970:; you fail to make a case that anything else then your personal view would suggest the articles fail to conform to those policies. Last but not least, I already explained to you above that there is no need to merge the 'History...' article with the main organization article. Certainly, some material from it can be used to expand the main article, but 'history of Solidarity' is as encyclopedic as any other history of... article out there. Once the aspect (historical or other) of an article becomes sufficiently long, it is split and expanded in its subarticle; I see no reason why this would not be applicable here.--
1021:
history of other entities, larger or smaller, that also happened in this period. If, as you wrote above, your main claim to objection is that you think this article has no right to exist and should be merged into main
Solidarity and/or history of Poland articles, than *I* do not think it is a valid objection, especially as dozens of other contributors and reviewers have not arrived at the same conclusion, and we have hundreds of 'history of an organization' articles on Wiki. Although I doubt I can convince you, so indeed, it will be up to Raul to decide whether to count your objection or not.--
850:
course without citing a single reference to support your POV you declare the article 'destined to be an unnecessary POV fork'. Your argument that we don't need 'history or an organization' type article is bizzarre: Wiki is not paper and we have both the room for detailed history, and a reason to split a detailed history section from main subject, which should contain sections on structure, influence, membership and such issues. Finally, considering both the influence of this organization and it's political aspect, I see nothing objectionable that it is closely connected to
1227:. The point is, as the article and the references therein explain in details, that historically the Solidarity was quite a different thing from what it is now. Nowadays, the classical definition of a trade union may be successfully applied. Historically, however, it was rather a social mouvement involving about 25% of the population and an unprecendented phenomenon in this part of Europe. We have good reasons to describe it separately. Actually, the present structure of articles helps to understand that important difference (and the
921:. Most importantly, though, is that "History of CPSU" is not being attempted to get a FA status that would bring 24 hours of the mainpage exposure. So that problem is less pressing at the moment. Your analogy with the constitutional crisis article is so far fetched that I won't even elaborate what the difference is. As for the phrases like "Poland regained independence in 1989", sure some opinionated writers may claim so. I can find references stating that killing animals is
734:"Even through some among the Solidarity tried to distance themselves from the right-wing government and assume a more left-wing stance, Solidarity was still identified with the government and suffered from the increasing disillusionment of the population, as transition from communist to a capitalist system failed to generate instant wealth and raise living standards in Poland to those in the West, and the shock therapy (Balcerowicz's Plan) generated much opposition."
736:, and there are lots of instances where the phrasing isn't correct and there are basic grammar errors like "worse state then 8 years earlier". The text is also overly familiar in places, and uses foreshadowing like "In reality, the talks would radically alter the shape of the Polish government and society" which I don't think is appropriate for a chronological re-telling of history in an encyclopedia.--
687:
innocent topic where lack of
Politics would bring POV issues to zero? Instead one after one you and Piotrus attempt to FA highly controversial articles. The idea of having articles on the complex issue at the FA level is commendeble by itself. But in the current stage of Knowledge when no scholarly oversight is attempted achieving it is next to impossible. Perhaps such articles may be refined at
75:. This is the house for self-published authors. Serious academics do not use it as they are published by the Unviersity press and reputable publishers. While it might be OK to refer to such book when stating a fact one witnessed (memoirs are OK), judgements from such books (like Solidarity is responsible for the Europe-wide fall of communism), are unacceptable. --
313:"one of the main rasons and targets of Reagan and Pope alliance" was Poland and not Solidarity. This whole stuff belongs to articles about politics, countries and their histories, not the article about a labor Union where you attempt to retell the history of Poland from 70s till today. Seems like POV forking to me. --
1168:), nonetheless I think that being reliable and telling the readers which reference is to which fact is important. Consider this example: "Lech Walesa was relesed but other activists were imprisoned. " vs "Lech Walesa was relesed but other activists were imprisoned ." Which sentence is more clear and informative?--
913:. You say that my argument for the lack of necessity for the history of organization article if the organization article is already there is "bizarre". What's bizarre? What the organization article is left to be about? I do not "demand" anything merged. But if "History of CPSU" is to be merged anywhere it is
806:, I waited a little after expressing my initial concerns and watched how the article goes. Now I conclude that the article has fundamental problems that simply cannot be addressed in its current shape even if a whole lot of good-faith NPOVing is attempted. The main problem of the article is that the it is
1067:
Your arguments are, sorry to say this, what is ridiculous. You fail to present any source to back up your offensive statements of the article presenting a 'fork' and 'a notable opinion of the Polish nationalist thought', even though in fact 90% of refs are
English academic books. Solidarity is still
1052:
even think that it played a major role in the Soviet collapse. While ridiculous, it is perhaps a notable opinion of the Polish nationalist thought. Let it be mentioned as such, no objections. Now, in view of the incomparability of the
Solidarity's historic role to its current obscurity you want the
293:
Considering that
Solidarity was one of the main rasons and targets of Reagan and Pope alliance, I'd believe it deserves a mention here. You are correct that the information should be in text, not the picture - I will fix it. As for the Gorby meeting, I don't know much about it, so I am assuming you
1254:
Well done. Essentiallly, it wins when compared to many other texts on the subject, encyclopedic ones included. References for any crucial statement. Some language issues can be easily addressed, I would like to see some copyediting in action; a little effort is entirely justified by the quality of
908:
This kind of response is regrettable, but I will try to answer what's answerable in it. My main objection is article's being a fork. You claim I do so "without citing a single reference to support your POV". Who references to support who POV? This is more than about factual accuracy. This is about
834:
from 1970s till today. There is absolutely no need for such POV fork. History and
Politics articles already exist. Telling the history of Poland through the prizm of the History of Solidarity is destined to be a POV magnet and it is. This article will be getting the cliche catch-phrases by certain
745:
There are no cite needed tags anymore. As for copyedit, we have been waiting for month for a native
English speaker to read the article and correct the language; it is an objection I cannot address myself. As for pictures, feel free to fix them by moving/deleting/improving captions; as I said, it
700:
Feel free to join that wiki fork if you think it is not a total waste of time; I (and
Halibutt, I am sure), who have featured many articles about controversial subjects, are sure to stay on Wiki were we feel our work is most needed and we will certainly work on others FAs, without much thought to
572:
wholeheartedly. Another great article. Sure, it could do with some better pictures or twice the number of refs (every sentenced referenced by at least three sources could be nice), but I believe it's as close as it gets. And don't forget the lead - all is there and that's how FA leads should look
279:
If you want to speak about alliance of Reagan and Pope do so in relevant articles. And in any case, even if you think it belongs to this article (IMO it does not) "good place to note" it is the article's text which should be illustrated by the pic. The pic was disconnected from the article it was
1057:
article to be devoted to the harldy notable aspects and keep all the really prominent info in the daughter article. Also, the title allows to fork an entire history of Poland for this period into this article which you have done already. This is an unencyclopedic approach and we cannot have it's
1020:
Indeed, I think it is. Although I am repeating this for the third time, article about history of an organization is not the same thing as an article about an organization (which should cover issues like structure, membership, influences, activities, traditions, etc.) and is not the same thing as
849:
Somehow I am not suprised that after I addressed your above objections you decided to oppose on another ground. The article has over 50 inline references, with almost every single fact accompanied by an inline ctatio from western academic publication verifiable online (via Google Print) - but of
686:
Halibutt, getting the politically charged article to a FA level is difficult and almost impossible task. This is because of the very nature of politics. What can Ghirla (or others) do if attempts to FA are always made with the politically charged articles? Why not try FAing some article in the
259:
Sanctions were important, and the text also mentions aid to
Solidarity. Further the caption of the picture is a good place to note the alliance of Reagan and the Pope. As for the Gorby picture, it's and old relic, from before I found more relevant pictures; if you think it's really an unneeded
516:
Finally, the thing about
Solidarity responsible for the fall of the USSR and/or its "influence led to the intensification and spread of anti-communist ideas and movements throughout the countries of the Eastern Bloc, weakening their communist governments." is quite questionable in
84:
One book by XLibris is used as inline citation three times, in all cases it is accompanied by another source (Lynne Rienner Publishers, Routledge). While you may dispute reliability of Xlibris, please note that Solidarity's importance in the fall of communism is also supported by
112:
Even "set the signal" is a highly POV statement that belongs to a single author. But even that is not the same as "sparked off". Anyway, I already corrected that. But pls remove the refs to XLibris book entirely as it is used exclusively to support not facts but opinions.
438:" - care to explain this one? Are you talking about Poland or Warsaw pact in general? Cause if what we have in Russia and some former Soviet republics now is an improvement of the morale, then I'm the Chinese emperor... Degradation of economy, maybe, but of the morale...
731:
I agree with comments that the article looks cluttered, there are too many pictures and sveral of them have very undescriptive captions. The article has cite needed tags. It could also use a copyedit (by a native english speaker), there are monsters like this
839:
and will never be NPOV. In fact, it is impossible to have an NPOV article which by its concept designed to be a POV fork of other topics. The article is OK to stay if it is so dear to its authors but it cannot do that under the prestigeous "FA" label.
1301:
The let's call it historical Solidarity, and the trade union as it is today are quite two different things. I agree that the article needs editing to be understandable in English, but as I saw Logologist already working on it, I'm confident it'll be
960:"If you oppose a nomination, write *Object or *Oppose followed by the reason(s). Each objection must provide a specific rationale that can be addressed. If nothing can be done in principle to address the objection, the FA Director may ignore it. "
655:
Was there a single instance when a Polish editor did not support Piotrus when voting on FAC? I believe Knowledge needs to resolve the problem of voting along the national lines, if it wants to keep FAs respected by the wider community of editors.
954:, not some other article, and nowhere does this article mentions that 'Poland regained independence in 1989'. That said, IF the article were to state this, you cannot claim it is POV by 'opinionated authors' (who nonetheless are published by
1001:
article because the latter also covers geography, demographics, public transportation, administrative status, city government, etc. Organization is different from the city. I repeat, what is left for the Solidarity article to cover is the
1126:
Fixed the 4 references (footnotes) which were before full stop. However as for those inside a sentence they are there to indicate they reference a particular, possibly controversial fact, and thus I feel they should be left where they
962:. The same policy applies to your claim that the article is POVed: present sources to back up your claim or your objections may not be counted. You say that 'this is more than about factual accuracy'. Incorrect. Knowledge policies are
138:
from that book for a specific example of how Solidarity influenced events in Hungary. I hope that two citations are enough for you, if not, then please provide references that state Solidarity's had little or no influence on the
280:
supposed to illustrate. Same with Gorby pic. The pic was disconnected and had a nonsense caption too. The meeting, by itself, does not signify the imnprovement of relations. Brezhnev met Ford, Carter and Reagan. See eg.
543:
In which part of the article do we claim that Solidarity was responsible for the fall of USSR? As discussed above, we have academic refs that it was responsible for fall of communism in Poland and contributed to the
862:. Perhaps you should demand that those articles - and many other - are merged, and that nothing less specific then 'history of country' deserves to be FACed? I can see how using your logic one can demand deFAing of
86:
260:
clutter, be bold and remove it, although Gorby was important to Solidarity too - perahps you'd like to expand the para mentioning him with a sentence or two on how his policies allowed Solidarity to fluorish?--
646:. Just one minor point. I would use a different image at the start of the article, as the license for a Time cover image is somewhat restrictive, plus the message it conveys pushes a certain point of view.
1010:
article of the same period covered by solidarity. The article basically repeats it. It is up to Raul to decide whether to, as you put it, "ignore my comments". Your opinion that he should is very helpful.
866:, as it obviously portrays history of Russia in 1993 through the prism of the Russian constitutional crisis of that year. PS. Many reliable academic authors note that Poland regained independence in 1989:
250:
when talking to Gorby are just clutter. The only time Reagan is mentoned in the text is in the sentence: "Ronald Reagan imposed economic sanctions on Poland". How is this illustrated by those images? --
873:
634:. Had to vote on this one. The contents are very nice, concise, an excellent read. The article could use a few more references though, it'd also be useful to polish up the English here and there. --
151:
148:
135:
870:
867:
134:
citation, from Princeton University Press book: " influence throughout the region was incalculable. We will then see how the Polish opposition inspired the rest of the region through 1989". See
431:
And the most important thing: numerous POV issues. The text reads in some places like a newspaper or a schoolbook (and a bad one), not like an encyclopedia article. Let's look at this precisely.
131:
48:, perhaps the most famous trade union in the world, and one of the most widely recognized Poland-related subjects. Pictures, citations... I hope you enjoy it. Comments, as always, appreciated! --
327:
193:
21:
925:. This won't give me a right to mention this matter-of-factly as an established fact in other articles. Articles to discuss contentious points when both POVs may be presented would be
881:
Speech of Polish president (ok, that's not academic, but is interesting). Again, feel free to provide refs to the contrary. Oh, and care to explain your reasoning of using an edit to
958:) unless you can present an alternative POV backed by sources other then your personal opinions. If you look at the top of this page, you may be suprised to find out that
855:
192:
Perhaps you should read the article and see where the text mentions Reagan and Pope. Then you will see the relevance of those photos. If still in doubt, letm me throw
153:. You'll forgive me if I will not cite the text here at that time (those two refs specifically mention Solidarity's contribution to the 'fall of communism')--
1255:
the information the article contains (well, I'm making some minor improvements). I think we could wish the article gets into a next encyclopedia contest. --
486:"The fall of the communist regime marked a new chapter in the history of Poland and in the history of Solidarity." - This reads like a bad newspaper.
407:
Pictures could use alternate layout (left, then right, then left and so on) to save space in some more sections (e.g.) "Martial law (1981-1983)".
863:
17:
122:
I see no reason to remove XLibris book, it's a useful secondary refs, nowehere used as an only ref. And since you seem not convinced about
1310:
1291:
1268:
1244:
1201:
1182:
1155:
1141:
1121:
1093:
1062:
1035:
1015:
984:
941:
903:
844:
792:
769:
760:
740:
715:
695:
681:
664:
650:
638:
626:
606:
585:
562:
537:
509:
479:
455:
424:
400:
348:
317:
308:
288:
274:
254:
238:
219:
210:
187:
167:
117:
107:
79:
62:
27:
765:
Until it gets one it is not featured standard. There are several copyeditors around, Tony, Wayward and others; just ask someone. --
332:
The weapons chosen by Pope and the President were neither guns nor butter, but the nurturing of the Solidarity propaganda machine.
243:
382:
I merged few of the shortest ones, those that remain contain distinct information and can remain alone, but if you disagree, do
491:
281:
224:
Could you be more specific? On my screen they are more or less below the para describing the importance of those personas.--
93:
is a reliable publisher ("The first blodless transition from Communism to democracy set the signal for other countries").--
1076:
1069:
910:
851:
323:
548:
in the entire region. What is it that you find questionable, exactly - and what refs do you have to back up your case?--
1219:" article. As indicated by Piotrus, usually this not the case. I would like to stress that in the particular case of
1187:
Update: I have rewritten some sentences, now virtually all refs follow a punctuation sign. Is this acceptable now?--
1151:
Wiki and standard English rules say at the end of punctuation, not at the end of punctuation when we feel like it.
955:
326:, but Solidarity was their most important tool. Again, please provide refs if you disagree with me. For now, enjoy
810:. Whatever material in it belongs actually to the history of the Polish labor union can very well be covered in
822:
article itself. As such, whatever in the article is directly related to Solidarity, needs to be moved to the
247:
1220:
1072:
1068:
one of the largest trade unions in Poland, and with 1,5m members and making headlines almost every day (
951:
930:
886:
662:
624:
38:
882:
618:) with {{NPOV}} tag applied to them most of the time. No need to spawn more propaganda on Main Page. --
934:
379:
Paragraph layout is moderately messy. There is too much one sentence paragraphs that could be merged.
533:
140:
778:, which Tony do you mean? I know of several. Is there any project listing available copyeditors?--
1285:
1280:
1278:. Seems that the article meets all the FA criteria. Comprehensive, well-written - great article!
1261:
1237:
678:
594:
582:
462:"stomped out by the government" - unencyclopedic. Sure a more neutral formulation could be used.
1307:
1194:
1175:
1134:
1086:
1028:
977:
918:
896:
859:
785:
753:
708:
615:
555:
545:
502:
472:
448:
417:
393:
341:
330:: "When met in person, both were of mind to join forces to free Poland from communist rule.
301:
267:
231:
203:
160:
144:
127:
100:
71:.To begin with, please either remove or rereference statements referred to books published by
55:
889:
article?? PS2. I wonder if labelling respected editors as 'POV pushers' is not offensive...--
854:; history of Solidarity and history of Poland are obviously connected; just as, for example,
657:
619:
1117:
for now. Footnotes go after punctuation, not before, and not in the middle of a sentence.
766:
737:
593:- some of issues Irpen and Grafik mentioned are worth to attend but overall it looks good
526:
989:
Piotrus, my main claim is more fundamental that the article is POVed or inaccurate. The
44:
It has been some time since I nominated a FAC, but I hope it was worth it :) History of
967:
1256:
1232:
1161:
926:
879:
675:
603:
579:
876:
602:. Very good article. POV issues can always arise but this one really deserves it. -
1303:
1190:
1171:
1130:
1082:
1024:
973:
892:
781:
775:
749:
704:
551:
498:
468:
444:
413:
389:
337:
297:
263:
227:
199:
156:
96:
51:
1160:
In academia citations are often found inside sentences. Granted, they are usuall
1152:
1118:
963:
688:
647:
1228:
1224:
1059:
1012:
938:
841:
823:
811:
692:
525:
I'm stopping here but there are some other examples as well in the text... --
314:
285:
251:
216:
184:
114:
76:
45:
669:
And was there a single instance when Ghirla supported any Poland-related FA?
1165:
635:
322:
Certainly, Poland was the higher level target, and this is described in the
123:
90:
814:
article which is not overly long and does not warrant spinning off the
383:
72:
1223:
some wikipedia editors were absolutely right to separate it from the
183:. What are they doing here and how do they illustrate the article? --
28:
Knowledge:Featured article candidates/History of Solidarity/Archive1
1079:, which any reader can attest comparing this FAC to the other FA.--
826:
article. The article, however, is wider. It attempts to retell the
937:
article to discuss the POV that Poland lacked any until 1989. --
914:
441:
We are not talking about modern morale, but morale back then.--
196:; it should clarify the reasons for why those pics are there.--
837:"when Poland "regained independence" from the USSR in 1989 (!)
614:
per Irpen and Grafik fr. We have too many biased FAs (such as
1040:
Right now, Solidarity is an obscure organization and it owes
434:"deepening internal crisis of Soviet-style societies due to
495:. Feel free to rewrite it into something you like more.--
376:. Several things plague the current form of the article:
836:
215:
I read the article. I see those pics out of place. --
1048:, the role it played in the events of 70s and 80s.
147:. PS. In case 2:0 is not convincing, here is 4:0 -
1006:article is spun off? Second, what is left for the
856:History of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union
1058:exemplification on the main page for 24 hours. --
946:Regarding the independence issue, first of all,
948:this is not a concern related to this article
8:
1231:article can get some more development).--
1211:on the question whether the "History of
878:(Universal Encyclopedia of Philosophy),
701:whether they are controversial or not.--
1191:Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus
1172:Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus
1131:Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus
1083:Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus
1025:Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus
974:Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus
893:Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus
808:destined to be an unnecessary POV fork
782:Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus
750:Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus
705:Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus
552:Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus
499:Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus
469:Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus
445:Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus
414:Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus
390:Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus
338:Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus
298:Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus
264:Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus
228:Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus
200:Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus
157:Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus
97:Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus
52:Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus
864:Russian constitutional crisis of 1993
18:Knowledge:Featured article candidates
7:
294:are right and it was unnecessary.--
126:in Solidarity contributing to the
35:
991:article is a POV fork by design
869:(Central European University),
492:De gustibus non est disputandum
282:Strategic Arms Limitation Talks
89:, and I am sure you will agree
1071:) it is hardly 'obscure'. And
997:article is different from the
1:
1077:history of Poland (1945-1989)
911:Knowledge:Tendentious editing
852:History of Poland (1945-1989)
324:History of Poland (1945-1989)
246:of Reagan talking to Pope or
1311:17:27, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
1292:17:31, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
1269:19:27, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
1245:15:35, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
1202:17:09, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
1183:01:24, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
1156:01:12, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
1142:19:56, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
1122:19:42, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
1094:20:49, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
1063:20:10, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
1036:06:30, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
1016:05:35, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
985:02:04, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
942:01:02, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
904:19:25, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
845:18:53, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
793:20:27, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
770:23:53, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
761:16:32, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
741:11:12, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
716:06:36, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
696:18:53, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
682:11:10, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
665:07:12, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
651:19:39, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
639:10:50, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
627:08:00, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
607:12:20, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
586:23:28, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
563:17:22, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
538:17:08, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
510:17:22, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
480:17:22, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
456:17:22, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
425:17:22, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
401:17:22, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
349:22:45, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
318:22:26, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
309:16:40, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
289:02:20, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
275:02:11, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
255:01:44, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
239:00:58, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
220:00:55, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
211:00:20, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
188:23:50, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
168:23:27, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
118:23:14, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
108:23:08, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
80:22:46, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
63:22:24, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
885:to object to nomination of
1327:
956:Cambridge University Press
465:Replaced with supressed.--
1215:" should make part of "
1075:is quite different from
746:looks all right to me.--
181:Reagan and Pope pictures
816:History of Organization
1221:History of Solidarity
1073:history of Solidarity
952:History of Solidarity
933:. Similarly, start a
931:Ethics of eating meat
887:History of Solidarity
436:degradation of morale
410:Good idea, applied.--
39:History of Solidarity
22:History of Solidarity
950:. We are discussing
858:is connected to the
835:POV pushers such as
141:Revolutions of 1989
1042:all its prominence
883:Karol Świerczewski
832:Politics in Poland
1266:
1259:
1242:
1235:
1008:History of Poland
919:History of Russia
860:history of Russia
828:History of Poland
616:Soviet-Polish War
546:Autumn of Nations
386:and merge them.--
145:fall of communism
128:Autumn of Nations
26:(Redirected from
1318:
1288:
1283:
1265:
1262:
1257:
1241:
1238:
1233:
1199:
1197:
1180:
1178:
1139:
1137:
1091:
1089:
1033:
1031:
982:
980:
935:Polish statehood
901:
899:
790:
788:
758:
756:
713:
711:
673:
660:
622:
577:
560:
558:
531:
507:
505:
477:
475:
453:
451:
422:
420:
398:
396:
346:
344:
306:
304:
272:
270:
236:
234:
208:
206:
194:this helpful ref
165:
163:
105:
103:
60:
58:
31:
1326:
1325:
1321:
1320:
1319:
1317:
1316:
1315:
1286:
1281:
1263:
1239:
1200:
1195:
1189:
1181:
1176:
1170:
1140:
1135:
1129:
1092:
1087:
1081:
1034:
1029:
1023:
995:History of City
983:
978:
972:
902:
897:
891:
791:
786:
780:
759:
754:
748:
714:
709:
703:
671:
658:
620:
575:
561:
556:
550:
527:
508:
503:
497:
478:
473:
467:
454:
449:
443:
423:
418:
412:
399:
394:
388:
347:
342:
336:
307:
302:
296:
273:
268:
262:
237:
232:
226:
209:
204:
198:
166:
161:
155:
106:
101:
95:
61:
56:
50:
42:
33:
32:
25:
24:
12:
11:
5:
1324:
1322:
1314:
1313:
1295:
1294:
1272:
1271:
1248:
1247:
1206:
1205:
1204:
1188:
1185:
1169:
1146:
1145:
1144:
1128:
1111:
1110:
1109:
1108:
1107:
1106:
1105:
1104:
1103:
1102:
1101:
1100:
1099:
1098:
1097:
1096:
1080:
1022:
971:
890:
872:,(Routldege)
801:
800:
799:
798:
797:
796:
795:
779:
747:
726:
725:
724:
723:
722:
721:
720:
719:
718:
702:
641:
629:
609:
597:
588:
566:
565:
549:
523:
522:
521:
520:
519:
518:
514:
513:
512:
496:
484:
483:
482:
466:
460:
459:
458:
442:
429:
428:
427:
411:
405:
404:
403:
387:
370:
369:
368:
367:
366:
365:
364:
363:
362:
361:
360:
359:
358:
357:
356:
355:
354:
353:
352:
351:
335:
295:
261:
225:
197:
177:
176:
175:
174:
173:
172:
171:
170:
154:
94:
49:
41:
36:
34:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1323:
1312:
1309:
1305:
1300:
1297:
1296:
1293:
1290:
1289:
1284:
1277:
1274:
1273:
1270:
1267:
1260:
1253:
1250:
1249:
1246:
1243:
1236:
1230:
1226:
1222:
1218:
1214:
1210:
1207:
1203:
1198:
1192:
1186:
1184:
1179:
1173:
1167:
1163:
1162:Harvard style
1159:
1158:
1157:
1154:
1150:
1147:
1143:
1138:
1132:
1125:
1124:
1123:
1120:
1116:
1113:
1112:
1095:
1090:
1084:
1078:
1074:
1070:
1066:
1065:
1064:
1061:
1056:
1051:
1047:
1043:
1039:
1038:
1037:
1032:
1026:
1019:
1018:
1017:
1014:
1009:
1005:
1000:
996:
992:
988:
987:
986:
981:
975:
969:
965:
964:verifiability
961:
957:
953:
949:
945:
944:
943:
940:
936:
932:
928:
927:Animal rights
924:
920:
916:
912:
907:
906:
905:
900:
894:
888:
884:
880:
877:
875:(Cambridge),
874:
871:
868:
865:
861:
857:
853:
848:
847:
846:
843:
838:
833:
829:
825:
821:
817:
813:
809:
805:
804:Strong oppose
802:
794:
789:
783:
777:
773:
772:
771:
768:
764:
763:
762:
757:
751:
744:
743:
742:
739:
735:
730:
727:
717:
712:
706:
699:
698:
697:
694:
690:
685:
684:
683:
680:
677:
674:
668:
667:
666:
663:
661:
654:
653:
652:
649:
645:
642:
640:
637:
633:
630:
628:
625:
623:
617:
613:
610:
608:
605:
601:
598:
596:
595:Alex Bakharev
592:
589:
587:
584:
581:
578:
571:
568:
567:
564:
559:
553:
547:
542:
541:
540:
539:
536:
535:
532:
530:
515:
511:
506:
500:
494:
493:
488:
487:
485:
481:
476:
470:
464:
463:
461:
457:
452:
446:
440:
439:
437:
433:
432:
430:
426:
421:
415:
409:
408:
406:
402:
397:
391:
385:
381:
380:
378:
377:
375:
372:
371:
350:
345:
339:
333:
329:
325:
321:
320:
319:
316:
312:
311:
310:
305:
299:
292:
291:
290:
287:
283:
278:
277:
276:
271:
265:
258:
257:
256:
253:
249:
245:
242:
241:
240:
235:
229:
223:
222:
221:
218:
214:
213:
212:
207:
201:
195:
191:
190:
189:
186:
182:
179:
178:
169:
164:
158:
152:
149:
146:
142:
137:
133:
129:
125:
121:
120:
119:
116:
111:
110:
109:
104:
98:
92:
88:
87:this citation
83:
82:
81:
78:
74:
70:
69:Imporper refs
67:
66:
65:
64:
59:
53:
47:
40:
37:
29:
23:
19:
1298:
1279:
1275:
1251:
1216:
1212:
1208:
1148:
1114:
1055:organization
1054:
1049:
1045:
1041:
1007:
1003:
998:
994:
990:
959:
947:
922:
831:
827:
820:Organization
819:
815:
807:
803:
776:User:Wayward
733:
728:
670:
643:
631:
611:
599:
591:Weak Support
590:
574:
569:
534:
528:
524:
490:
435:
373:
331:
180:
68:
43:
1217:this object
1115:Weak oppose
993:. You see,
689:Citizendium
632:3/4 support
489:I like it.
1229:Solidarity
1225:Solidarity
968:neutrality
824:Solidarity
812:Solidarity
244:This image
130:, here is
46:Solidarity
1213:an object
1166:footnotes
818:from the
136:this page
124:causation
91:Routledge
1258:Beaumont
1234:Beaumont
923:Genocide
917:and not
774:I asked
604:Darwinek
328:this one
248:this one
20: |
1304:SylwiaS
1302:fine.--
1299:Support
1287:Kendysz
1276:Support
1252:Support
1209:Comment
1149:Comment
1046:history
1044:to its
1004:history
644:Support
600:Support
570:Support
529:Grafikm
517:itself.
384:be bold
374:Comment
132:another
73:Xlibris
1164:, not
1153:Rlevse
1127:are.--
1119:Rlevse
966:, and
729:Oppose
676:Halibu
659:Ghirla
648:Balcer
621:Ghirla
612:Object
580:Halibu
573:like.
1282:Jacek
1196:talk
1177:talk
1136:talk
1088:talk
1060:Irpen
1030:talk
1013:Irpen
979:talk
939:Irpen
898:talk
842:Irpen
787:talk
755:talk
710:talk
693:Irpen
557:talk
504:talk
474:talk
450:talk
419:talk
395:talk
343:talk
315:Irpen
303:talk
286:Irpen
269:talk
252:Irpen
233:talk
217:Irpen
205:talk
185:Irpen
162:talk
115:Irpen
102:talk
77:Irpen
57:talk
16:<
1308:talk
1050:Some
999:City
929:and
915:CPSU
830:and
767:Peta
738:Peta
691:. --
636:Ouro
284:. --
143:and
1264:(@)
1240:(@)
1306:|
1011:--
840:--
679:tt
672://
656:--
583:tt
576://
334:--
150:,
113:--
1193:|
1174:|
1133:|
1085:|
1027:|
976:|
895:|
784:|
752:|
707:|
554:|
501:|
471:|
447:|
416:|
392:|
340:|
300:|
266:|
230:|
202:|
159:|
99:|
54:|
30:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.