1023:, which is a mall. Gillie and Marc are known for putting up temporary sculptures on the premises of property developers, and ginning up tons of opportunist press coverage ("The Last Three" has significantly more press coverage than this sculpture, and we don't have an article for it), and sometimes generating pretty intense controversy for their kitsch, and lack of cultural sensitivity. And the vast majority of their sculptures are not of notable women, they are of an imaginary self portrait as a dog. If this sculpture is ultimately permanent, then maybe the article has a place, but almost none of their existing work is permanent. Until then it is Crystal Ball. Regretfully.
718:
sources theselves. The story is the same and therefore is only one source. That's what I gathered from what was said. In the case of this statue, the few sources all state the same information therefore they are the same. There is no independent viewpoints because it is so new. They all cover the same subject from the same vantage point using the same sources for their work. That's what I was saying. My suggestion was to give it time and then recreate the page adding the new sources and it will be soething to support for inclusion. --
1040:, Thank you clarifying this, and for taking the time to make changes to correct the errors that I unknowingly introduced. I was completely unaware of the issues you raise, and confused the two sculptures. I'm still somewhat confused, and am wondering if I should strike my comments above stating the the sculpture has already been built. Is the Cuomo sculpture built yet, or this one (which is the Gillie & Marc sculpture? That info will help in redefining my !vote accordingly.
1403:. The article now has multiple tertiary sources that provide coverage of the topic, though some of them duplicate each other. However, the statue hasn't been unveiled yet, so coverage of the statue will unsurprisingly be limited at the present time. As a result, I'm not opposed to merging this article for now, although that would likely end up unmerged anyway once it is unveiled.
755:, OK, we'll have to agree to disagree. I see similar coverage in multiple independent reliable sources as an indication that the topic is important or at least popular. If we've deemed the sources reliable and independent, we should assume good faith in the reporting; It's not groupthink, perhaps the reporting is similar because the subject is just not that complicated. ~
443:- this article on a commemorative public sculpture of a notable woman. When I arrived at this AfD, the article already had three sigcov citations in reliable, verifiable news sources: the New York Times, ABC News, and CBS news. I added two more; it now has five. A quick BEFORE search brought up multiple other news sources. I agree with
618:
works. Several journals simultaneously publishing different articles does not always constitute multiple works, especially when the authors are relying on the same sources, and merely restating the same information. Similarly, a series of publications by the same author or in the same periodical is normally counted as one source." --
481:
can be gathered and multiple sources which cover the story in a significant way from different angles can be found. If we go by policy, the article should not be included. The statue does not receive notability just because the subject of the statue is notable. We all know this...notability is not inherited. --
1062:
sculptures, then work with real estate companies to temporarily install them on their property for 3 to 9 months, then move them to another site. The official, permanent sculpture has not yet been created, and will likely take quite a long time to create. Cuomo announced the 23 member commission in
October.
480:
multiple sources is considered sources that do not repeat the same information. They are reliable but they say the same thing, therefore they are counted as one source, not multiple as required by the notability guideline. It is not creating more work to draftify the article until all the information
925:
that has not happened yet. The unveiling ceremony will occur on March 15 because is the new official holiday in NYC, "Justice
Ginsberg Day" (which is also her birthday). Therefore CRYSTALBALL does not apply. If the article was called "The unveiling of the statue of RGB" then it would apply, however,
617:
state "Lack of multiple sources suggests that the topic may be more suitable for inclusion in an article on a broader topic. It is common for multiple newspapers or journals to publish the same story, sometimes with minor alterations or different headlines, but one story does not constitute multiple
717:
I meant what I said as my interpretations of the above wording. If you have three articles, from CNN, ABC NEWS, and MSNBC, all reporting on the same subject, from the same POV and basically saying the same thing they can only be counted as one source for notability despite being multiple reliable
1061:
sculpture has been made, but not installed (though some of their other work has been presented as rendererings, so it is unclear if this is a sophisticated digital render). I did a
Autobiography/COI TNT on their article a few years ago, so learned quite a bit about their work. They make/conceive
389:
An easy solution would be to draftify the article rather than delete wholesale. It most likely will receive a lot of attention from media organizations over the next few months and especially once built. By then more sources could be added and the article could be expanded with more information.
656:
One can extrapolate from the information above that the notes are offering examples but that the same principle applies for all sources. If it is just the same story repeated over again or if the sources of the article are being pulled from the same sources themselves then it only counts as one
1158:
There is no reason to have separate articles about every public honor a person receives, even if it has articles in the news. This content should be handled in the main article; if that is too large, create a page for memorials and hornors, not individual pages. 05:34, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
1386:, when you nominated the article it had only one reference. It now has 20, including from the New York Times, CNN, and PEOPLE, some of which you may believe are RSs devoted to the subject of this article. Do you still believe that it does not meet GNG, or does this soften your opinion?
694:, OK but all of this is not the same as your original blanket statement that if two sources have the same information, they should be considered one. What we're looking for is for sources to be independent of one another (and independent of the subject). I am aware of this. ~
1330:, per discussion and obvious well-sourced notable topic with sources added since the nom. The statue is not "crystal", it exists, and is one of the few statues of real-life women in New York city. As Deb says, can't see the justification for deletion.
995:: First and foremost, there are two sculptures, this one and an official permanent monument near her birthplace -- that is the one that Cuomo spoke about, and that is the one that had the legit jury. So half of the sources that
201:
1082:, got it, thank you for straitening that out. It is also good to know the Gillie and Marc article and any associated articles on their specific works should be watched for continued PROMO moving forward.
1156:"This is not a guarantee that a topic will necessarily be handled as a separate, stand-alone page. Editors may use their discretion to merge or group two or more related topics into a single article."
1011:
refer to are not actually about this work, and I have removed the 4 citations that refer to this other sculpture. Second, it is not verifiable that this one is permanent, as I believe is implied by
1387:
1185:
1120:
195:
921:- The sculpture has already been built. It exists. It has been photographed. It is finished. It has been written about in multiple verifiable independent reliable sources. It is the
347:
just be recreated in a couple months, assuming no unveiling delay. Another editor has also posted a note on my talk page saying they plan to help recreate this article as well. ---
1252:
per
TimothyBlue. Notability of statues is not inherited from their subjects, and there is no indication of long-term, enduring coverage that would justify a separate article.
162:
1189:
135:
130:
139:
274:
122:
244:
259:
109:
1063:
881:
unveiled to the public, there will be even more articles about what people think of it. It is a certainty that there will be more articles on this topic.
94:
877:
Is the topic of an RBG statue notable? Yes, because if the statue gets cancelled, there will be even more articles about the cancellation. If it gets
860:. Will definitely receive widespread coverage at the unveiling - there's no reason to delete it now only to recreate the exact same page later.--
1184:. We have to look at more than the refs in the article. I just added eight or nine more rs refs. There are a lot out there. Clearly passes GNG.
216:
1065:. This commission has Ginsburg's relatives, her colleagues, law clerks, the directors of the Brooklyn Museum, and El Museo del Barrio etc.
183:
1391:
1124:
126:
1369:
1174:
543:, I never expected otherwise. I just wanted to add the contextual differences between personal opinion and factual evidence. ;-) --
657:
source for notability. It must be several reliable sources independent of each other, not only literally but also in content. --
1412:
1395:
1374:
1339:
1322:
1305:
1284:
1261:
1236:
1215:
1193:
1128:
1091:
1074:
1049:
1032:
971:
954:
936:
910:
893:
869:
852:
836:
815:
790:
764:
747:
703:
686:
647:
597:
572:
527:
510:
460:
423:
381:
362:
334:
303:
281:
266:
251:
236:
177:
89:
82:
64:
17:
173:
118:
70:
292:
Non-notable at this moment. Article may come back after it is built if it's shown to have a large notability. Stay safe,
103:
99:
223:
355:
327:
1429:
1363:
is not notable separately from the individual it depicts, and details can be easily summarized in the biography.
1116:
447:
that it is purposeless to delete it, or even to draftify - that would just make additional work for editors like
40:
52:. It looks like the refs added towards the end convinced most people, but at best this would be no consensus.
962:
certainly will be notable once unveiled. Rather silly nom: "No claim to notability or duration of coverage".
1070:
1028:
737:
676:
637:
562:
500:
413:
189:
1352:
865:
298:
588:, I've never heard of this criteria requiring new information in each source. Where is this documented? ~
343:
we're not keeping in main space right now, can the page be moved to draft space instead of deleted? This
1425:
1227:
is not allowed because the article is being actively worked on (almost 50 edits in the last few days). ~
1170:
1020:
986:
448:
377:
348:
320:
36:
1408:
1335:
1162:
1087:
1045:
932:
832:
811:
523:
456:
1348:
1249:
1147:
848:
435:
315:
209:
1356:
1224:
1112:
1079:
1066:
1037:
1024:
889:
752:
719:
691:
658:
619:
585:
544:
515:
482:
395:
372:
Arguably passes GNG now & is sure to in a couple of months. Deletion would be purposeless. --
1277:
1205:
451:
who has offered to recreate it. Honestly, I am very surprised this was nominated for deletion.
1301:
1201:
991:
it pains me to vote to delete an article you started, and one about RBG, but the fact is that
967:
906:
861:
293:
78:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
1424:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
319:. I'll just be recreating in a couple months unless another editor beats me to the punch. ---
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
1364:
1166:
444:
373:
1404:
1331:
1257:
1210:
1083:
1058:
1054:
1041:
998:
980:
928:
926:
the sculpture DOES exist, it has been built, it is already notable. Look at the citations.
828:
807:
540:
519:
452:
439:
1115:
It is in fact being installed permanently. A number of sources indicate that. Including
1232:
950:
844:
760:
699:
593:
55:
1318:
1293:
1270:
1014:
885:
614:
477:
1297:
1002:
963:
902:
801:
787:
156:
1383:
1151:
473:
391:
278:
263:
248:
233:
1253:
1355:. The article as it stands now is hanging a promotion for the artists on the
1228:
1006:
946:
756:
714:
695:
610:
589:
1314:
394:) and it should be followed. Not notable now but will be very soon. --
1119:. Does that change your view - given your above comments? Thanks.
1420:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
883:
Also, not to discount my fine arguments, but RBG was awesome.
901:
Adequately covered in highly regarded secondary sources.--
152:
148:
144:
208:
1313:
because I can't see the justification for deletion.
945:
significant coverage in multiple reliable sources. ~
312:the article and let it snowball but otherwise just
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
1432:). No further edits should be made to this page.
806:please see my comment below. Thanks in advance!
273:Note: This discussion has been included in the
258:Note: This discussion has been included in the
243:Note: This discussion has been included in the
232:No claim to notability or duration of coverage.
275:list of New York-related deletion discussions
222:
8:
390:Knowledge does have a notability guideline (
110:Help, my article got nominated for deletion!
272:
257:
245:list of Women-related deletion discussions
242:
260:list of Arts-related deletion discussions
1388:2603:7000:2143:8500:DC79:4CC3:DC44:71FA
1186:2603:7000:2143:8500:8C2A:84CA:D15B:3FEC
1121:2603:7000:2143:8500:DC79:4CC3:DC44:71FA
7:
24:
1359:of the statue, but as of now the
1019:'s argument. It is installed at
95:Introduction to deletion process
1349:Ruth Bader Ginsburg#Recognition
1250:Ruth Bader Ginsburg#Recognition
1148:Ruth Bader Ginsburg#Recognition
786:Clearly a case of CRYSTALBALL.
436:Ruth Bader Ginsburg#Recognition
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
1:
993:things are not what they seem
119:Statue of Ruth Bader Ginsburg
71:Statue of Ruth Bader Ginsburg
1413:02:12, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
1396:18:38, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
1375:17:54, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
1340:12:34, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
1323:19:20, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
1306:16:05, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
1285:07:49, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
1262:20:52, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
1237:23:36, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
1216:16:28, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
1194:08:34, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
1129:17:37, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
1092:22:21, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
1075:21:30, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
1050:21:18, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
1033:20:57, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
972:18:18, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
955:15:32, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
937:14:53, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
911:12:33, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
894:06:45, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
870:03:24, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
853:20:21, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
837:18:31, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
816:14:54, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
791:17:58, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
765:15:47, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
748:15:12, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
704:14:46, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
687:14:13, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
648:14:06, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
598:15:30, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
573:16:24, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
528:16:09, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
511:15:32, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
461:14:57, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
424:13:52, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
382:13:34, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
363:18:08, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
335:13:24, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
304:12:51, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
282:11:39, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
267:11:39, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
252:11:39, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
237:11:39, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
65:10:10, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
960:Keep/Merge to subject's bio
85:(AfD)? Read these primers!
1449:
977:Delete, Draftify, or Merge
1351:per those above, and per
919:Comment for clarification
827:Fails in passing WP:GNG.
1422:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
1204:for an unbuilt statue.
518:, I stand by my !vote.
1057:, It appears that the
339:May I please request,
1365:Ivanvector's squirrel
1021:City Point (Brooklyn)
83:Articles for deletion
316:Ruth Bader Ginsburg
308:Silly. I say just
1165:comment added by
884:
744:
683:
644:
569:
507:
420:
284:
269:
254:
100:Guide to deletion
90:How to contribute
63:
1440:
1282:
1275:
1213:
1208:
1178:
1018:
1010:
990:
987:Another Believer
882:
805:
743:
738:
734:
729:
724:
682:
677:
673:
668:
663:
643:
638:
634:
629:
624:
568:
563:
559:
554:
549:
506:
501:
497:
492:
487:
449:Another Believer
419:
414:
410:
405:
400:
358:
351:
350:Another Believer
330:
323:
322:Another Believer
301:
296:
227:
226:
212:
160:
142:
80:
62:
60:
53:
34:
1448:
1447:
1443:
1442:
1441:
1439:
1438:
1437:
1436:
1430:deletion review
1372:
1353:WP:NOTINHERITED
1278:
1271:
1211:
1206:
1160:
1146:selectively to
1059:Gillie and Marc
1012:
996:
984:
981:Gillie and Marc
799:
739:
730:
725:
720:
678:
669:
664:
659:
639:
630:
625:
620:
564:
555:
550:
545:
502:
493:
488:
483:
440:Gillie and Marc
415:
406:
401:
396:
361:
356:
349:
333:
328:
321:
299:
294:
169:
133:
117:
114:
77:
74:
56:
54:
48:The result was
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
1446:
1444:
1435:
1434:
1416:
1415:
1398:
1377:
1368:
1342:
1325:
1308:
1287:
1269:as per above.
1264:
1242:
1241:
1240:
1239:
1219:
1218:
1196:
1179:
1140:
1139:
1138:
1137:
1136:
1135:
1134:
1133:
1132:
1131:
1101:
1100:
1099:
1098:
1097:
1096:
1095:
1094:
974:
957:
914:
913:
896:
872:
855:
839:
821:
820:
819:
818:
794:
793:
780:
779:
778:
777:
776:
775:
774:
773:
772:
771:
770:
769:
768:
767:
709:
708:
707:
706:
651:
650:
613:The notes for
603:
602:
601:
600:
580:
579:
578:
577:
576:
575:
533:
532:
531:
530:
464:
463:
426:
384:
367:
366:
365:
353:
325:
306:
286:
285:
270:
255:
230:
229:
166:
113:
112:
107:
97:
92:
75:
73:
68:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1445:
1433:
1431:
1427:
1423:
1418:
1417:
1414:
1410:
1406:
1402:
1399:
1397:
1393:
1389:
1385:
1381:
1378:
1376:
1371:
1366:
1362:
1361:statue itself
1358:
1354:
1350:
1346:
1343:
1341:
1337:
1333:
1329:
1326:
1324:
1320:
1316:
1312:
1309:
1307:
1303:
1299:
1295:
1291:
1288:
1286:
1283:
1281:
1276:
1274:
1268:
1265:
1263:
1259:
1255:
1251:
1247:
1244:
1243:
1238:
1234:
1230:
1226:
1223:
1222:
1221:
1220:
1217:
1214:
1209:
1203:
1200:
1197:
1195:
1191:
1187:
1183:
1180:
1176:
1172:
1168:
1164:
1157:
1153:
1149:
1145:
1142:
1141:
1130:
1126:
1122:
1118:
1114:
1113:Theredproject
1111:
1110:
1109:
1108:
1107:
1106:
1105:
1104:
1103:
1102:
1093:
1089:
1085:
1081:
1080:Theredproject
1078:
1077:
1076:
1072:
1068:
1067:Theredproject
1064:
1060:
1056:
1053:
1052:
1051:
1047:
1043:
1039:
1038:Theredproject
1036:
1035:
1034:
1030:
1026:
1025:Theredproject
1022:
1016:
1008:
1004:
1000:
994:
988:
982:
978:
975:
973:
969:
965:
961:
958:
956:
952:
948:
944:
941:
940:
939:
938:
934:
930:
927:
924:
920:
912:
908:
904:
900:
897:
895:
891:
887:
880:
876:
873:
871:
867:
863:
859:
856:
854:
850:
846:
843:
840:
838:
834:
830:
826:
823:
822:
817:
813:
809:
803:
798:
797:
796:
795:
792:
789:
785:
782:
781:
766:
762:
758:
754:
753:Tsistunagiska
751:
750:
749:
745:
742:
735:
733:
728:
723:
716:
713:
712:
711:
710:
705:
701:
697:
693:
692:Tsistunagiska
690:
689:
688:
684:
681:
674:
672:
667:
662:
655:
654:
653:
652:
649:
645:
642:
635:
633:
628:
623:
616:
612:
609:
608:
607:
606:
605:
604:
599:
595:
591:
587:
586:Tsistunagiska
584:
583:
582:
581:
574:
570:
567:
560:
558:
553:
548:
542:
539:
538:
537:
536:
535:
534:
529:
525:
521:
517:
516:Tsistunagiska
514:
513:
512:
508:
505:
498:
496:
491:
486:
479:
475:
472:According to
471:
468:
467:
466:
465:
462:
458:
454:
450:
446:
442:
441:
437:
433:
431:
427:
425:
421:
418:
411:
409:
404:
399:
393:
388:
385:
383:
379:
375:
371:
368:
364:
359:
352:
346:
342:
338:
337:
336:
331:
324:
318:
317:
311:
307:
305:
302:
297:
291:
288:
287:
283:
280:
276:
271:
268:
265:
261:
256:
253:
250:
246:
241:
240:
239:
238:
235:
225:
221:
218:
215:
211:
207:
203:
200:
197:
194:
191:
188:
185:
182:
179:
175:
172:
171:Find sources:
167:
164:
158:
154:
150:
146:
141:
137:
132:
128:
124:
120:
116:
115:
111:
108:
105:
101:
98:
96:
93:
91:
88:
87:
86:
84:
79:
72:
69:
67:
66:
61:
59:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
1421:
1419:
1400:
1379:
1360:
1344:
1327:
1310:
1289:
1279:
1272:
1266:
1245:
1198:
1181:
1161:— Preceding
1155:
1143:
992:
976:
959:
942:
922:
918:
916:
915:
898:
878:
874:
862:Bettydaisies
857:
841:
824:
783:
740:
731:
726:
721:
679:
670:
665:
660:
640:
631:
626:
621:
565:
556:
551:
546:
503:
494:
489:
484:
469:
438:
429:
428:
416:
407:
402:
397:
386:
369:
344:
340:
314:redirect to
313:
309:
289:
231:
219:
213:
205:
198:
192:
186:
180:
170:
76:
57:
49:
47:
31:
28:
1384:User:Namiba
1357:WP:COATRACK
1225:WP:DRAFTIFY
1167:TimothyBlue
445:Tagishsimon
374:Tagishsimon
279:User:Namiba
264:User:Namiba
249:User:Namiba
234:User:Namiba
196:free images
1405:Epicgenius
1332:Randy Kryn
1202:WP:TOOSOON
1182:Clear Keep
1084:Netherzone
1055:Netherzone
1042:Netherzone
999:Netherzone
929:Netherzone
829:Akronowner
808:Netherzone
541:Netherzone
520:Netherzone
453:Netherzone
58:Sandstein
1426:talk page
923:unveiling
845:Lajmmoore
476:and even
37:talk page
1428:or in a
1380:Question
1199:Draftify
1175:contribs
1163:unsigned
1117:this one
1015:Possibly
886:Possibly
387:Draftify
163:View log
104:glossary
39:or in a
1298:Bearian
1005:, and
1003:Ipigott
964:Johnbod
903:Ipigott
802:Lettler
788:Lettler
470:Comment
295:Cyclone
202:WP refs
190:scholar
136:protect
131:history
81:New to
1294:WP:HEY
1280:(talk)
825:Delete
784:Delete
615:WP:GNG
478:WP:GNG
290:Delete
174:Google
140:delete
1345:Merge
1273:Störm
1267:Merge
1254:Edge3
1246:Merge
1207:KidAd
1144:Merge
979:with
879:built
434:with
432:Merge
217:JSTOR
178:books
157:views
149:watch
145:links
16:<
1409:talk
1401:Keep
1392:talk
1370:nuts
1336:talk
1328:Keep
1319:talk
1311:Keep
1302:talk
1292:per
1290:Keep
1258:talk
1233:talk
1229:Kvng
1212:talk
1190:talk
1171:talk
1152:WP:N
1125:talk
1088:talk
1071:talk
1046:talk
1029:talk
1007:Kvng
968:talk
951:talk
947:Kvng
943:Keep
933:talk
907:talk
899:Keep
890:talk
875:Keep
866:talk
858:Keep
849:talk
842:Keep
833:talk
812:talk
761:talk
757:Kvng
741:Talk
732:Wolf
727:Rose
715:Kvng
700:talk
696:Kvng
680:Talk
671:Wolf
666:Rose
641:Talk
632:Wolf
627:Rose
611:Kvng
594:talk
590:Kvng
566:Talk
557:Wolf
552:Rose
524:talk
504:Talk
495:Wolf
490:Rose
474:WP:N
457:talk
430:Keep
417:Talk
408:Wolf
403:Rose
392:WP:N
378:talk
370:Keep
357:Talk
345:will
329:Talk
310:keep
300:Toby
210:FENS
184:news
153:logs
127:talk
123:edit
50:keep
1347:to
1315:Deb
1248:to
224:TWL
161:– (
1411:)
1394:)
1382:.
1373:)
1367:(/
1338:)
1321:)
1304:)
1296:.
1260:)
1235:)
1192:)
1177:)
1173:•
1154:,
1150::
1127:)
1090:)
1073:)
1048:)
1031:)
1001:,
983:.
970:)
953:)
935:)
909:)
892:)
868:)
851:)
835:)
814:)
763:)
746:)
702:)
685:)
646:)
596:)
571:)
526:)
509:)
459:)
422:)
380:)
341:IF
277:.
262:.
247:.
204:)
155:|
151:|
147:|
143:|
138:|
134:|
129:|
125:|
1407:(
1390:(
1334:(
1317:(
1300:(
1256:(
1231:(
1188:(
1169:(
1123:(
1086:(
1069:(
1044:(
1027:(
1017::
1013:@
1009::
997:@
989::
985:@
966:(
949:(
931:(
917:*
905:(
888:(
864:(
847:(
831:(
810:(
804::
800:@
759:(
736:(
722:A
698:(
675:(
661:A
636:(
622:A
592:(
561:(
547:A
522:(
499:(
485:A
455:(
412:(
398:A
376:(
360:)
354:(
332:)
326:(
228:)
220:·
214:·
206:·
199:·
193:·
187:·
181:·
176:(
168:(
165:)
159:)
121:(
106:)
102:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.