1004:. Thanks for your support with the article's development. I think the salutes are evidence of the same kind of reverence as the removal of hats and show the effect that the Cenotaph continued to have on people for years (and arguably still does, though perhaps only on certain days of the year). I've done my best to capture that, and you can see the depth and breadth of sourcing from the bibliography, but I'm not sure it's really been documented. King does indeed mention Glasgow, Leeds, and Stoke but he and Borg use various examples to illustrate the point about its influence and I've tried to avoid an indiscriminate list of other cenotaphs—the IWM identified at least 55, most of which probably owe something to Lutyens but I've added Leeds and Glasgow (I'm surprised Glasgow is a red link!), but Stoke's was demolished and replaced.
105:, which passed FAC back in 2016. It documents the history of what is easily Britain's most famous war memorial, and probably one of the most famous war memorials anywhere. It was never intended to be such. It started life in wood and plaster as one of a collection of monuments for the parade to celebrate the formal end of the First World War, but it caught the imagination of a public mourning the loss of an entire generation of men in a way that nothing before or since ever has. The industrial-scale slaughter had never been seen before, and most of the dead (or what was left of them) were buried overseas. People needed somewhere to grieve, and the Cenotaph gave them that. It was rebuilt almost unchanged and in the same spot in stone, where it has stood for over a century and is still revered today.
1687:
architect in the
British Empire."{{sfn|Amery|Richardson|Stamp|1981|p=149}} But I think it also needs a snippet on the emotional, rather than just the professional, impact on Lutyens. It is certain from the sources that the war had a major emotional impact on him: "how can such things be. A ribbon of isolated graves, where men were tucked in where they fell. How to arrange their names in decent order. The question is so big, so wide..." (Brown|p=167) Actually, virtually the whole letter is in Hussey (p=373), which might be a better source. Brown also has a nice quote from
1038:(so not usable unless someone publishes and refers to it, as they did for Hong Kong). I do think it is worth putting in a tad more detail about Hong Kong and/or including in the gallery some of the 'empire' replicas (particularly if some of the other images encounter problems). It would also take the focus away from Lutyens' UK work (6 images of his other cenotaphs seems overkill) and illustrate the wider impact across the world, which might give the article and/or gallery a better balance (including explicit replicas is not an indiscriminate list).
2270:" – The phrasing is rather different as Ward-Jackson (p. 418) quotes it: "if possible less catafalqué ... I am putting a great vase or basin on it – to spout a pillar of flame at night and I hope smoke by day". (The starting point of the quotation and the ellipsis are as they appear in Ward-Jackson.) Is the quotation accurately transcribed from Greenberg? Ward-Jackson doesn't specify that the letter he's quoting is to Lady Lutyens, so it might be a different letter saying the same thing.
2113:" – Not the dates according to the Cenotaph's inscription; it gives the end date as MCMXIX, as one of the article's photos shows very clearly. Perhaps leave these dates out of the lede, assuming the reader has some general knowledge (and if not, they're in the first section of the article body), and if the sources say anything about the 1919 date include that in the article? The discrepancy is the sort of thing a curious observer might want to find out about from the article.
1030:, but it seems that the plans to use the Lutyens design in Brisbane foundered and it never went ahead, so I am not convinced there is a replica in Australia unless there is an explicit citation (the cenotaph in North Sydney isn't the Lutyens design). The cenotaph in Johannesburg has been linked to the Lutyens design (but isn't a replica). At least one source explicitly talks about the process by which permission was obtained from Lutyens (for Hong Kong): p.109 from
1026:) of examples, as I find that 'exporting' of the design more interesting than the focus on Lutyens' other cenotaphs in the UK, but I see that this gallery didn't survive the upgrade. You say the replicas elsewhere in the empire are in Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Bermuda, and Hong Kong. Do you know where in Australia there is a replica? The idea was certainly reported on, as
1151:"The most spectacular reversal occurred in the Victorian town of Bendigo, where the old memorial hall was accompanied from 1957 by a half-sized replica of London's Cenotaph, unveiled nearly forty years after the original. reproduce in Bendigo the most revered of monuments to British Great War dead a festival of conservative imperial Australia."
1022:
the memorial explicitly negotiated with
Lutyens for the right to erect an exact replica (though usually of a reduced size). Of these three categories, it is this latter category that I would have expected to see covered more in the literature, but it appears not. I did at one point put together a gallery (see
3108:
from the unveiling of the
Cenotaph until at least 1924. He went on to design over 130 war memorials and cemeteries, many influenced by his work on the Cenotaph. His Southampton Cenotaph was unveiled in 1920, while the permanent monument on Whitehall was still under construction. - needs chrono tweak?
2122:
Not sure about the structure of the lede; I would expect to find the date the (permanent) Cenotaph was erected in the first paragraph, but instead it goes into relative depth about the temporary version. I'd also be inclined to include the
National Service of Remembrance in the first paragraph, as an
1739:
Here, I would use
Pevsner, (see above). Both for completeness, and because its description "The chief, national war memorial" conveys both its importance and its influence. It also refers to "demountable railings, set up every November", which Lutyens designed in 1938. Presumably they're not still in
1176:
that are close copies of London's but were actually sketched from newsreel. There are many others that obviously owe a lot to
Lutyens but didn't involve him directly, and others that were claimed to be close replicas that look nothing like it, so the distinction you make is not always clear. Will see
968:
I think one area that might be 'missing' from the Later
History section is something on how the Cenotaph features (due to its location) as part of the landscape for other ceremonial events in and around Whitehall, parliament and Westminster Abbey, and how state funerals (and ceremonial funerals) that
585:
Okay! "The
Copyright Act 1911 removed the concept of common law copyright protection from British law, and it also provided specific protection for government works for the first time. Crown copyright was extended to any work prepared or published by or under the direction or control of King George V
1786:
That's it from me. As I said, a very moving read, and you've done sterling work on the whole series. It's getting closer to the point where the
Lutyens article itself needs doing! Have a look at the suggestions above, include or discard as appropriate, and I'll be delighted to support. All the best.
839:
says that, "Usually, if the sections are separated, then explanatory footnotes are listed first, short citations or other footnoted citations are next, and any full citations or general references are listed last." This article has the long references listed first, then the short citations, which is
969:
pass the
Cenotaph (usually but not always en route to Westminster Abbey) feature salutes to the Cenotaph. It may not be possible to add anything, as it is possible that no-one has commented on this, but it clearly does happen. See the accounts of the funeral procession for Douglas Haig in 1928, the
1021:
Understood and surprised that Stoke was demolished! The distinction that would be ideal (but probably not clear enough in the sources) would be between other memorials inspired by the Cenotaph, the ones by Lutyens where he drew on his own design of the Cenotaph, and those cases where those raising
2588:
could be used to argue against the past tense, but I'm not going to push this. However, there ought to be internal consistency. There are references in the present tense to writings by Allan Greenberg, David Lloyd and Paul Fussell; apologies if any of those were put in during one of my copyedits.
1686:
A couple of things here. The Cenotaph did make his name, although he got his knighthood in 1918. There's quite a nice quote in Amery et. al., which may be usable. "The immense popular and professional success of Lutyens's intuitive brilliance with his Cenotaph design made him into the most famous
3358:
at "tomb chest" - no strong view. Possible touches: "which diminishes in steps as it rises" - unlike Egyptian pylons, all the stages have apparently vertical faces; "The memorial is austere, containing very little decoration, and few inscriptions". Perhaps "Three flags are placed into both long
3060:
and how to preserve an appropriate tone. It began preserving the messages so they could be compiled into albums and given to the Imperial War Museum. By March 1921, officials had catalogued over 30,000 items; the volume was such that they were forced to abandon their efforts at preservation. The
3049:
After the unveiling of the permanent memorial, members of the public again laid floral tributes, - this sounds like repeat of "The public response to the newly unveiled memorial exceeded ... began to file past the Cenotaph and lay flowers at its base." Perhaps slight reword eg 'At the permanent
760:
When reviewing the article for GAN I commented that it struck me as of FA standard, and revisiting it confirms my view. The article is highly readable (nearly 7,000 words, but it didn't seem that long even at a fourth perusal, just now), in impeccable prose, comprehensive as far as I can judge,
3165:
The relationship between Armistice Day, Remembrance Day, and Remembrance Sunday is a little complicated and probably mostly out of scope for an article on an individual war memorial. Other than that, I believe I've addressed all your comments. Thank you for thoroughness and apologies for my
1201:
I've added something from Skelton about other cenotaphs abroad, which might help make some distinction, but there's little in the sources about the distinction with UK cenotaphs between "exact replica" and "inspired by" or just "named Cenotaph" beyond the ones that Lutyens designed himself.
1696:
I'm familiar with the Barrie quote and the letter. I was reluctant to add another quote to a section that already contains quite a few. The letter seems a little tangential to the Cenotaph specifically. I have Amery but hadn't used it because it's light on detail but I'll have a
848:
The infobox says the cenotaph was designated a listed building on 5 February 1970, but the article only has the year listed. The full date should be added to the article text so that this information is cited somewhere, or removed from the infobox if the date cannot be verified.
1392:"It has sometimes been compared to other famous war memorials" - not quite sure what's being got at here, or where it (re)appears in the body, unless it's the last para. of "Appreciation"? Is it saying something about its influence/impact, which is discussed in the next para.?
344:
The flag folding - the design called for cloth, so it's not fixed - shows it's the same image, and he gave permission for them to use it, so, unless I'm misinterpreting something, that's publication under U.S. law, and so which copyright doesn't matter now? Check my work?
1262:
HJM - Very moving. Just read it through twice and it captures the monument's significance very well. Shall get back with a review asap. Just putting a couple of things here so I don't forget them. I'll reorder them properly, so just ignore them for now.
563:
197:
3118:"were built across Britain, along with many other monuments inspired to some extent by Lutyens's design" - is slight repeat of "Several towns and cities erected war memorials based to some extent on Lutyens's design for Whitehall" just above?
1461:"Lloyd George summoned Lutyens" - Appreciate it is covered in Note B (see above), but I'd favour expanding that note to confirm that the design was approved on 7 July 1919, which supports the contention that Lutyens and LlG met in early July.
448:. Long story short is... there's two ways it can go out of copyright in the U.S., - 70 years after his death or 95 years after publication - but coincidentally they both work out to it going out of copyright on January 1st 2024. This isn't
2616:
Thank you for your kind words and attention to detail, and apologies for the tardy response. I believe I've addressed everything except where I've replied inline. Please let me know if I've missed anything or you want to follow up further.
632:
This is transcluded from a template. I have no idea what it's provenance is but it's used in thousands of places on enwiki and elsewhere. That said, I'm not convinced of the value of the template in the first place so I've removed it.
1081:: "Simple replica of the Whitehall Cenotaph in London with a wreath on the front face. This memorial was intended to be a temporary structure and was replaced by the current Stoke on Trent cenotaph (see record number 13670) in 1938."
3368:"Design" it's in the measurements, and some of the pics, but I think you could spell out more that there are two long sides and two short. And their positions - the long ones facing across the street, the short ones down the street.
2978:
Its mass decreases with its height, the sides becoming narrower towards the bottom of the coffin than at the base. - not sure "than at the base" is necessary ("decreases with its height" says it). Could also remove "the bottom
1755:
Yes, understand the challenge (see above). The one that would be good, of Lutyens walking away from the temporary Cenotaph, is also in Brown (p=171). But no idea whether it could be got. I doubt it as I can't even find it on
1303:
I was hoping Pevsner might have been a bit more verbose, but he might have decided on succinctness given the depth of writing elsewhere on the Cenotaph and the number of buildings and monuments to cover in Westminster.
984:
that states Lutyens' Cenotaph was "broadly imitated and referenced in a number of First World War Memorials erected during the 1920s, including those in Leeds, Glasgow, and Stoke-on-Trent", referencing King pp.140-150.
2744:
IWM at the time of the Cenotaph's inception, and the museum in Elephant and Castle remains so (although it's part of a larger body these days). I don't want to confuse matters by getting bogged down in a tangential
2424:" – a proper name taking capital letters? (This would apply to the second sentence of the lede as well.) If so, perhaps capitalise First and Second later too, to make it more obvious what the ordinals refer to?
2116:
Dates removed from lead. I've not come across anything specific to the Cenotaph but a lot of memorials used 1919. I believe they took the Treaty of Versailles, rather than the armistice, to be the "end" of the
3350:"It takes the form of a tomb chest atop a rectangular pylon, which diminishes as it rises. The memorial is austere, containing almost no decoration. From each side hang three flags." Lead para 2. Me, I'd link
1627:. Some ascribed imperialistic or nationalistic meanings to it, including Haig, who called it "a symbol of the empire's unity"" - I see what you mean, but surely Haig meant his symbolism comment to be positive?
1727:
seems to suggest that only lengthy poems get italics. I can't say I'm fussed, but poems from an anthology being in quotes would fit with songs and episodes (albums, series, and anthologies having italics).
1158:
by the London Cenotaph, and those that are exact or reduced-scale replicas. These are two distinct concepts and the distinction needs to be made clearer, possibly by use of the examples provided here.
300:
True, but he was hired to make the Cenotaph. Presuming this design is part of that, the law at the time was very strongly biased towards things becoming Crown Copyright under this kind of situation.
108:
I've largely rewritten and expanded it from the ground up over the course of a couple of years, and slowly accumulated just about every piece of literature which covers it in detail. I'm indebted to
811:"The memorial met with public acclaim, has been largely praised by academics and has sometimes been compared to other famous war memorials" This new version replaced the first "and" with a comma.
1295:? See Nikki's image review above for some of the problems we're having with historical photos! If someone has the technical and copyright expertise to get it onto Commons, I'd happily include it.
227:
published; it's on display in the Imperial War Museum, and was part of an exhibition on Lutyens' work after his death so there's no doubt that he's the author (and he's been dead for : -->
519:
Unfortunately, English Knowledge (XXG) works in the exact opposite direction: It accepts files that are free in the U.S. and not elsewhere. You could possibly justify fair use, though.
2085:
183:
2347:
I don't think anyone reading about cenotaphs wants to go on a tangent about the organisation of the British government, and the term is probably understood by most English speakers.
1745:
Added the quote. I've seen photos of railings (in Skelton I think) but no idea if they're the originals. Not sure they're important enough to mention in the article on the Cenotaph.
552:
201:
3109:(ie "from the unveiling" ... "he went on" ... but then Southampton unveiled before London? Unless "from the unveiling of the Cenotaph" refers to the unveiling of the temporary?
1154:
There are now two cases of Lutyens' replicas being documented in secondary sources (Hong Kong and Bendigo). The tricky thing is to distinguish in the article between memorials
3406:
Thanks for having a look, John. All addressed, I believe, except I'm reluctant to add more detail to the lead, which has been heavily trimmed as a result of comments above.
1691:; "The cenotaph grows in beauty. I stand cogitating why and how it is so noble a thing. It is how the war has lifted you and moved you above yourself."(p=172) Again, usable?
1034:(Hong Kong’s Cenotaph and Beyond). The authoritative record on replicas (both erected and planned-but-never-erected appears to be still mostly in the National Archives file
2918:
Hello Harry, thank you for this fine article which honours the Cenotaph, the fallen and Lutyens. This is my Anzac Day contribution. I have a few comments and questions...
3362:"Lutyens's first war memorial was the Rand Regiments Memorial in Johannesburg" add the date, which seems to be 1911 for his work. I'd break this para too, at "From 1915".
1148:(2008). I will quote from page 340, where the erection of a Cenotaph in Bendigo is described as a 'reversal' (i.e. from a utilitarian memorial to a monumental memorial):
1550:(semi-circular), cyma reversa, and cavetto" - a complex sentence, made harder for me by the hyphen. Would a colon work; "the transition moulding which is in three stages
761:
balanced, well proportioned and well and widely referenced. I don't see any aspect that requires improvement, and the article seems to me to meet all the FA criteria. –
797:
I struggle with leads, and this was possibly a little too long. I've trimmed it by about 100 words and merged the last two paragraphs so that it all fits on my screen.
2972:
the fledgling Imperial War Museum (founded in 1917) - move IWM wlink up to here from "design process is in the collection of the Imperial War Museum, as are several"?
3318:
Ham beat me to the party, and have closely follow their review. It is forensic and real, but winding down now and now at a stage, where given Harry's responses, I
2432:
Any mention in the sources of how the carved wreaths on the north and south faces appear as if suspended on ribbons from round protuberances to the left and right?
1775:
The only thing that immediately occurs is anything around the costs? Vulgar, I know but important. Lutyens writes to his wife of Parliament voting £10,000. Usable?
830:
and the former name is given in bold there; the note is just to prevent confusion because the terms "empire" and "Commonwealth" appear quite a lot in the article.
794:
but I do recommend that you take a look at the lede and consider removing or summarising some information, especially if other reviewers note the same concern.
1707:
For me, the poem titles would look better italicised, as the painting and book titles are. But oddly, we appear to adopt both styles more widely on Wiki, e.g.
1172:
Will have a look at adding something more about other cenotaphs but I doubt the sourcing will support much. There are two in New Zealand that are mentioned in
209:
Where and when was the first two of these first published? For the last, the image description gives a date of 1928, but the tag indicates published pre-1927?
40:
974:
790:
Just from loading the page, I find that the lede is quite long, with four large paragraphs. I won't oppose because of this, since I think it is still within
502:
since we seem to be concluding that it's not free in the US, I'm guessing that means it shouldn't stay on Commons? Would uploading it locally be acceptable?
1568:
to be supported by ovolo (curved decorative moulding beneath the edge)" - what's the "appearing" doing? Does the moulding not actually support the corniche?
687:
might be a good addition. Let me know if you want it, though; setting up Agence Rol photos on Commons is not straightforwards. I know how to document them.
3078:
2957:"public began laying flowers and wreaths around the Cenotaph's base" and "huge quantities of flowers were laid at the base of the monument" - repetitious?
2662:
I'm reluctant to get into more detail at this point; the link is blue if the reader wants to know more, and it's covered in a few more words further down.
1140:! That is a perfect example of what I was talking about. Following this information trail, I ended up at a page from another work co-authored by the late
3223:. I've been busy in real life so my responses have been slow. If I’ve missed anything or you think of anything else, I’d be happy to try and address it.
1763:
Historical images are a bit of a problem. We need to know the provenance (photographer and original publication dates) to establish the copyright status.
1471:
As you say, the date is mentioned further down. I'm not sure it's necessary to repeat it here. The note already says that Hussey's date can't be correct.
2578:
Unless there's a style guide I'm missing or some such, I'm not sure why we would put opinions of people who opined in the past, in the present tense?
810:"The memorial met with public acclaim and has been largely praised by academics and has sometimes been compared to other famous war memorials," -: -->
383:
188:
Unable to find a date of death for the first but suspecting it may be more recent than 70 years; image removed. Date and US tag added for the second.
3453:
657:
I've added my analysis above. Afraid some timing aspects of this are a little inauspicious - lots of stuff barely not out of copyright in America.
30:
17:
101:
This article is the culmination of a project I've been working on (on and off, with quite a few digressions!) for about six years, starting with
259:
Perhaps I'm missing something, but given this Cenotaph sketch was a sketch made on request by the government, isn't this just Crown Copyright,
2954:
the Cenotaph came to represent the absent dead and served as a substitute - tense mix? ie, represented/served or came to represent and serve?
3464:
2067:
1997:
970:
2718:
does, an "original design" for the Cenotaph. Also, although our article title doesn't do this, the IWM is properly the Imperial War Museum
558:
Hope you don't mind me pulling this out of the conversation above. I'm seeing no indication it's not from 1928 or just before. If this is
2063:
1993:
1714:
802:"...with the repatriation of the Unknown Warrior an unidentified British serviceman exhumed from France..." Place a comma after Warrior
193:
2031:: Apologies for the delay. The day job is occupying just about every waking moment at the minute! Believe I've addressed all of these.
863:
827:
149:, where X is how much you want to scale it relative to user preferences. For example, if you have a default image size set of 200px,
2966:
missing info? next section is "Reconstruction in stone" but what was temp made of? Mention it was of wood and plaster construction?
1806:, I was wondering if you felt in a position to either support or oppose this nomination? Obviously, neither is obligatory. Thanks.
977:
in 1965, and a few others as well. I was hoping to find a source that gave a traditional route for such events, but drew a blank.
858:
179:
2796:". A very pernickety point, this, but the Cenotaph is at the end of Whitehall, at the point where it becomes Parliament Street.
445:
319:
1363:
I suspect possibly the latter (possibly via the former, but the concept is ancient) but we can only write what the sources say.
1780:
Oddly, it doesn't come up in any of the books. It's the sort of detail I'd expect Skelton to mention. I'll have another look.
823:
562:, it's fine, otherwise this leaves copyright in America 1 January 2024. Now, coins in general do come under crown copyright (
228:
70 years) and that it has been published. The second, not sure where you're getting 1928 from? The painting dates from 1919.
3485:
3440:
3418:
3392:
3331:
3312:
3292:
3267:
3235:
3214:
3196:
3178:
3159:
3016:
2947:
2901:
2883:
2858:
2781:
2629:
2598:
2560:
2522:
2372:
2325:
2308:
2204:
2174:
2071:
2043:
2019:
2001:
1963:
1919:
1898:
1869:
1835:
1815:
1796:
1334:
1316:
1272:
1236:
1214:
1189:
1167:
1131:
1095:
1047:
1016:
994:
980:
On the replicas or close copies, it may be worth checking the Alex King reference again as there is a recent article (2020)
952:
935:
910:
884:
776:
749:
718:
701:
671:
652:
627:
604:
580:
533:
514:
486:
467:
439:
425:
401:
359:
339:
314:
295:
277:
254:
240:
218:
174:
Done, except for the gallery in the bottom where I'm not sure I could add anything that's helpful and not overly repetitive.
162:
128:
94:
3092:
3061:
Office of Works was keen to avoid being seen as a censor but also to preserve the character - 4 x preserv/, any alt word/s?
1115:
2540:" – in context this reads as if Greenberg was someone who voiced an opinion in the 1920s; change the tense of "believed".
2341:
2296:
2291:
2240:
1586:" - bluelink Derwent Wood. I'm assuming it's the same guy, although oddly our article on him doesn't mention the Cenotaph.
615:
245:
For the first, I don't doubt the life+70 tag, but the US tag is problematic if no pre-1927 publication can be verified.
3140:
consistency - how do you decide on tenses when quoting authors etc eg historian "Mosse noted that" v "Lloyd notes that"
1288:
Photo of Lutyens at the temporary structure - Letters to His Wife, p=370 - great if findable/useable, but suspect not.
3007:
2938:
1910:
1860:
3346:
I haven't read all the above, but the article has had a good chewing over, so I hope I'll just have a few comments.
1462:
1279:
2575:". I think it should be present perfect tense for scholars' opinions throughout the Appreciation section, as well.
3303:
Placeholder. Waiting for the above to be resolved, and will comment then. Obviously this is an important article.
3112:
cemeteries, many influenced by his work on the Cenotaph - how were cemeteries influenced by Cenotaph? Simplicity?
566:- but it rather depends who made these medals. You may be able to argue fair use in the meantime. Will research
1442:? The former was 1910 and the latter 1911. I think the Delhi commission came in early 1912. Perhaps "his first
618:: source link is dead, missing US tag, and if the author is unknown how do we know they died over 70 years ago?
2714:" – This is not a sketch (despite the filename); I'd suggest calling it either an architectural drawing or, as
2098:
1435:
102:
3427:
who thought the lead was too long, wasn't it? Not for the first time, I disagree with that. Anyway, happy to
3026:
in Westminster Abbey, inaugurated - move wlink up to here from "existence of the tomb in Westminster Abbey."
2059:
1989:
1822:
Gog - Apologies, overlooked this one. Harry’s taken a look at my comments/suggestions and I’m very happy to
965:
Just a brief set of comments, as I have mainly been watching the excellent work being done on this article.
2635:
Just a few more after a second read-through, and I've also replied above. I hope I haven't been holding up
1434:
public commission was the design of much of New Delhi" - nit-picking but are we certain Delhi predates the
685:
682:
3002:
2933:
2823:
2733:
2015:
1952:
1905:
1877:
1855:
1811:
1439:
981:
2922:
Dozens of replicas were built in Britain and Commonwealth countries - and 'other' Commonwealth countries?
323:
3413:
3287:
3230:
3173:
2878:
2624:
2320:
2038:
1893:
1311:
1209:
1184:
1011:
930:
713:
647:
509:
420:
235:
123:
89:
2975:
a wooden money collection box - maybe hyphenate money-collection (otherwise ambiguous ie wooden money)?
2213:
What are the citations for the first four sentences of the second paragraph in the Background section?
3351:
2987:
2273:
I've been back to Greenberg and the quote in the Knowledge (XXG) article is verbatim from the source.
2258:" is correct for the wife of a knight; some stuff online seems to suggest that it should be "Lady ".
2185:
2084:
Another excellent piece of work, on the most vital article of your whole project – it's always among
1852:. I'm sure I've seen a heavily sandbagged cenotaph picture somewhere, but I couldn't readily find it.
1583:
1375:
1232:
1163:
1043:
990:
623:
435:
397:
291:
250:
214:
158:
2469:
2462:
2162:
2129:
1849:
769:
3457:
3322:. I realise some points are open, but they are tweaking, Ham's substantive points have been meet.
3480:
3240:
Hello Harry, finally got here. I have re-read and have added 2 further minor suggested changes...
3192:
2961:
2538:
which Greenberg believed would have been at odds with its "open symbolism and abstract character"
2055:
2028:
1985:
320:
Illustrated London News November 13 1920, page 769. Explicit derivative work of Lutyens' design .
1031:
3365:"objected to the lack of Christian symbol" - "symbols", "a Cs", "symbolism", or something else?
2192:
Not sure what you mean? It's not referred to with a definite article anywhere in this article.
1300:
Pevsner|Bradley, pp=245-6, "The chief national war memorial" - Impact: On other war memorials.
1035:
3436:
3388:
3377:"The Cenotaph is flanked on each side by flags of the United Kingdom" - again, each long side.
3263:
3210:
3155:
2140:
2133:
2024:
2011:
1807:
1084:
901:
Those are my thoughts after reading the article. Please ping me when the above are addressed.
738:
690:
660:
593:
569:
522:
493:
475:
456:
348:
328:
303:
266:
260:
3258:
Trusting you will consider these, I am very pleased to now sign my support. Thank you again.
843:
Thank you but I prefer it the way it is, and it's consistent with my other featured articles.
3407:
3281:
3224:
3167:
2897:
2872:
2854:
2777:
2768:
I've changed this to "mounted onto"; the closest sense of the verb "to mould" I can find is
2618:
2594:
2556:
2518:
2368:
2314:
2304:
2200:
2170:
2152:
2032:
2007:
1887:
1305:
1220:
1203:
1178:
1127:
1072:
1005:
924:
854:
707:
641:
503:
414:
229:
117:
83:
61:
1418:
I'm not sure it would be helpful, but it wouldn't do any harm if someone wanted to add one.
3327:
3308:
2581:
2108:
1883:
1510:
There's possibly room for improvement in the phrasing but I don't think those suggestions
1479:
1228:
1196:
1159:
1068:
1039:
1001:
986:
948:
906:
728:
636:
619:
587:
559:
497:
431:
409:
393:
392:
Okay - I would expect the AWM declaration to apply to status in Australia rather than US.
287:
246:
210:
154:
109:
3074:
base was vandalised with spray paint - move link up to "protestors spray-painted slogans"
3036:
and not an unknown warrior that became - this is only place without caps, is intentional?
1090:
744:
706:
If they're usable from a copyright perspective, one or both would make a great addition.
696:
666:
599:
575:
564:"Copyright for designs and images of United Kingdom decimal coins subsists in the Crown."
528:
481:
462:
354:
334:
309:
272:
3456:
has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see
2712:
One of Lutyens's sketches for the Cenotaph, in the collection of the Imperial War Museum
2543:
There's a similar issue with the description of Catherine Moriarty's opinion; for that "
1325:
Apologies for the pause on this. Real life is troublesome. Will get to it this weekend.
2715:
1959:
1831:
1792:
1349:
1330:
1268:
1078:
880:
791:
764:
113:
1027:
3475:
3202:
3188:
1353:
893:
It's easily verified, just not that important. I've added it to the body nonetheless.
53:
3146:
Remembrance Day v Armistice Day - needs explanation? (Armistice Sunday is explained)
2839:" – If the dates for WWI have been removed, for consistency these should be as well.
1903:
Thanks Harry, if we can't find a reliable source for that then we can't include it.
3432:
3401:
3384:
3275:
3259:
3220:
3206:
3184:
3151:
3040:
2991:
2527:
I could go either way on "the Empire", but I've de-capped all of these now I think.
2450:
and opposed overt religious symbolism on the Cenotaph and in his work with the IWGC
2295:" at the beginning of this section, for internal consistency. (The current text of
1709:
1688:
472:
You may be able to argue fair use here, but whether it's worth it is the question.
116:
for a very thorough GA review, and now I think it's ready for its star. Thank you,
72:
2846:" – Not obvious from the context which war, but from the reference it must be WWI?
1882:
This doesn't seem to be documented anywhere reliable. I dug up a reference to the
1613:
Drawing library is the term used in the books and seems like a natural term to me.
1501:"Lutyens proposed was the replacement of the silk flags on the temporary Cenotaph
1348:, meaning "empty tomb"" - appreciate this is the NHLE wording, but is it actually
389:
The AWM states that it's in the public domain; that's all the information I have.
198:
File:The_Cenotaph_the_Morning_of_the_Peace_Procession_by_Sir_William_Nicholson.jpg
3088:
3471:
3355:
3115:
aside - gallery, pity the Longstaff isn't bigger, it's so stunning and evocative
2893:
2866:
2850:
2773:
2611:
2590:
2552:
2514:
2478:
The Cenotaph was shrouded in Union Flags, until the king performed the unveiling
2364:
2300:
2196:
2166:
1659:"He compared the diminishing tiers (when viewed from the ground up) to the hilt
1137:
1123:
446:
Knowledge (XXG):Non-U.S._copyrights#Dates_of_restoration_and_terms_of_protection
57:
2356:" – "Issue" doesn't sound right in this register; perhaps "without objection"?
3424:
3323:
3304:
3096:
2928:
file Edwin Lutyens.jpg alt of a bespectaceld, balding man - typo bespectacled
2758:" – Is it necessary to give the location? If so, "Greece" is a bit imprecise.
2636:
2165:, which has "He was buried in Westminster Abbey, London on 11 November 1920".
1141:
944:
918:
902:
2753:
2589:
They should be in whichever tense is used for the other scholars' opinions.
2585:
2447:
2443:
2299:
doesn't manage to be consistent on this, so it doesn't offer any pointers.)
2285:
Not a hill I'm going to die on, but used on its own it's not a proper noun.
1955:
1827:
1803:
1788:
1724:
1326:
1264:
876:
836:
3150:
Thanks, please let me know if you need any clarifications for my comments.
2765:" – I don't understand "moulded onto"; is that meant to be "mounted onto"?
2231:
introduces several design elements common in Lutyens's subsequent memorials
1940:
is a citation to "Gregory (2009)" that I suspect should be "Gregory (2008)"
452:
far away, so I'd almost be inclined to use a {{#ifexpr|{{CURRENTYEAR}}: -->
2769:
2689:
I think this works with or without the possessive but I prefer it without.
3105:
According to Jane Brown, in a biography of the architect - her biography?
3054:
406:
I would imagine so. How can we ascertain its copyright status in the US?
3137:
consistency - "21st century" and "20th century" v "twenty-first century"
3023:
are several of Lutyens's original sketches; several other - 2x "several"
3053:
glass domes - any wlink? What did they hold/cover/symbolise? Were they
2654:
2646:
1119:
923:
Thank you for your attention to detail, and for your formatting fixes.
3205:, will have another quick read through later today. Sorry for delay.
2888:
As Ceoil said, all my substantive points are met now, so this has my
2313:
I'm happy treating "Armistice of 11 November 1918" as a proper noun.
1946:
Massingham is too early for an ISBN; did you consult a later edition?
3254:
According to the literary historian Andrew Moffett, the poems - Alex
322:
Which, given he gave permission, seems you count as publication per
39:
Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in
2763:
The bottom of the structure is moulded onto three diminishing steps
2189:" sometimes takes the definite article here and sometimes doesn't.
2147:
He hadn't been interred at the time of the events being discussed.
3071:
statue of? (I presume there is only one of Churchill in vicinity?)
2983:
2216:
Everything from the start of a paragraph to the first <ref: -->
430:
What is the first publication of this image that can be verified?
2268:
Curzon wants it less catafalque so I am putting a great urn on it
2238:
Homberger, Eric (12 November 1976). "The Story of the Cenotaph".
3251:
signing of the Treaty of Versailles in 28 June 1919 - on 28 June
3087:
such as ANZAC Day - now more commonly formatted as Anzac Day eg
3050:
memorial, members of the public continued to lay floral tributes
2794:
in the centre of the roadway, surrounded by government buildings
2490:"Abbey" is not a proper noun (cf. a cenotaph vs. The Cenotaph).
3374:" it is crowned by a laurel wreath" add "invisible from below"?
1223:, for the delay in getting back to this, and thanks for adding
2925:
Lutyens himself designed several others - is "himself" needed?
2226:" follow the one on the etymology (in the Background section)?
282:"made on request by" is not automatically "created by" - it's
2790:
in the centre of Whitehall surrounded by government buildings
1523:
money collection box in the shape of the Cenotaph made from
3057:? If no link or explanation available, ignore this question
2700:
By the time he had received the commission for the Cenotaph
2493:
I'm willing to concede that, but it makes me wonder about "
2086:
the most viewed pages on memorials and public art in London
1970:
Suggest adding chapter page numbers to the Richardson cite.
2102:" – as originally conceived, but its scope is broader now.
2261:
Yes it is. Lady would be correct for the wife of a lord.
3046:
even on a bus - even when on a bus (or even from a bus)?
2338:
Mond announced that the decision rested with the cabinet
1411:
Would this benefit from a map? Seems to be space for it.
1146:
Sacred Places: War Memorials in the Australian Landscape
590:. And this was from the Royal Mint, so Crown Copyright.
2960:
A two-minute silence was observed, after which - wlink
2495:
Calls for a permanent Cenotaph began almost immediately
2132:, an unidentified British serviceman to be interred in
1933:
1542:"Above it is the transition moulding which is in three
1224:
1023:
852:
FAC stalker - date is confirmed in the listing record,
184:
File:Monk-97672_-_The_Temporary_Cenotaph,_Whitehall.jpg
112:
for his help and advice throughout the process, and to
65:
3383:
That's it - a very thorough & satisfying article!
3380:"The Cenotaph has been contrasted with..." split para.
3102:
applied to only 2.5% of listings - per cent (per MoS)?
2680:
was responsible for Lutyens becoming a national figure
2446:
and heavily influenced by his wife's involvement with
1370:"It takes the form of a tomb chest atop a rectangular
3029:
held in Westminster Abbey rather than the Cenotaph -
2806:
so as to be barely visible to the naked eye (entasis)
1464:
You mention this further down in the Curzon sentence.
553:
File:Reverse_of_Armistice_Day_Memorial_Medal_1928.jpg
202:
File:Reverse_of_Armistice_Day_Memorial_Medal_1928.jpg
2722:
now. This would also affect the later instances of "
1886:
suffering bomb damage, but nothing on the Cenotaph.
1846:
Very nicely written, pretty comprehensive coverage.
1079:
https://www.iwm.org.uk/memorials/item/memorial/13563
2969:
Suggestions that the temporary cenotaph be - cap C?
1278:Date of Lutyens' design - approved on 7 July 1919,
3084:According Paul Fussell, an American - according to
2812:"? I realise it is defined in an earlier section.
1527:" - you can probably drop the "wood" without loss.
182:needs a US PD tag and author date of death. Ditto
153:will make the image look like it's 220px for you.
3493:The above discussion is preserved as an archive.
2997:file The Cenotaph alt=fabrig flags - typo fabric
2705:That seems like extra words for no added meaning.
1505:" - "with ones/models/replicas in painted stone"?
286:that it was Crown copyright, but not guaranteed.
2830:I despise colons in mid-prose; hence the emdash.
2696:By the time he was commissioned for the Cenotaph
2290:Fighting in the First World War ceased with the
1637:"the apparent simplicity and lack of decoration
840:outside the norm. Consider switching the order.
41:Knowledge (XXG) talk:Featured article candidates
3354:here as well. I suppose you considered linking
3121:gallery "Other cenotaphs by Lutyens in the UK"
2815:That feels like extra words for no added value.
2487:" (all instances) – capital A, I should think.
2224:Cenotaphs originated in Ancient Greek tradition
2217:tag is supported by the reference(s) following.
1600:"in the Royal Institute of British Architects'
43:. No further edits should be made to this page.
3128:ref 44 Gregory (2009), p. 268. - year is 2008?
3064:preserve the character of the cenotaph - cap C
1641:the two memorials" - "the apparent simplicity
3499:No further edits should be made to this page.
3470:template in place on the talk page until the
3077:during Black Lives Matter protests - pipe to
2986:- is that geometry link correct or should be
29:The following is an archived discussion of a
8:
3125:other? ie there are more than those pictured
2770:"Form (an object) out of malleable material"
975:death and state funeral of Winston Churchill
731:doesn't spot any other issues, I'm happy to
3131:ref 99 Dearden, Lizzie - no retrieved date
3079:George Floyd protests in the United Kingdom
1283:Already in the article, cited to Greenberg.
1077:I wouldn't worry about the Stoke one. From
263:, which is worldwide? I can't see why not.
18:Knowledge (XXG):Featured article candidates
2990:(but would need anchor added there ie per
2799:But it's in the middle of the carriageway.
1478:"Sir Frank Baines, chief architect at the
2728:the collection of the Imperial War Museum
2501:"; quoted text later in the article has "
2123:indicator of the Cenotaph's significance.
1564:"The coffin lid finishes with a cornice,
384:File:Immortal_Shrine_(Will_Longstaff).jpg
3359:sides" - or "real cloth flags on poles".
3067:and on a statue of Winston Churchill. -
3041:Gun carriage#State and military funerals
2385:(the "empty tomb" suggested by the word
1582:"The sculptural work was carried out by
1848:I would suggest adding something about
1575:No, it doesn't. It's purely decorative.
3143:consistency - authorlink v author-link
2280:the first anniversary of the armistice
2246:" – Should this have page references?
1951:I suspect it’s the 1984 reprint, here
150:
146:
142:Happy to do so if you can explain how
2844:executed during the war for desertion
2363:" is much better than my suggestion!
1717:. Does MoS not prescribe an approach?
1344:"The word "cenotaph" is derived from
7:
3134:ref 116 Gregory, p. 142. - add year
971:death and state funeral of George VI
223:The first, I don't know when it was
3414:
3288:
3231:
3174:
3055:Bell jar#Decorative or preservative
2879:
2625:
2321:
2039:
1894:
1715:The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock
1608:library", or "drawings collection"?
1312:
1291:I assume it's the same photo as in
1210:
1185:
1012:
931:
714:
648:
510:
421:
236:
194:File:Cenotaph_sketch_by_Lutyens.jpg
124:
90:
2288:Perhaps then it would have to be "
1559:I hate colons in mid-prose, sorry!
864:National Heritage List for England
859:"The Cenotaph (Grade I) (1357354)"
828:Commonwealth War Graves Commission
24:
2497:" in the second paragraph. Also "
2233:" – Should it say what these are?
1554:torus, cyma reversa and cavetto"?
1446:public commission", or some such?
2837:the Second World War (1939–1945)
2822:flags of the United Kingdom—the
2354:This was accepted without issue.
2195:Sorry, you're right about this.
1850:the WWII damage during the Blitz
822:I don't think that's necessary;
586:or any government department" -
386:is believed to be PD in the US?
180:File:Greek_Parade_Paris_1919.jpg
2724:Imperial War Museum collections
2222:Should the sentence beginning "
1735:Impact - On other war memorials
1457:Origins: the temporary Cenotaph
3187:, anything to follow? Cheers,
2507:a symbol of the empire's unity
2161:"? I was going by our article
1954:, but will let Harry confirm.
1703:Impact - On art and literature
824:Imperial War Graves Commission
819:Note a might need a citation.
139:Suggest scaling up the sketch
1:
2772:, and stone isn't malleable.
2342:Cabinet of the United Kingdom
2297:Armistice of 11 November 1918
2292:armistice of 11 November 1918
2282:" – Capital A for Armistice?
2241:The Times Literary Supplement
1489:It's linked on first mention.
2673:and has largely been praised
2669:and has been largely praised
2547:" can easily be changed to "
2503:from all parts of the empire
1842:Support by WereSpielChequers
1623:"not all of which have been
943:My concerns were addressed.
616:File:British_Empire_1897.jpg
3465:featured article candidates
2871:see what you think now. :)
2810:(a device known as entasis)
2249:It's a single-page article.
31:featured article nomination
3516:
3313:23:20, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
3160:17:13, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
3017:04:49, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
2988:Molding (decorative)#Torus
2948:04:49, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
2732:The Imperial War Museum's
2002:14:13, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
1964:15:11, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
1932:Footnote numbers refer to
1920:21:31, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
1899:22:12, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
1870:10:24, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
1797:12:30, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
1335:20:41, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
1317:20:40, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
1273:11:11, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
1132:09:24, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
1048:10:04, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
1017:21:27, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
995:20:16, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
953:02:01, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
936:20:30, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
911:02:23, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
885:11:11, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
777:07:41, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
653:20:28, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
628:02:44, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
440:01:20, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
426:22:10, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
402:01:19, 14 April 2022 (UTC)
255:01:20, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
241:22:10, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
219:01:19, 14 April 2022 (UTC)
163:01:19, 14 April 2022 (UTC)
129:23:46, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
95:23:46, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
3486:01:53, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
2982:which is in three stages-
2716:the IWM's catalogue entry
2657:(slight convex curvature)
1645:, and lack of decoration
1482:" - link Office of Works.
1293:Lutyens and the Great War
1237:11:29, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
1174:Lutyens and the Great War
786:Non-expert prose review:
382:Can you elaborate on why
3496:Please do not modify it.
3441:15:50, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
3419:11:42, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
3415:Penny for your thoughts?
3393:19:38, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
3332:22:34, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
3293:11:01, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
3289:Penny for your thoughts?
3268:09:28, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
3236:07:23, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
3232:Penny for your thoughts?
3215:23:21, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
3197:11:45, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
3179:18:53, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
3175:Penny for your thoughts?
2902:07:18, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
2884:17:39, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
2880:Penny for your thoughts?
2859:08:00, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
2782:07:18, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
2630:18:36, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
2626:Penny for your thoughts?
2599:08:00, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
2561:08:00, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
2523:08:00, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
2480:" – no need for a comma.
2411:The base of the monument
2407:The base of the cenotaph
2373:08:00, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
2326:16:56, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
2322:Penny for your thoughts?
2309:08:00, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
2254:I don't really know if "
2205:08:00, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
2175:08:00, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
2099:First World War memorial
2072:19:42, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
2044:17:57, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
2040:Penny for your thoughts?
2020:20:43, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
1895:Penny for your thoughts?
1836:05:11, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
1816:20:41, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
1436:Johannesburg Art Gallery
1313:Penny for your thoughts?
1215:20:18, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
1211:Penny for your thoughts?
1190:12:11, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
1186:Penny for your thoughts?
1096:09:33, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
1013:Penny for your thoughts?
932:Penny for your thoughts?
750:10:31, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
719:14:54, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
715:Penny for your thoughts?
702:19:37, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
672:17:40, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
649:Penny for your thoughts?
605:02:24, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
581:17:37, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
534:18:30, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
515:14:51, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
511:Penny for your thoughts?
487:17:41, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
468:17:06, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
444:Doesn't matter, I fear:
422:Penny for your thoughts?
360:07:38, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
340:07:16, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
315:06:56, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
296:00:24, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
278:09:57, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
237:Penny for your thoughts?
171:Suggest adding alt text
125:Penny for your thoughts?
103:Northampton War Memorial
91:Penny for your thoughts?
36:Please do not modify it.
3219:No apology necessary,
2511:British and Empire dead
2509:". And the subsequent "
2468:who was to be known as
2427:It's not a proper noun.
2415:The cenotaph is austere
1497:Reconstruction in stone
1168:10:50, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
2824:Royal Air Force Ensign
2734:War Memorials Register
2499:Britain and its Empire
2159:who was to be interred
1440:British School at Rome
1153:
1089:Has about 7.8% of all
756:Support from Tim riley
743:Has about 7.9% of all
695:Has about 7.8% of all
665:Has about 7.8% of all
598:Has about 7.8% of all
574:Has about 7.8% of all
527:Has about 7.8% of all
480:Has about 7.8% of all
461:Has about 7.8% of all
353:Has about 7.8% of all
333:Has about 7.8% of all
308:Has about 7.8% of all
271:Has about 7.8% of all
196:needs a US tag. Ditto
3039:gun carriage - wlink
1974:The link in is dead.
1649:, the two memorials"?
1149:
961:Comment by Carcharoth
3371:Split 2nd para here.
3352:Pylon (architecture)
3280:both fixed. Thanks!
2186:Southampton Cenotaph
2139:who was interred in
2128:the repatriation of
2054:. Fixes look good.
1604:library." - "drawing
1114:Butting in: There's
2752:reminiscent of the
2470:the Unknown Warrior
2463:the Unknown Warrior
2400:The monument's mass
2163:The Unknown Warrior
2130:the Unknown Warrior
1682:Impact - On Lutyens
1177:what I can dig up.
857:(5 February 1970).
2962:Two-minute silence
1593:He's linked above.
1503:with painted stone
2573:Borg has observed
2435:Surprisingly, no.
2361:with no objection
2141:Westminster Abbey
2134:Westminster Abbey
2080:Support by Ham II
1878:WereSpielChequers
1661:of sheathed sword
1378:on first meeting.
1258:Support from KJP1
1032:this book chapter
782:Comments by Z1720
261:Template:PD-UKGov
97:
3507:
3498:
3469:
3463:
3460:, and leave the
3423:Ok, it was only
3416:
3405:
3290:
3279:
3233:
3176:
3014:
3010:
3005:
2945:
2941:
2936:
2881:
2870:
2845:
2838:
2826:
2811:
2807:
2795:
2791:
2764:
2757:
2736:
2729:
2725:
2713:
2701:
2697:
2685:
2681:
2674:
2670:
2658:
2650:
2627:
2615:
2574:
2570:
2550:
2549:observed in 1995
2546:
2539:
2512:
2508:
2504:
2500:
2496:
2486:
2479:
2472:
2465:
2451:
2423:
2416:
2412:
2408:
2401:
2397:
2390:
2382:
2381:(the empty tomb)
2362:
2359:Your amendment "
2355:
2344:and capitalise?
2339:
2323:
2294:
2281:
2269:
2257:
2245:
2232:
2225:
2188:
2160:
2156:
2143:
2136:
2112:
2101:
2041:
1917:
1913:
1908:
1896:
1881:
1867:
1863:
1858:
1667:sheathed sword"?
1314:
1212:
1200:
1187:
1094:
1076:
1014:
933:
922:
875:
873:
871:
855:Historic England
805:Done. Good spot.
774:
772:
767:
748:
716:
700:
670:
650:
640:
603:
579:
532:
512:
501:
485:
466:
423:
413:
358:
338:
313:
276:
238:
152:
148:
126:
92:
79:
48:The article was
38:
3515:
3514:
3510:
3509:
3508:
3506:
3505:
3504:
3503:
3494:
3484:
3467:
3461:
3399:
3344:
3301:
3273:
3097:this discussion
3012:
3008:
3003:
2943:
2939:
2934:
2916:
2864:
2843:
2836:
2821:
2809:
2805:
2793:
2789:
2762:
2751:
2731:
2727:
2723:
2711:
2699:
2695:
2683:
2679:
2672:
2668:
2652:
2644:
2609:
2582:Present perfect
2572:
2568:
2548:
2544:
2537:
2510:
2506:
2502:
2498:
2494:
2484:
2477:
2467:
2461:to be known as
2460:
2441:
2421:
2414:
2410:
2406:
2399:
2395:
2384:
2380:
2360:
2353:
2337:
2289:
2279:
2267:
2255:
2237:
2230:
2223:
2184:
2158:
2157:In that case, "
2150:
2138:
2127:
2109:First World War
2106:
2093:
2082:
1930:
1915:
1911:
1906:
1884:Guards Memorial
1875:
1865:
1861:
1856:
1844:
1480:Office of Works
1260:
1194:
1093:
1082:
1066:
963:
916:
869:
867:
853:
784:
770:
765:
763:
758:
747:
736:
735:at this point.
699:
688:
669:
658:
634:
602:
591:
588:Crown Copyright
578:
567:
560:Crown Copyright
531:
520:
491:
484:
473:
465:
454:
407:
357:
346:
337:
326:
312:
301:
275:
264:
76:
64:) 12 June 2022
34:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
3513:
3511:
3502:
3501:
3489:
3488:
3478:
3474:goes through.
3446:
3445:
3444:
3443:
3396:
3395:
3381:
3378:
3375:
3372:
3369:
3366:
3363:
3360:
3343:
3336:
3335:
3334:
3300:
3297:
3296:
3295:
3256:
3255:
3252:
3248:
3247:
3246:
3245:
3244:
3243:
3242:
3241:
3181:
3148:
3147:
3144:
3141:
3138:
3135:
3132:
3129:
3126:
3119:
3116:
3113:
3110:
3106:
3103:
3100:
3095:, BBC ref and
3085:
3082:
3075:
3072:
3065:
3062:
3058:
3051:
3047:
3044:
3037:
3034:
3027:
3024:
3021:
3020:
3019:
2995:
2980:
2976:
2973:
2970:
2967:
2964:
2958:
2955:
2952:
2951:
2950:
2926:
2923:
2915:
2908:
2907:
2906:
2905:
2904:
2848:
2847:
2840:
2833:
2832:
2831:
2818:
2817:
2816:
2802:
2801:
2800:
2786:
2785:
2784:
2759:
2748:
2747:
2746:
2740:Fixed. It was
2708:
2707:
2706:
2692:
2691:
2690:
2676:
2665:
2664:
2663:
2653:Lutyens added
2645:Lutyens added
2633:
2632:
2606:
2605:
2604:
2603:
2602:
2601:
2565:
2564:
2563:
2534:
2533:
2532:
2531:
2530:
2529:
2528:
2481:
2474:
2457:
2442:Lutyens was a
2438:
2437:
2436:
2430:
2429:
2428:
2422:the world wars
2418:
2413:"? Ditto for "
2403:
2392:
2377:
2376:
2375:
2350:
2349:
2348:
2334:
2333:
2332:
2331:
2330:
2329:
2328:
2276:
2275:
2274:
2264:
2263:
2262:
2252:
2251:
2250:
2234:
2227:
2220:
2219:
2218:
2211:
2210:
2209:
2208:
2207:
2181:
2180:
2179:
2178:
2177:
2124:
2120:
2119:
2118:
2103:
2081:
2075:
2049:
2048:
2047:
2046:
1982:
1981:
1977:
1976:
1971:
1967:
1966:
1948:
1947:
1944:
1943:needs the year
1941:
1929:
1926:
1925:
1924:
1923:
1922:
1843:
1840:
1839:
1838:
1819:
1818:
1784:
1783:
1782:
1781:
1777:
1776:
1768:
1767:
1766:
1765:
1764:
1758:
1757:
1748:
1747:
1746:
1742:
1741:
1732:
1731:
1730:
1729:
1728:
1719:
1718:
1700:
1699:
1698:
1693:
1692:
1679:
1678:
1677:
1676:
1675:
1669:
1668:
1656:
1655:
1651:
1650:
1634:
1633:
1629:
1628:
1616:
1615:
1614:
1610:
1609:
1597:
1596:
1595:
1594:
1588:
1587:
1579:
1578:
1577:
1576:
1570:
1569:
1561:
1560:
1556:
1555:
1535:
1534:
1533:
1529:
1528:
1516:
1515:
1507:
1506:
1494:
1493:
1492:
1491:
1490:
1484:
1483:
1475:
1474:
1473:
1472:
1466:
1465:
1454:
1453:
1452:
1448:
1447:
1423:
1422:
1421:
1420:
1419:
1413:
1412:
1404:
1403:
1402:
1401:
1400:
1394:
1393:
1389:
1388:
1387:
1386:
1380:
1379:
1367:
1366:
1365:
1364:
1358:
1357:
1337:
1322:
1321:
1320:
1319:
1298:
1297:
1296:
1286:
1285:
1284:
1259:
1253:
1252:
1251:
1250:
1249:
1248:
1247:
1246:
1245:
1244:
1243:
1242:
1241:
1240:
1239:
1112:
1111:
1110:
1109:
1108:
1107:
1106:
1105:
1104:
1103:
1102:
1101:
1100:
1099:
1098:
1088:
962:
959:
958:
957:
956:
955:
899:
898:
897:
896:
895:
894:
888:
887:
846:
845:
844:
833:
832:
831:
817:
816:
815:
808:
807:
806:
800:
799:
798:
792:MOS:LEDELENGTH
783:
780:
757:
754:
753:
752:
742:
724:
723:
722:
721:
694:
679:
678:
677:
676:
675:
674:
664:
613:
612:
611:
610:
609:
608:
607:
597:
573:
555:is from 1919?
550:
549:
548:
547:
546:
545:
544:
543:
542:
541:
540:
539:
538:
537:
536:
526:
479:
460:
380:
379:
378:
377:
376:
375:
374:
373:
372:
371:
370:
369:
368:
367:
366:
365:
364:
363:
362:
352:
332:
307:
270:
191:
190:
189:
177:
176:
175:
169:
168:
167:
166:
165:
99:
98:
75:
70:
69:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
3512:
3500:
3497:
3491:
3490:
3487:
3483:
3482:
3477:
3473:
3466:
3459:
3455:
3451:
3448:
3447:
3442:
3438:
3434:
3430:
3426:
3422:
3421:
3420:
3417:
3411:
3410:
3403:
3398:
3397:
3394:
3390:
3386:
3382:
3379:
3376:
3373:
3370:
3367:
3364:
3361:
3357:
3353:
3349:
3348:
3347:
3341:
3338:Support from
3337:
3333:
3329:
3325:
3321:
3317:
3316:
3315:
3314:
3310:
3306:
3298:
3294:
3291:
3285:
3284:
3277:
3272:
3271:
3270:
3269:
3265:
3261:
3253:
3250:
3249:
3239:
3238:
3237:
3234:
3228:
3227:
3222:
3218:
3217:
3216:
3212:
3208:
3204:
3200:
3199:
3198:
3194:
3190:
3186:
3182:
3180:
3177:
3171:
3170:
3164:
3163:
3162:
3161:
3157:
3153:
3145:
3142:
3139:
3136:
3133:
3130:
3127:
3124:
3120:
3117:
3114:
3111:
3107:
3104:
3101:
3098:
3094:
3090:
3086:
3083:
3080:
3076:
3073:
3070:
3066:
3063:
3059:
3056:
3052:
3048:
3045:
3042:
3038:
3035:
3033:the Cenotaph?
3032:
3028:
3025:
3022:
3018:
3015:
3011:
3006:
2999:
2998:
2996:
2993:
2989:
2985:
2981:
2977:
2974:
2971:
2968:
2965:
2963:
2959:
2956:
2953:
2949:
2946:
2942:
2937:
2930:
2929:
2927:
2924:
2921:
2920:
2919:
2913:
2909:
2903:
2899:
2895:
2891:
2887:
2886:
2885:
2882:
2876:
2875:
2868:
2863:
2862:
2861:
2860:
2856:
2852:
2841:
2834:
2829:
2828:
2825:
2819:
2814:
2813:
2803:
2798:
2797:
2787:
2783:
2779:
2775:
2771:
2767:
2766:
2760:
2755:
2749:
2743:
2739:
2738:
2735:
2721:
2717:
2709:
2704:
2703:
2693:
2688:
2687:
2677:
2666:
2661:
2660:
2656:
2648:
2642:
2641:
2640:
2638:
2631:
2628:
2622:
2621:
2613:
2608:
2607:
2600:
2596:
2592:
2587:
2583:
2580:
2579:
2577:
2576:
2569:Borg observed
2566:
2562:
2558:
2554:
2542:
2541:
2535:
2526:
2525:
2524:
2520:
2516:
2492:
2491:
2489:
2488:
2482:
2475:
2471:
2464:
2458:
2455:
2452:" – too many
2449:
2445:
2439:
2434:
2433:
2431:
2426:
2425:
2419:
2404:
2393:
2388:
2378:
2374:
2370:
2366:
2358:
2357:
2351:
2346:
2345:
2343:
2335:
2327:
2324:
2318:
2317:
2312:
2311:
2310:
2306:
2302:
2298:
2293:
2287:
2286:
2284:
2283:
2277:
2272:
2271:
2265:
2260:
2259:
2253:
2248:
2247:
2243:
2242:
2235:
2228:
2221:
2215:
2214:
2212:
2206:
2202:
2198:
2194:
2193:
2191:
2190:
2187:
2182:
2176:
2172:
2168:
2164:
2154:
2149:
2148:
2146:
2145:
2142:
2135:
2131:
2125:
2121:
2115:
2114:
2110:
2104:
2100:
2096:
2091:
2090:
2089:
2087:
2079:
2076:
2074:
2073:
2069:
2065:
2061:
2057:
2056:Mike Christie
2053:
2045:
2042:
2036:
2035:
2030:
2026:
2023:
2022:
2021:
2017:
2013:
2009:
2006:
2005:
2004:
2003:
1999:
1995:
1991:
1987:
1986:Mike Christie
1979:
1978:
1975:
1972:
1969:
1968:
1965:
1961:
1957:
1953:
1950:
1949:
1945:
1942:
1939:
1938:
1937:
1935:
1928:Source review
1927:
1921:
1918:
1914:
1909:
1902:
1901:
1900:
1897:
1891:
1890:
1885:
1879:
1874:
1873:
1872:
1871:
1868:
1864:
1859:
1853:
1851:
1841:
1837:
1833:
1829:
1825:
1821:
1820:
1817:
1813:
1809:
1805:
1801:
1800:
1799:
1798:
1794:
1790:
1779:
1778:
1774:
1773:
1772:
1769:
1762:
1761:
1760:
1759:
1754:
1753:
1752:
1749:
1744:
1743:
1738:
1737:
1736:
1733:
1726:
1723:
1722:
1721:
1720:
1716:
1712:
1711:
1706:
1705:
1704:
1701:
1695:
1694:
1690:
1685:
1684:
1683:
1680:
1673:
1672:
1671:
1670:
1666:
1662:
1658:
1657:
1653:
1652:
1648:
1644:
1640:
1636:
1635:
1631:
1630:
1626:
1622:
1621:
1620:
1617:
1612:
1611:
1607:
1603:
1599:
1598:
1592:
1591:
1590:
1589:
1585:
1581:
1580:
1574:
1573:
1572:
1571:
1567:
1563:
1562:
1558:
1557:
1553:
1549:
1545:
1541:
1540:
1539:
1536:
1531:
1530:
1526:
1522:
1518:
1517:
1514:improvements.
1513:
1509:
1508:
1504:
1500:
1499:
1498:
1495:
1488:
1487:
1486:
1485:
1481:
1477:
1476:
1470:
1469:
1468:
1467:
1463:
1460:
1459:
1458:
1455:
1450:
1449:
1445:
1441:
1437:
1433:
1429:
1428:
1427:
1424:
1417:
1416:
1415:
1414:
1410:
1409:
1408:
1405:
1398:
1397:
1396:
1395:
1391:
1390:
1384:
1383:
1382:
1381:
1377:
1374:" - I'd link
1373:
1369:
1368:
1362:
1361:
1360:
1359:
1355:
1354:Ancient Greek
1351:
1347:
1343:
1342:
1341:
1338:
1336:
1332:
1328:
1324:
1323:
1318:
1315:
1309:
1308:
1302:
1301:
1299:
1294:
1290:
1289:
1287:
1282:
1281:
1280:
1277:
1276:
1275:
1274:
1270:
1266:
1257:
1254:
1238:
1234:
1230:
1226:
1222:
1218:
1217:
1216:
1213:
1207:
1206:
1198:
1193:
1192:
1191:
1188:
1182:
1181:
1175:
1171:
1170:
1169:
1165:
1161:
1157:
1152:
1147:
1143:
1139:
1135:
1134:
1133:
1129:
1125:
1121:
1117:
1116:this cenotaph
1113:
1097:
1092:
1087:
1086:
1080:
1074:
1070:
1065:
1064:
1063:
1062:
1061:
1060:
1059:
1058:
1057:
1056:
1055:
1054:
1053:
1052:
1051:
1050:
1049:
1045:
1041:
1037:
1033:
1029:
1025:
1020:
1019:
1018:
1015:
1009:
1008:
1003:
999:
998:
997:
996:
992:
988:
983:
978:
976:
973:in 1952, the
972:
966:
960:
954:
950:
946:
942:
939:
938:
937:
934:
928:
927:
920:
915:
914:
913:
912:
908:
904:
892:
891:
890:
889:
886:
882:
878:
866:
865:
860:
856:
851:
850:
847:
842:
841:
838:
834:
829:
826:redirects to
825:
821:
820:
818:
813:
812:
809:
804:
803:
801:
796:
795:
793:
789:
788:
787:
781:
779:
778:
775:
773:
768:
755:
751:
746:
741:
740:
734:
730:
726:
725:
720:
717:
711:
710:
705:
704:
703:
698:
693:
692:
686:
683:
681:
680:
673:
668:
663:
662:
656:
655:
654:
651:
645:
644:
638:
631:
630:
629:
625:
621:
617:
614:
606:
601:
596:
595:
589:
584:
583:
582:
577:
572:
571:
565:
561:
557:
556:
554:
551:
535:
530:
525:
524:
518:
517:
516:
513:
507:
506:
499:
495:
490:
489:
488:
483:
478:
477:
471:
470:
469:
464:
459:
458:
451:
447:
443:
442:
441:
437:
433:
429:
428:
427:
424:
418:
417:
411:
405:
404:
403:
399:
395:
391:
390:
388:
387:
385:
381:
361:
356:
351:
350:
343:
342:
341:
336:
331:
330:
324:
321:
318:
317:
316:
311:
306:
305:
299:
298:
297:
293:
289:
285:
281:
280:
279:
274:
269:
268:
262:
258:
257:
256:
252:
248:
244:
243:
242:
239:
233:
232:
226:
222:
221:
220:
216:
212:
208:
207:
205:
204:
203:
199:
195:
192:
187:
186:
185:
181:
178:
173:
172:
170:
164:
160:
156:
144:
143:
141:
140:
138:
137:
136:
135:
131:
130:
127:
121:
120:
115:
111:
106:
104:
96:
93:
87:
86:
82:
81:Nominator(s):
78:
77:
74:
71:
68:
66:
63:
59:
55:
51:
44:
42:
37:
32:
27:
26:
19:
3495:
3492:
3479:
3450:Closing note
3449:
3428:
3408:
3345:
3339:
3319:
3302:
3282:
3257:
3225:
3168:
3149:
3122:
3068:
3030:
3001:
2992:cyma reversa
2932:
2917:
2914:from JennyOz
2911:
2889:
2873:
2849:
2741:
2719:
2634:
2619:
2584:. I suppose
2453:
2386:
2315:
2239:
2095:The Cenotaph
2094:
2083:
2077:
2051:
2050:
2033:
2012:Gog the Mild
1983:
1973:
1934:this version
1931:
1904:
1888:
1854:
1847:
1845:
1823:
1808:Gog the Mild
1785:
1770:
1750:
1734:
1710:Burnt Norton
1708:
1702:
1689:J. M. Barrie
1681:
1664:
1660:
1646:
1642:
1638:
1624:
1619:Appreciation
1618:
1605:
1601:
1584:Derwent Wood
1565:
1551:
1547:
1543:
1537:
1524:
1520:
1511:
1502:
1496:
1456:
1443:
1431:
1425:
1406:
1371:
1345:
1339:
1306:
1292:
1261:
1255:
1204:
1179:
1173:
1155:
1150:
1145:
1085:Adam Cuerden
1083:
1006:
979:
967:
964:
940:
925:
900:
868:. Retrieved
862:
785:
762:
759:
739:Adam Cuerden
737:
732:
708:
691:Adam Cuerden
689:
661:Adam Cuerden
659:
642:
594:Adam Cuerden
592:
570:Adam Cuerden
568:
523:Adam Cuerden
521:
504:
494:Adam Cuerden
476:Adam Cuerden
474:
457:Adam Cuerden
455:
449:
415:
349:Adam Cuerden
347:
329:Adam Cuerden
327:
304:Adam Cuerden
302:
283:
267:Adam Cuerden
265:
230:
224:
151:|upright=1.1
134:Image review
133:
132:
118:
107:
100:
84:
80:
73:The Cenotaph
49:
47:
35:
28:
3409:HJ Mitchell
3356:sarcophagus
3340:Comments by
3283:HJ Mitchell
3226:HJ Mitchell
3169:HJ Mitchell
3166:tardiness.
2874:HJ Mitchell
2649:(curvature)
2639:'s review.
2620:HJ Mitchell
2316:HJ Mitchell
2153:HJ Mitchell
2111:(1914–1918)
2034:HJ Mitchell
1889:HJ Mitchell
1307:HJ Mitchell
1256:Comments by
1205:HJ Mitchell
1180:HJ Mitchell
1136:Thank you,
1073:HJ Mitchell
1007:HJ Mitchell
926:HJ Mitchell
727:As long as
709:HJ Mitchell
643:HJ Mitchell
505:HJ Mitchell
453:2023|]}}
416:HJ Mitchell
231:HJ Mitchell
119:HJ Mitchell
85:HJ Mitchell
3425:User:Z1720
2827:" – colon
2256:Lady Emily
1426:Background
1229:Carcharoth
1197:Carcharoth
1160:Carcharoth
1156:influenced
1142:Ken Inglis
1069:Carcharoth
1040:Carcharoth
1002:Carcharoth
987:Carcharoth
835:Optional:
729:Nikkimaria
637:Nikkimaria
620:Nikkimaria
498:Nikkimaria
432:Nikkimaria
410:Nikkimaria
394:Nikkimaria
288:Nikkimaria
247:Nikkimaria
211:Nikkimaria
155:Nikkimaria
147:|upright=X
110:Carcharoth
3458:WP:FAC/ar
3454:candidate
2756:in Greece
2754:Parthenon
2684:Lutyens's
2586:MOS:TENSE
2485:the abbey
2448:Theosophy
2444:pantheist
2340:" – Link
1980:Repaired.
1725:MOS:TITLE
1632:Reworded.
1566:appearing
1532:Reworded.
837:MOS:NOTES
814:Reworded.
766:Tim riley
325:. Only
114:Tim riley
3476:Hog Farm
3452:: This
3203:Ian Rose
3189:Ian Rose
3013:Chequers
2944:Chequers
2912:Comments
2910:Support
2545:observed
2513:" (×2).
2417:" later.
2396:Its mass
2387:cenotaph
2078:Comments
2064:contribs
1994:contribs
1916:Chequers
1866:Chequers
1663:" - "of
1625:positive
1438:and the
1399:Removed.
941:Support.
870:17 April
284:possible
54:Hog Farm
50:promoted
3433:Johnbod
3429:Support
3402:Johnbod
3385:Johnbod
3342:Johnbod
3320:support
3276:JennyOz
3260:JennyOz
3207:JennyOz
3152:JennyOz
2890:Support
2745:detail.
2730:" and "
2655:entasis
2647:entasis
2505:" and "
2068:library
1998:library
1824:Support
1771:Missing
1756:Google.
1602:drawing
1407:Infobox
1219:Sorry,
1120:Bendigo
733:Support
684:and/or
2894:Ham II
2867:Ham II
2851:Ham II
2808:" → "
2774:Ham II
2682:" → "
2612:Ham II
2591:Ham II
2553:Ham II
2515:Ham II
2365:Ham II
2301:Ham II
2197:Ham II
2167:Ham II
2137:" → "
1751:Images
1544:stages
1538:Design
1521:wooden
1138:Ham II
1124:Ham II
206:Done.
58:FACBot
3324:Ceoil
3305:Ceoil
3299:Ceoil
3221:Jenny
3185:Jenny
3009:Spiel
3000:done
2984:torus
2940:Spiel
2931:done
2792:" → "
2698:" → "
2671:" → "
2651:" → "
2637:Ceoil
2571:" → "
2466:" → "
2409:" → "
2398:" → "
2383:" → "
2097:is a
2008:Harry
1912:Spiel
1862:Spiel
1697:look.
1674:Done.
1654:Done.
1548:torus
1451:Done.
1444:major
1432:first
1430:"his
1385:Done.
1376:pylon
1372:pylon
1350:Greek
1346:Greek
1221:Harry
945:Z1720
919:Z1720
903:Z1720
225:first
16:<
3481:Talk
3437:talk
3389:talk
3328:talk
3309:talk
3264:talk
3211:talk
3193:talk
3156:talk
3123:Some
3004:Ϣere
2979:of".
2935:Ϣere
2898:talk
2855:talk
2778:talk
2726:", "
2595:talk
2557:talk
2519:talk
2369:talk
2305:talk
2201:talk
2171:talk
2117:war.
2107:the
2060:talk
2052:Pass
2029:Mike
2016:talk
1990:talk
1960:talk
1956:KJP1
1907:Ϣere
1857:Ϣere
1832:talk
1828:KJP1
1812:talk
1804:KJP1
1793:talk
1789:KJP1
1740:use?
1713:and
1525:wood
1340:Lead
1331:talk
1327:KJP1
1269:talk
1265:KJP1
1233:talk
1225:this
1164:talk
1128:talk
1071:and
1044:talk
1036:here
1028:here
1024:here
991:talk
982:here
949:talk
907:talk
881:talk
877:KJP1
872:2022
771:talk
624:talk
496:and
450:that
436:talk
398:talk
292:talk
251:talk
215:talk
159:talk
145:Add
62:talk
56:via
3472:bot
3201:Hi
3183:Hi
3093:ABC
3089:AWM
3069:the
2742:the
2737:".
2702:"?
2686:"?
2659:"?
2551:".
2454:and
2066:-
2025:Gog
1996:-
1984:--
1802:Hi
1512:are
1352:or
1118:in
1091:FPs
1000:Hi
745:FPs
697:FPs
667:FPs
600:FPs
576:FPs
529:FPs
482:FPs
463:FPs
355:FPs
335:FPs
310:FPs
273:FPs
52:by
3468:}}
3462:{{
3439:)
3431:.
3412:|
3391:)
3330:)
3311:)
3286:|
3266:)
3229:|
3213:)
3195:)
3172:|
3158:)
3091:,
3031:at
2994:)?
2900:)
2892:.
2877:|
2857:)
2780:)
2675:"?
2623:|
2597:)
2559:)
2521:)
2456:s.
2402:"?
2391:"?
2371:)
2319:|
2307:)
2203:)
2173:)
2144:"
2088:.
2070:)
2062:-
2037:|
2027:,
2018:)
2010:?
2000:)
1992:-
1962:)
1936:.
1892:|
1834:)
1826:.
1814:)
1795:)
1647:on
1643:of
1639:to
1333:)
1310:|
1271:)
1235:)
1227:.
1208:|
1183:|
1166:)
1144::
1130:)
1122:.
1046:)
1010:|
993:)
951:)
929:|
909:)
883:)
861:.
712:|
646:|
626:)
508:|
438:)
419:|
400:)
294:)
253:)
234:|
217:)
200:,
161:)
122:|
88:|
67:.
33:.
3435:(
3404::
3400:@
3387:(
3326:(
3307:(
3278::
3274:@
3262:(
3209:(
3191:(
3154:(
3099:.
3081:?
3043:?
2896:(
2869::
2865:@
2853:(
2842:"
2835:"
2820:"
2804:"
2788:"
2776:(
2761:"
2750:"
2720:s
2710:"
2694:"
2678:"
2667:"
2643:"
2614::
2610:@
2593:(
2567:"
2555:(
2536:"
2517:(
2483:"
2476:"
2473:"
2459:"
2440:"
2420:"
2405:"
2394:"
2389:)
2379:"
2367:(
2352:"
2336:"
2303:(
2278:"
2266:"
2244:.
2236:"
2229:"
2199:(
2183:"
2169:(
2155::
2151:@
2126:"
2105:"
2092:"
2058:(
2014:(
1988:(
1958:(
1880::
1876:@
1830:(
1810:(
1791:(
1665:a
1606:s
1552::
1546:-
1519:"
1356:?
1329:(
1267:(
1231:(
1199::
1195:@
1162:(
1126:(
1075::
1067:@
1042:(
989:(
947:(
921::
917:@
905:(
879:(
874:.
639::
635:@
622:(
500::
492:@
434:(
412::
408:@
396:(
290:(
249:(
213:(
157:(
60:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.