no clear consensus here, although a majority of opinions would keep the article. The article can be renominated after some time when the lasting importance of the book, if any, can be better assessed.
265:
Not applicable here. Even if we apply GNG, this has received several bursts of coverage (in multiple RS): the initial release and criticism/activism/support, Amazon ban, Knesset sppech, and throughout the period multiple in depth reviews in the
English, Hebrew, Arabic and other languages covering the
686:
In one chapter, I look at a book entitled The
Invention of the Jewish People by Shlomo Sand which provoked controversy a few years ago because of its critique of Zionism. Sand makes his argument against Israel by trying to disprove the origin story which he believes underpins Zionism’s claim to the
596:
and the B&N website no longer has a page for the book, so clearly it's been delisted by them. As for sustained coverage - the book basically got a few gleeful endorses from pro-Israel websites when first published and a couple of disapproving mentions on pro-Palestinian media, then got a second
615:
2. Coverage: A. The book got enraged counter-responses after publication (in addition to endorsements) + calls for action against Amazon. B. Additional coverage after banning (late June). C. Trickling coverage in July from several sources (including some that are in-depth analysis of the claim) -
611:
1. I've seen the oneliner (at the end of a substansive article) in dailywire (and reffed it in the article) - still not sure (from what I see from other sources) that it actually was banned in B&N and not end of print run - but it doesn't really matter either way until it gets real coverage
474:
have a history and are an independent ethnic group, but I'm struggling to find a specific discussion of this controversy on WP. Since most of the article is about the wider controversy rather than the literary merits of the text, I suspect a merge might be a better option if there is a suitable
646:
3. Who will care six months from now? As the book has been called on the one hand "History of the
Palestinian People is explicitly intended to reinforce the dehumanization of an entire people in order to grease the machinery of subjugation and ethnic cleansing", and on the other hand we have a
665:
It's quite disturbing that you would describe a collection of blank pages as a "thesis". Other than that, it's hyperbolic to describe what happened to the book as a "ban", or "censorship" - it's simply been delisted by the major online sellers. As for the responses, they have mostly addressed
526:
1. Being a self-published book does not correlate with notability - but nor does it preclude notability. This particular book was covered in-depth (with lengthly analysis on the merit of the claim (either agreeing or disagreeing) with some outliers going as far as to call it "History of the
697:
One might further argue that whereas a private, independent bookseller with a specific inventory must decide which books fit the shop’s criteria and deserve to occupy shelf space, Amazon is in reality a common utility, a portal for anything published and
789:
571:
has taken this book seriously. Dead serious - including said claims that this is a call for dehumanization/ethnic cleansing/subjugation, as well as in-depth analysis of the merits of the claim that there is no
Palestinian people or Palestinian
813:
Yes, it was reportedly listed as a bestseller on Amazon in a couple of narrow categories for the few days it was on sale there, which would not be difficult to achieve over such a short timespan. However, that has no relevance here, since
1096:
to be a notable topic. Any editor is welcome to test the consensus by renominating the article; perhaps it has changed. The event we are dealing with in this article is an insignificant publicity stunt, IMO. Hence my vote for deletion.
169:
756:- even if it is a joke, which isn't the exact definition in this case, best selling jokes are notable. The book has a clear thesis presented thunderingly by the sound of silence, and answered by dozens of writers.
634:
has an in-depth counter response, others really just carry what she said - a number of these (in Hebrew & English )). So that's 4 distinct phases of coverage in approx. a month or so - which is definitely
861:
Two responses from you to me, two comments on contributor. Thank you for reminding me why I rarely bother contributing in this topic area. As for BLUDGEON - not even close, I have responded to exactly
703:). All this while Amazon continues to sell, as has been noted by some sources, books and merchandise calling for the genocide of Jews or the erasure of Israel. The book is notable - as it meets
820:
Bestseller lists in retailer or e-commerce sources like Amazon or self-published sources like personal websites, blogs, bulletin boards, wikis, and similar media are not considered reliable.
163:
689:. The book hasn't been "simply delisted" - it was banned for sale on Amazon, which may be described as a "common utility" due its monopolistic or near-monopolistic status (not my words:
865:!vote on this page, all my other posts have been in response to posts addressed to me - and I already withdrew from the exchange with my principal interlocutor, no prompting required.
95:
90:
1001:
99:
304:
82:
597:
blip of coverage about a week later due to it being delisted on Amazon. That hardly qualifies as sustained in my book. Who will care about this book six months from now?
378:
933:
122:
973:
527:
Palestinian People is explicitly intended to reinforce the dehumanization of an entire people in order to grease the machinery of subjugation and ethnic cleansing"
725:
Sorry, I'm still not persuaded. But I think I've made the points I wanted to make, so I will endeavour at this point to step aside and let others have their say.
266:
book itself and the claim therein (both positive and negative). Books, howver, are typically seen as a persistent object, and in particuar this book amply passes
129:
953:
690:
1068:. So is it deletion-worthy when the subject criticizes the Left but keep-worthy when it criticizes the Right? Your stance seems hypocritical to me.
496:(nominator has since updated nomination with valid criteria) I think there are applicable policies. Firstly, this is a self published book and per
86:
184:
331:. Nom fails to provide a policy-based reason for deletion. Personal opinions are neither a valid reason for bringing an articl eto AFD, nor is
412:
also has an article (which the nom also nominated). Many books are "old" or "recycled", our question at
Knowledge should be if they are notable.
151:
1181:
I don't know why it wasn't signed... I added the four tildes. Anyway, I'd like to add that these books are not all *individually* noteworthy.
680:
Voll has said he looked for sources for
Palestinian existence prior to the modern time - and found none - thus his thesis (in the sense of
621:
1039:; essentially, an unremarkable prank which has been done before. No societal impact or long-term significance; just 15 minutes of fame.
78:
70:
1246:
1218:
1204:
1141:
1106:
1083:
1048:
1027:
985:
965:
945:
924:
907:
874:
852:
830:
804:
783:
765:
734:
720:
675:
660:
606:
581:
517:
484:
456:
433:
389:
369:
344:
316:
279:
260:
242:
223:
64:
145:
836:
701:
356:
Nom hasn't even bothered to cite an actual single policy in bringing this Afd. Article uses 38 separate references. Easily fulfills
711:. While "Historicity of the Palestinian people" might be notable in and of itself - so is this book due so coverage in the sources.
530:)) - by over 20 different sources independent of the author/publisher (and possibly more) - clearly surpassing the requirement in
594:
141:
17:
1152:
Someone should create an article about all these blank page books and this can redirect to that. 16:36, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
191:
1167:
409:
270:(1) with much more than 2 independent reviews (Around 20 or so. Even if we are exceedingly selective it is more than 10).
552:
3. Banning from Amazon (B&N may be due to print run selling out - it is not clear this was actually banned there) -
981:
961:
941:
623:
538:
791:
is a gNews search on "A history of the
Palestinian Poeple" + bestseller. Gato, AFD is about sources, not opinions.
537:
2. Coverage is sustained - persisting from immediately following publication to this week (e.g. Bosnian newspaper
1265:
545:) - calling SUSTAINED here amounts to saying articles can't be made on new books. SUSTAINED isn't a criteria for
332:
157:
40:
1076:
1020:
214:.....all blank books. And all, AFAIK, self published. Knowledge doesn't need to put up with every silly joke,
251:, Ok, so I'm not accustomed to the alphabet soup used for AfD, to editors voting here: please use your heads,
1064:
Funnily, that's not how you saw it in the AfD I referenced above. Please tell me about the lasting impact of
492:. I had been considering nominating this article for deletion myself but might as well comment here instead.
480:
1093:
1065:
977:
957:
937:
500:, "Self-publication and/or publication by a vanity press do not correlate with notability". Secondly, per
365:
1261:
1102:
1044:
903:
848:
800:
792:
340:
312:
300:
230:
36:
1155:
612:
regarding B&N issues (I will note that if it was actually banned - this increases significance).
1070:
1014:
1012:
would have made a competent nomination. Her mistake is probably going to result in a keep outcome.
870:
826:
779:
730:
671:
602:
513:
505:
177:
1230:- This book might be the same joke as done before but this one got big press and definitely meets
693:
528:
840:
476:
626:
541:
1214:
1192:
1186:
1163:
1036:
997:
716:
656:
577:
501:
429:
417:
383:
361:
275:
248:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
1260:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
700:). The Amazon ban followed an activist campaign to ban the book (on and off the Amazon site,
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
1242:
1200:
1137:
1098:
1059:
1040:
899:
844:
796:
774:
I hardly think a book that was on sale for barely a week can be described as a best-seller.
636:
564:
following the banning increased significantly (and on a personal level - got me interested).
336:
328:
308:
256:
238:
219:
1128:
cannot be applied here as it not an an event and even if we apply it it should be kept per
1129:
761:
405:
628:
543:
421:
1125:
920:
866:
822:
775:
726:
667:
598:
509:
452:
444:
55:
1231:
1121:
1005:
895:
708:
619:
401:
357:
1210:
1182:
1159:
815:
712:
704:
652:
640:
573:
568:
561:
546:
531:
497:
471:
425:
413:
271:
267:
682:
a statement or theory that is put forward as a premise to be maintained or proved.
116:
1237:
1196:
1133:
1009:
252:
234:
215:
1209:
Not all are notable. This particular book, per the sourcing in the article, is.
757:
631:
916:
556:(which included claims that an empty book is a call for ethnic cleansing)-
504:, Knowledge articles should be on topics with "enduring notability" and per
448:
617:
200:
This is an old joke, which has been tried many times before, see
1254:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
494:
While the nominator has not given a valid reason for deletion,
210:
Reasons To Vote For
Democrats: A Comprehensive Guide, 2016
625:. D. Coverage following Hotovely's speech with the book:
112:
108:
104:
593:
says the book has been "banned" by Barnes & Noble,
176:
1004:. If I were to support a keep outcome, I'd point to
305:
Knowledge:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions
420:) 23:00, 19 July 2017 (UTC) Bears mentioning that
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
1268:). No further edits should be made to this page.
1002:Knowledge rejects that argument when it wants to
554:following a wide pro-Palestinian campaign to ban
639:. The book definitely has, if we're looking at
379:list of Literature-related deletion discussions
934:list of Palestine-related deletion discussions
424:has an article as well, and is deemed notable.
207:Everything Obama Knows About the Economy, 2011
974:list of Politics-related deletion discussions
190:
8:
972:Note: This debate has been included in the
952:Note: This debate has been included in the
932:Note: This debate has been included in the
377:Note: This debate has been included in the
954:list of Israel-related deletion discussions
1153:
971:
951:
931:
376:
996:If I were to support deletion, I'd cite
1191:The user cannot participate in AFD per
470:It's part of a wider debate on whether
696:
685:
681:
651:) - is what really makes this notable.
204:The Great Book of Lesbian Humor, 1960s
7:
643:(1) more than two in-depth reviews.
79:A History of the Palestinian People
71:A History of the Palestinian People
894:because sourcing suffices to pass
567:4. Prank? Much of the coverage in
24:
837:Knowledge:Deletion is not cleanup
327:Nom fails to exhibit evidence of
839:take this to talk. You are in
475:target, else keep (for now). --
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
335:a valid argument for deletion.
1:
410:Reasons To Vote For Democrats
1189:) 16:43, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
1285:
1247:15:11, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
1219:17:51, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
1205:15:08, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
1142:15:03, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
1107:21:23, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
1084:21:16, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
1049:21:05, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
1028:20:39, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
986:20:29, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
966:20:26, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
946:20:26, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
925:06:40, 21 July 2017 (UTC)
908:14:52, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
875:10:10, 21 July 2017 (UTC)
853:19:12, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
831:17:08, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
805:15:21, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
784:12:12, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
766:11:43, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
735:14:47, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
721:13:26, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
676:13:08, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
661:12:13, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
607:11:51, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
582:11:21, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
560:, to wit the coverage in
518:10:59, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
485:09:43, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
457:06:48, 21 July 2017 (UTC)
434:00:26, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
400:(creator). Easily passes
390:22:28, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
370:22:16, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
345:14:51, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
317:14:51, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
280:21:21, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
261:20:49, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
243:22:48, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
224:21:29, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
65:10:25, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
1257:Please do not modify it.
795:is not a valid argument.
32:Please do not modify it.
843:territory on this page.
558:only confers notability
1094:Khizr and Ghazala Khan
1066:Khizr and Ghazala Khan
404:and the book specific
303:is a subhead on page
1150:Merge and Redirect
333:WP:IJUSTDONTLIKEIT
1193:WP:ARBPIA3#500/30
1171:
1158:comment added by
1092:I still consider
988:
978:Shawn in Montreal
968:
958:Shawn in Montreal
948:
938:Shawn in Montreal
540:, Knesset speech
392:
63:
1276:
1259:
1240:
1082:
1079:
1073:
1063:
1026:
1023:
1017:
388:
195:
194:
180:
132:
120:
102:
62:
60:
53:
34:
1284:
1283:
1279:
1278:
1277:
1275:
1274:
1273:
1272:
1266:deletion review
1255:
1238:
1077:
1071:
1069:
1057:
1021:
1015:
1013:
382:
137:
128:
93:
77:
74:
56:
54:
48:The result was
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
1282:
1280:
1271:
1270:
1250:
1249:
1224:
1223:
1222:
1221:
1145:
1144:
1114:
1113:
1112:
1111:
1110:
1109:
1087:
1086:
1072:Chris Troutman
1052:
1051:
1030:
1016:Chris Troutman
990:
989:
969:
949:
928:
927:
910:
888:
887:
886:
885:
884:
883:
882:
881:
880:
879:
878:
877:
856:
855:
808:
807:
793:WP:IDONTLIKEIT
769:
768:
750:
749:
748:
747:
746:
745:
744:
743:
742:
741:
740:
739:
738:
737:
644:
613:
585:
584:
565:
550:
535:
521:
520:
487:
464:
463:
462:
461:
460:
459:
437:
436:
394:
393:
373:
372:
350:
349:
348:
347:
324:
323:
322:
321:
320:
319:
301:WP:Not notable
287:
286:
285:
284:
283:
282:
231:WP:Not notable
212:
211:
208:
205:
198:
197:
134:
73:
68:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1281:
1269:
1267:
1263:
1258:
1252:
1251:
1248:
1245:
1244:
1243:
1241:
1233:
1229:
1226:
1225:
1220:
1216:
1212:
1208:
1207:
1206:
1202:
1198:
1194:
1190:
1188:
1184:
1179:
1178:
1176:
1175:
1173:
1172:
1169:
1165:
1161:
1157:
1151:
1143:
1139:
1135:
1131:
1127:
1123:
1119:
1116:
1115:
1108:
1104:
1100:
1095:
1091:
1090:
1089:
1088:
1085:
1080:
1074:
1067:
1061:
1056:
1055:
1054:
1053:
1050:
1046:
1042:
1038:
1034:
1031:
1029:
1024:
1018:
1011:
1007:
1003:
999:
995:
992:
991:
987:
983:
979:
975:
970:
967:
963:
959:
955:
950:
947:
943:
939:
935:
930:
929:
926:
922:
918:
914:
911:
909:
905:
901:
897:
893:
890:
889:
876:
872:
868:
864:
860:
859:
858:
857:
854:
850:
846:
842:
838:
834:
833:
832:
828:
824:
821:
817:
812:
811:
810:
809:
806:
802:
798:
794:
790:
787:
786:
785:
781:
777:
773:
772:
771:
770:
767:
763:
759:
755:
752:
751:
736:
732:
728:
724:
723:
722:
718:
714:
710:
706:
702:
699:
694:
691:
688:
683:
679:
678:
677:
673:
669:
664:
663:
662:
658:
654:
650:
649:blunt fashion
645:
642:
638:
633:
629:
627:
624:
622:
620:
618:
614:
610:
609:
608:
604:
600:
595:
592:
589:
588:
587:
586:
583:
579:
575:
570:
566:
563:
559:
555:
551:
548:
544:
542:
539:
536:
533:
529:
525:
524:
523:
522:
519:
515:
511:
507:
503:
499:
495:
491:
488:
486:
482:
478:
477:Colapeninsula
473:
469:
466:
465:
458:
454:
450:
446:
443:
442:
441:
440:
439:
438:
435:
431:
427:
423:
419:
415:
411:
407:
403:
399:
396:
395:
391:
387:
386:
380:
375:
374:
371:
367:
363:
359:
355:
352:
351:
346:
342:
338:
334:
330:
326:
325:
318:
314:
310:
306:
302:
298:
295:
294:
293:
292:
291:
290:
289:
288:
281:
277:
273:
269:
264:
263:
262:
258:
254:
250:
246:
245:
244:
240:
236:
232:
228:
227:
226:
225:
221:
217:
209:
206:
203:
202:
201:
193:
189:
186:
183:
179:
175:
171:
168:
165:
162:
159:
156:
153:
150:
147:
143:
140:
139:Find sources:
135:
131:
127:
124:
118:
114:
110:
106:
101:
97:
92:
88:
84:
80:
76:
75:
72:
69:
67:
66:
61:
59:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
1256:
1253:
1236:
1235:
1227:
1180:
1177:
1174:
1154:— Preceding
1149:
1147:
1146:
1117:
1032:
993:
912:
891:
862:
819:
818:states that
753:
648:
590:
557:
553:
506:WP:SUSTAINED
493:
489:
472:Palestinians
467:
397:
385:CAPTAIN RAJU
384:
362:Plot Spoiler
353:
296:
247:.....and Pr
213:
199:
187:
181:
173:
166:
160:
154:
148:
138:
125:
57:
50:no consensus
49:
47:
31:
28:
1099:K.e.coffman
1060:K.e.coffman
1041:K.e.coffman
900:E.M.Gregory
845:E.M.Gregory
841:WP:BLUDGEON
797:E.M.Gregory
354:Speedy keep
337:E.M.Gregory
309:E.M.Gregory
164:free images
1037:WP:NOTNEWS
998:WP:NOTNEWS
698:available.
632:mondoweiss
591:Daily Wire
502:WP:NOTNEWS
249:WP:NOTNEWS
58:Sandstein
1262:talk page
1008:. I wish
867:Gatoclass
835:So what?
823:Gatoclass
776:Gatoclass
727:Gatoclass
668:Gatoclass
637:WP:SIGCOV
599:Gatoclass
510:Gatoclass
445:Also this
329:WP:BEFORE
37:talk page
1264:or in a
1168:contribs
1156:unsigned
1130:WP:RAPID
707:(1) and
572:history.
406:WP:NBOOK
123:View log
39:or in a
1211:Icewhiz
1183:Mgolden
1160:Mgolden
1126:WP:NEWS
1120:Passes
994:Comment
713:Icewhiz
653:Icewhiz
574:Icewhiz
468:Comment
426:Icewhiz
414:Icewhiz
272:Icewhiz
170:WPÂ refs
158:scholar
96:protect
91:history
1239:Galatz
1232:WP:GNG
1197:Shrike
1134:Shrike
1122:WP:GNG
1033:Delete
1010:Huldra
1006:WP:GNG
1000:. But
896:WP:GNG
788:Here:
709:WP:GNG
490:Delete
402:WP:GNG
358:WP:GNG
253:Huldra
235:Huldra
216:Huldra
142:Google
100:delete
816:WP:BK
758:DGtal
705:WP:BK
641:WP:BK
569:WP:RS
562:WP:RS
547:WP:BK
532:WP:BK
498:WP:BK
422:4′33″
299:that
268:WP:BK
185:JSTOR
146:books
130:Stats
117:views
109:watch
105:links
16:<
1228:Keep
1215:talk
1201:talk
1187:talk
1164:talk
1138:talk
1118:Keep
1103:talk
1078:talk
1045:talk
1035:per
1022:talk
982:talk
962:talk
942:talk
921:talk
917:Dahn
913:Keep
904:talk
892:Keep
871:talk
849:talk
827:talk
801:talk
780:talk
762:talk
754:Keep
731:talk
717:talk
672:talk
657:talk
603:talk
578:talk
534:(1).
514:talk
481:talk
453:talk
449:Dahn
430:talk
418:talk
398:Keep
366:talk
341:talk
313:talk
297:Note
276:talk
257:talk
239:talk
220:talk
178:FENS
152:news
113:logs
87:talk
83:edit
863:one
229:Pr
192:TWL
121:– (
1234:-
1217:)
1203:)
1195:--
1170:)
1166:•
1140:)
1132:--
1105:)
1047:)
984:)
976:.
964:)
956:.
944:)
936:.
923:)
906:)
873:)
851:)
829:)
803:)
782:)
764:)
733:)
719:)
695:-
692:,
674:)
659:)
605:)
580:)
516:)
483:)
455:)
447:.
432:)
381:.
368:)
360:.
343:)
315:)
278:)
259:)
241:)
233:,
222:)
172:)
115:|
111:|
107:|
103:|
98:|
94:|
89:|
85:|
1213:(
1199:(
1185:(
1162:(
1148:*
1136:(
1124:.
1101:(
1081:)
1075:(
1062::
1058:@
1043:(
1025:)
1019:(
980:(
960:(
940:(
919:(
902:(
898:.
869:(
847:(
825:(
799:(
778:(
760:(
729:(
715:(
670:(
655:(
630:(
601:(
576:(
549:.
512:(
479:(
451:(
428:(
416:(
364:(
339:(
311:(
307:.
274:(
255:(
237:(
218:(
196:)
188:·
182:·
174:·
167:·
161:·
155:·
149:·
144:(
136:(
133:)
126:·
119:)
81:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.