591:'s status as PD. The situation is this; the image of the painting was taken from the U.S. Naval Historical Center, which asserts that as far as they know, every image there is PD. Okay, but the painting is done by, best I can tell, Propaganza Krieg (PK) Lieutenant Julius Ceasar Schmitz-Westerholt, a German military officer. I couldn't find any German equivalent to PD-USGov-Military, and this had to have been produced sometime after 24 May 1941, so I'm really not sure where the painting is in the Public Domain.
1050:
between the Hood and the
Cervera, the freighters slipped into Bilbao supported by the fire of a coastal battery and the Basque armed trawler Biskaya.", whereas this article only says "On 23 April 1937, the ship escorted three British merchantmen into Bilbao harbour despite the presence of the Nationalist cruiser Almirante Cervera that attempted to blockade the port". First, the dates conflict, but second, I think this would be worth including, as firing salvos at each other seems rather important.
1024:"Most seriously, the deck protection was flawed—spread over three decks, it was designed to detonate an incoming shell on impact with the top deck, with much of the energy being absorbed as the exploding shell had to penetrate the armour of the next two decks. The development of effective time-delay shells at the end of World War I made this scheme much less effective, as the intact shell would penetrate layers of weak armour and explode deep inside the ship" Was anything ever done about this?
1138:"fast battleship", and they advocated that the US Navy develop a fast battleship of its own" or "became extremely impressed by Hood which was described by ???? as a "fast battleship", so they advocated that the US Navy develop a fast battleship of its own". depending on whether the US observers or someone else disagreed with the Royal Navy description and thought she was a Fast Battleship rather than a Battlecruiser.
738:, the USRAA would have restored the US copyright on a normal image like this because it was still under copyright in 1996. So, assuming the 1941 publishing date is true (would need proof), Commons would accept it, but we would need to note that (a) it is war booty = avoids the USRAA = PD in the United States, and (b) it is PD in Germany and other countries due to the 70 years' lapse.
731:
public domain before the copyright laws were altered to their current form (NA in this case), if the "image appears to be an "orphan" where copyright is concerned" (applies here), or is probably an official photograph but it was not explicitly marked as such (NA in this case). Given this, I think we can assume it is war booty, as that would make it one of these "orphan"s.
955:
Without the gunnery advances (i.e. long-range gunnery), the lack of horizontal problem wouldn't have been an issue. She was still plenty fast, but her engines were needed replacing with smaller, lighter, more modern machinery like that used on the Renown class BCs. That might have saved enough weight
480:
Hood was significantly larger than her predecessors of the Renown class. As completed she had an overall length of 860 feet 7 inches (262.3 m), a maximum beam of 104 feet 2 inches (31.8 m), and a draught of 32 feet (9.8 m) at deep load. This was 110 feet (33.5 m) longer and 14 feet (4.3 m) wider than
1137:
Unless I'm missing something this still seems odd to me. "became extremely impressed by Hood which was described as a "fast battleship", so they advocated that the US Navy develop a fast battleship of its own" in my view should either be "became extremely impressed by Hood which they described as a
730:
a clarification email. I don't have any current communication lines open; the correspondence was back in 2009, and I suspect we would get the same answer. The person who answered my email gave three possibilities for photographs that aren't official U.S. Navy photographs: either they entered the
1049:
says "On 21 April, Almirante
Cervera, along with the Galerna, was involved in a three-hour long confrontation with the Battleship HMS Hood and the destroyer HMS Firedrake, when the insurgent warships fired upon three British merchantmen in a fruitless attempt to stop them. After blunt exchanges
368:
mentions that the chapel includes a roll of honour in which most likely, Spinner is mentioned, although that's not explicitly spelled out. I can delete or not the bit about the chapel, although I think it's pretty much a given that he's listed since the
Association maintains the roll of honour
1060:
They didn't fire at each other. Cerveza fired across the bow of one merchantman, but backed off when Hood trained her entire broadside at her. The date is correct according to my source, although my other source on
Firedrake says 19 April. Just to confuse things!
1204:"Captain Pridham was relieved by Captain Harold Walker on 20 May 1938 and was relieved of command when the ship returned to Portsmouth in January 1939" I think this needs something like "Captain Pridham was relieved by Captain Harold Walker on 20 May 1938 and
1289:: ""The law concerning protected places applies anywhere in the world, but in practice, outside the UK, the sanctions can only be enforced against UK citizens, UK flagged ships, or vessels landing in the UK, unless backed by local legislation." - Dank (
1129:"Around 1918, the US naval staff in Great Britain became extremely impressed by the Hood which was described as a "fast battleship"," would that be which they described as a fast battleship, if not could you give an idea who described her so?
951:"At this point in her service, Hood's usefulness had deteriorated because of advances in naval gunnery." Was it just gunnery? Better engines and armor distributions probably played a part too (especially the former).
206:
481:
the older ships. She displaced 42,670 long tons (43,350 t) at load and 46,680 long tons (47,430 t) at deep load, over 13,000 long tons (13,210 t) more than the older ships. The ship had a complete double bottom.
178:
117:
694:@Ed: If you already have a line of communication open with the NHHC, it is very much worth it to send them an email asking for clarification. They might be able to help us figure this out.
869:
Ed has responded; best I can tell, everyone is happy. It's my understanding that Sturm has passed previous spot-checking (and if he hasn't, there's no hope for the rest of us. :) - Dank (
671:
images on their web page to be PD. I'm going to assume for some images that this is applicable only in the US, but that's solvable by hosting the images on en.wiki instead of
Commons.
847:
688:@Brad: It dosen't work that way. Taking a photograph of a copyrighted piece of art does not eliminate the original copyright claim, it applies to the photograph as well.
803:
The copyright of the painting still needs a resolution. Ask at commons for help. There are experienced people there. Photos of artwork are a whole different ballgame.
1271:
I'm not a specialist in maritime law, but I believe that countries retain rights over their sunken warships, even if in international waters. Thanks for the review.--
741:
In short: this image is PD, but we will need to find a first publishing date of 1941 if it is to be hosted on
Commons. Otherwise uploading to en.wiki will suffice.
177:
symbolized the
British Empire before World War II and her sinking by the German battleship Bismarck in 1941 was a huge shock. This article had an extensive MilHist
653:
Since the image is noted as courtesy of the US Army's Chief of
Military History, the painting may well have been captured by the Army and retained as war booty.--
40:
992:
with the US Navy. Might be worth including a sentence on this, but that's up to you. Otherwise I really like the "Battlecruiser or Fast
Battleship" section.
30:
17:
419:
Sneaking suspicion that
Bastrop and Bastock are one and the same, as Bastock p. 38 places the Special Service Squadron at the scuttling of HMAS
1092:
I've only reviewed this in terms of prose and internal consistency, but my queries have been addressed and in my opinion it is of FA standard.
1300:
258:
This is an issue only in the refs aside from the italicized quotes where the ship's name is not italicized to stand out from the quote.
1286:
1268:
The UK may have designated it as a war grave, but it isn't in UK waters. Does that designation have any meaning in international law?
734:
Here's the complicated part. If this was painted and published in 1941, that would mean that the German copyright lapsed this year.
88:
83:
900:]) on the article and got no results. An unbiased party might wish to do the same and report back to settle the copyvio criteria.--
133:
92:
1357:
1329:
1319:
1294:
1280:
1257:
1243:
1190:
1169:
1155:
1108:
1068:
1055:
1037:
1014:
1005:
974:
965:
945:
923:
909:
893:
874:
855:
826:
812:
788:
774:
745:
721:
675:
662:
648:
618:
570:
560:
546:
531:
511:
497:
474:
452:
438:
407:
324:
310:
284:
270:
241:
221:
190:
165:
996:
It's a bit more complicated than just Hood's plans; the up-armoring of Renown and Repulse seems also to have played a role.--
75:
817:
I've removed the painting pending resolution of the copyright issue. No response from the Center of Military History yet.--
691:@Sturmvogel: Would that change the copyright status? I honestly don't know. Also, how would we find out about such a thing.
1119:
I may be displaying complete ignorance here, but aren't propellers the same as screws, and if so shouldn't we standardise?
138:
750:
That popping sound you just heard was my brain (:D). Oh, and the caption check is done, everything on that end is good.
588:
1348:
1310:
1234:
1181:
1146:
1099:
1218:
Three survivors were picked up. Were any bodies recovered or are they all missing and presumed to be in the ship?
434:
s presence or absence at the scuttling, and generally fail to specify beyond "the Special Service Squadron"). --
1276:
1253:
1165:
1033:
1001:
961:
905:
822:
784:
765:
712:
658:
609:
556:
542:
527:
507:
493:
448:
362:
FN 77: supports that both brothers are mentioned on the gravestone, but not some of the rest of the content
320:
280:
186:
161:
667:
And I'll note that I have an email from the NHHC somewhere which explicitly states that the NHHC considers
423:. However, while it mentions the Danae class cruisers, Bastock does not mention the presence or absence of
1343:
1305:
1229:
1176:
1141:
1094:
217:
916:
889:
839:
202:
639:
may not be. This should be licensed with PD-art once the copyright of the painting can be determined.
865:
is consistently italicized in the end sections). The only image under discussion has been removed.
861:
Status report: Nikki's two remaining concerns have been dealt with (no "H.M.S." now in the text, and
403:
306:
266:
237:
247:"Brassey's Naval and Shipping Annual 1924 (p. 422)" - is this worth having as a bibliography entry?
470:
1272:
1249:
1161:
1029:
997:
957:
901:
818:
780:
751:
698:
654:
595:
552:
538:
523:
503:
489:
444:
316:
276:
182:
157:
79:
1010:
Interesting. I wonder if my sources simplified the matters too much? Anyway, that's fine then.
956:
to adequately armor her decks as I believe the Brits planned to do if war hadn't broken out.--
808:
644:
210:
988:
s, but I'm pretty sure one of the three(?) redesigns were due to the Brits sharing plans for
885:
502:
In the middle of the next sentence. That cite covers everything in the paragraph thus far.--
1115:
Nice work, well written. I've made a few tweaks, hope you like them, if not its a wiki,....
779:
I've emailed the Army Center for Military History to see if they can clarify its status.--
399:
302:
262:
233:
1325:
1290:
870:
851:
566:
466:
443:
Text doesn't specify that Hood was there, only the Squadron. Thanks for the comments.--
1065:
1052:
1011:
971:
942:
935:
920:
742:
672:
435:
71:
64:
382:
Be consistent in whether you disambiguate shortened citations using titles or dates
804:
640:
109:
1064:
Heh, having eight 15-inch guns would be a good deterrent! Looks good to me then.
250:
Not since I don't have a copy to hand to add the required additional information.
53:
427:. (Other sources I have access to relating to the sinking also fail to specify
366:
1208:
was relieved of command when the ship returned to Portsmouth in January 1939"
1299:
Thanks Dank. I guess that's a pedanticism too far for this article. but a
537:
Why? Private hands is a very common phrase for this sort of situation.--
390:
No citations to Bastock, Preston 2002 (unless FN 37 is to this Preston)
181:
and I believe that it meets the criteria for featured article status.--
884:
passed the article at GA and can see no reason not to promote to FA.
298:
Current standard for RN ship articles is to omit the periods in HMS.
39:
Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in
414:
The publisher's name changed over time. It's given as per the book.
594:
Everything else looked good. I'll to the caption check tomorrow.
1028:
Nope. Plans were made, but nothing was ever actually done.--
1222:
Curiously, no bodies were seen by the rescuing destroyer.
915:
That also might be because the copyvio bots are down. See
465:- no dab links, have fixed link 71, all other ELs are OK.
143:
867:
I've pinged Ed; he hadn't looked at Sturm's replies yet.
1301:
International law re War graves in International waters
984:
It's been a long time since I looked at sources on the
843:
697:
As it stands, this image still makes me uncomfortable.
105:
101:
97:
57:
118:Featured article candidates/HMS Hood (51)/archive1
1368:The above discussion is preserved as an archive.
565:Changed it to "privately held"; better? - Dank (
41:Knowledge (XXG) talk:Featured article candidates
919:, which I believe is down for the same reason.
43:. No further edits should be made to this page.
301:Okay, then do this consistently in citations.
1374:No further edits should be made to this page.
261:Yes, it's an issue in refs. Can it be fixed?
29:The following is an archived discussion of a
8:
1226:Thanks, I think that might be worth adding.
18:Knowledge (XXG):Featured article candidates
122:
846:made since I reviewed this for A-class.
374:Be consistent in how "et al" is notated
125:
115:
343:Missing bibliographic info for Bastrop
199:Transcluded 15:29, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
7:
522:should be "one is private property"
255:Check for consistent italicization
1287:Protection of Military Remains Act
346:FN 71: publisher, retrieval date?
24:
521:"one is in private hands" --: -->
398:Conway or Conway Maritime Press?
1303:would be an interesing article.
365:This is a little trickier. This
201:. Let's conduct FAC reviews at
205:, please; premature commentary
1069:17:42, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
1015:17:42, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
975:17:42, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
946:17:42, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
875:18:15, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
635:is most definitely PD but the
587:I have serious concerns about
1:
1330:02:01, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
1320:13:51, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
1295:00:41, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
1191:13:51, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
1170:01:47, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
1109:13:51, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
325:18:30, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
311:03:31, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
285:18:30, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
271:03:31, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
589:File:Sinking of HMS Hood.jpg
1358:19:53, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
1281:22:15, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
1258:00:30, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
1244:22:54, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
1156:13:23, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
1056:09:38, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
1038:22:15, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
1006:22:15, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
966:22:15, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
924:09:38, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
910:20:16, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
827:17:29, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
813:16:37, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
31:featured article nomination
1391:
551:Somewhat un-encyclopedic.
894:07:20, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
856:15:07, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
789:14:32, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
775:04:02, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
746:22:21, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
722:21:01, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
676:18:48, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
663:13:50, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
649:07:50, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
619:06:51, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
571:19:10, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
561:18:49, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
547:13:52, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
532:12:26, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
512:02:44, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
498:02:34, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
488:Where are the citations?
475:16:25, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
453:23:35, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
439:11:03, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
408:15:45, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
242:15:45, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
222:13:54, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
191:16:37, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
166:16:37, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
56:14:18, 16 September 2011
1371:Please do not modify it.
349:Merged into another ref.
36:Please do not modify it.
584:- Captions not checked
232:- spotchecks not done.
850:are my edits. - Dank (
842:, having reviewed the
483:
335:FN 37: which Preston?
1324:Thanks much. - Dank (
478:
354:FN 75: why hyphens?
295:HMS or H.M.S. Hood?
917:User:Corensearchbot
840:standard disclaimer
772:
719:
616:
169:
151:
150:
1382:
1373:
1355:
1351:
1346:
1317:
1313:
1308:
1241:
1237:
1232:
1188:
1184:
1179:
1153:
1149:
1144:
1106:
1102:
1097:
771:
766:
763:
718:
713:
710:
615:
610:
607:
433:
214:
154:
123:
113:
95:
48:The article was
38:
1390:
1389:
1385:
1384:
1383:
1381:
1380:
1379:
1378:
1369:
1353:
1349:
1344:
1315:
1311:
1306:
1239:
1235:
1230:
1186:
1182:
1177:
1151:
1147:
1142:
1104:
1100:
1095:
1045:The article on
767:
760:
756:
752:
714:
707:
703:
699:
611:
604:
600:
596:
431:
212:
86:
70:
68:
34:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
1388:
1386:
1377:
1376:
1363:
1361:
1360:
1340:
1339:
1338:
1337:
1336:
1335:
1334:
1333:
1332:
1266:
1265:
1264:
1263:
1262:
1261:
1260:
1215:
1214:
1213:
1201:
1200:
1199:
1198:
1197:
1196:
1195:
1194:
1193:
1126:
1125:
1124:
1116:
1112:
1111:
1080:
1078:
1077:
1076:
1075:
1074:
1073:
1072:
1071:
1042:
1041:
1040:
1021:
1020:
1019:
1018:
1017:
981:
980:
979:
978:
977:
970:Alright then.
927:
926:
898:I ran Earwig (
880:
878:
877:
834:
832:
831:
830:
829:
800:
799:
798:
797:
796:
795:
794:
793:
792:
791:
758:
754:
739:
732:
705:
701:
692:
689:
686:
685:
684:
683:
682:
681:
680:
679:
678:
624:
623:
622:
621:
602:
598:
592:
578:
577:
576:
575:
574:
573:
519:
518:
517:
516:
515:
514:
460:
459:
458:
457:
456:
455:
417:
416:
415:
396:
395:
394:
388:
387:
386:
380:
379:
378:
372:
371:
370:
360:
359:
358:
352:
351:
350:
344:
341:
340:
339:
333:
332:
331:
330:
329:
328:
327:
293:
292:
291:
290:
289:
288:
287:
253:
252:
251:
227:
226:
225:
224:
179:A-class review
171:
170:
156:Nominator(s):
149:
148:
147:
146:
144:External links
141:
136:
128:
127:
121:
120:
67:
62:
61:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1387:
1375:
1372:
1366:
1365:
1364:
1359:
1356:
1352:
1347:
1341:
1331:
1327:
1323:
1322:
1321:
1318:
1314:
1309:
1302:
1298:
1297:
1296:
1292:
1288:
1284:
1283:
1282:
1278:
1274:
1273:Sturmvogel 66
1270:
1269:
1267:
1259:
1255:
1251:
1250:Sturmvogel 66
1247:
1246:
1245:
1242:
1238:
1233:
1227:
1224:
1223:
1221:
1220:
1219:
1216:
1211:
1210:
1209:
1207:
1202:
1192:
1189:
1185:
1180:
1173:
1172:
1171:
1167:
1163:
1162:Sturmvogel 66
1159:
1158:
1157:
1154:
1150:
1145:
1139:
1135:
1134:
1132:
1131:
1130:
1127:
1122:
1121:
1120:
1117:
1114:
1113:
1110:
1107:
1103:
1098:
1091:
1088:
1087:
1083:
1082:
1081:
1070:
1067:
1063:
1062:
1059:
1058:
1057:
1054:
1051:
1048:
1043:
1039:
1035:
1031:
1030:Sturmvogel 66
1027:
1026:
1025:
1022:
1016:
1013:
1009:
1008:
1007:
1003:
999:
998:Sturmvogel 66
995:
994:
993:
991:
987:
982:
976:
973:
969:
968:
967:
963:
959:
958:Sturmvogel 66
954:
953:
952:
949:
948:
947:
944:
941:
938:
937:
933:
929:
928:
925:
922:
918:
914:
913:
912:
911:
907:
903:
902:Sturmvogel 66
899:
896:
895:
891:
887:
883:
876:
872:
868:
864:
860:
859:
858:
857:
853:
849:
845:
841:
838:on prose per
837:
828:
824:
820:
819:Sturmvogel 66
816:
815:
814:
810:
806:
802:
801:
790:
786:
782:
781:Sturmvogel 66
778:
777:
776:
773:
770:
764:
762:
749:
748:
747:
744:
740:
737:
733:
729:
725:
724:
723:
720:
717:
711:
709:
696:
695:
693:
690:
687:
677:
674:
670:
666:
665:
664:
660:
656:
655:Sturmvogel 66
652:
651:
650:
646:
642:
638:
634:
630:
629:
628:
627:
626:
625:
620:
617:
614:
608:
606:
593:
590:
586:
585:
583:
580:
579:
572:
568:
564:
563:
562:
558:
554:
553:Reformation32
550:
549:
548:
544:
540:
539:Sturmvogel 66
536:
535:
534:
533:
529:
525:
524:Reformation32
513:
509:
505:
504:Sturmvogel 66
501:
500:
499:
495:
491:
490:Reformation32
487:
486:
485:
484:
482:
477:
476:
472:
468:
464:
454:
450:
446:
445:Sturmvogel 66
442:
441:
440:
437:
430:
426:
422:
418:
413:
412:
411:
410:
409:
405:
401:
397:
392:
391:
389:
384:
383:
381:
376:
375:
373:
367:
364:
363:
361:
356:
355:
353:
348:
347:
345:
342:
337:
336:
334:
326:
322:
318:
317:Sturmvogel 66
314:
313:
312:
308:
304:
300:
299:
297:
296:
294:
286:
282:
278:
277:Sturmvogel 66
274:
273:
272:
268:
264:
260:
259:
257:
256:
254:
249:
248:
246:
245:
244:
243:
239:
235:
231:
230:Source review
223:
219:
215:
208:
207:moved to talk
204:
200:
197:
196:
195:
194:
193:
192:
188:
184:
183:Sturmvogel 66
180:
176:
168:
167:
163:
159:
158:Sturmvogel 66
153:
152:
145:
142:
140:
137:
135:
132:
131:
130:
129:
124:
119:
116:
114:
111:
107:
103:
99:
94:
90:
85:
81:
77:
73:
72:HMS Hood (51)
66:
65:HMS Hood (51)
63:
60:
58:
55:
51:
44:
42:
37:
32:
27:
26:
19:
1370:
1367:
1362:
1342:
1326:push to talk
1304:
1291:push to talk
1228:
1225:
1217:
1205:
1203:
1175:
1140:
1136:
1128:
1118:
1093:
1089:
1085:
1084:
1079:
1046:
1044:
1023:
989:
985:
983:
950:
939:
931:
930:
897:
881:
879:
871:push to talk
866:
862:
852:push to talk
835:
833:
768:
753:
735:
727:
715:
700:
668:
636:
632:
612:
597:
582:Media Review
581:
567:push to talk
520:
479:
462:
461:
428:
424:
420:
229:
228:
198:
174:
172:
155:
139:Citation bot
69:
49:
47:
35:
28:
1160:Reworded.--
886:Jim Sweeney
1206:he in turn
400:Nikkimaria
303:Nikkimaria
263:Nikkimaria
234:Nikkimaria
986:Lexington
467:GermanJoe
421:Australia
1354:Chequers
1316:Chequers
1240:Chequers
1187:Chequers
1174:Thanks.
1152:Chequers
1105:Chequers
932:Comments
637:painting
436:saberwyn
134:Analysis
50:promoted
1248:Done.--
1212:Agreed.
1133:Named.
1090:Support
1047:Cervera
940:Support
882:Support
844:changes
836:Support
761:anguard
736:However
708:anguard
605:anguard
463:Comment
315:Done.--
275:Done.--
213:Georgia
126:Toolbox
89:protect
84:history
393:Fixed.
385:Fixed.
377:Fixed.
369:there.
357:Fixed.
338:Added.
203:WT:FAC
93:delete
54:Ucucha
1350:Spiel
1312:Spiel
1285:From
1236:Spiel
1183:Spiel
1148:Spiel
1123:Done.
1101:Spiel
1086:Query
848:These
726:That
633:photo
211:Sandy
110:views
102:watch
98:links
16:<
1345:Ϣere
1307:Ϣere
1277:talk
1254:talk
1231:Ϣere
1178:Ϣere
1166:talk
1143:Ϣere
1096:Ϣere
1034:talk
1002:talk
990:Hood
962:talk
906:talk
890:talk
863:Hood
823:talk
809:talk
805:Brad
785:talk
769:Wha?
757:ven
716:Wha?
704:ven
659:talk
645:talk
641:Brad
631:The
613:Wha?
601:ven
557:talk
543:talk
528:talk
508:talk
494:talk
471:talk
449:talk
429:Hood
425:Hood
404:talk
321:talk
307:talk
281:talk
267:talk
238:talk
218:Talk
187:talk
175:Hood
173:HMS
162:talk
106:logs
80:talk
76:edit
934:by
728:was
669:all
209:.
52:by
1328:)
1293:)
1279:)
1256:)
1168:)
1066:Ed
1053:Ed
1036:)
1012:Ed
1004:)
972:Ed
964:)
943:Ed
936:Ed
921:Ed
908:)
892:)
873:)
854:)
825:)
811:)
787:)
743:Ed
673:Ed
661:)
647:)
569:)
559:)
545:)
530:)
510:)
496:)
473:)
451:)
406:)
323:)
309:)
283:)
269:)
240:)
220:)
189:)
164:)
108:|
104:|
100:|
96:|
91:|
87:|
82:|
78:|
59:.
33:.
1275:(
1252:(
1164:(
1032:(
1000:(
960:(
904:(
888:(
821:(
807:(
783:(
759:M
755:S
706:M
702:S
657:(
643:(
603:M
599:S
555:(
541:(
526:(
506:(
492:(
469:(
447:(
432:'
402:(
319:(
305:(
279:(
265:(
236:(
216:(
185:(
160:(
112:)
74:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.