2038:(It's not relevant to our edit dispute, but I also want to push back on the statement that I am not acting in good faith in taking offense to the 'deliberately' in the 00:08, June 9, 2024 UTC edit summary. Honestly, use 'deliberately' was not AFG. Again, it suggest intentionality, that's why I had a problem with it. And this was after I made additional changes to the article to clarify the concerns you had raised with me in my talk page. I didn't just put the table back up and move on, I did further changes, not in my original reverted edit, that spelled the obsolete systems being obsolete.)--
523:
502:
333:
434:
413:
315:
810:
2075:
343:
1985:- Your 00:08, June 9, 2024 UTC edit, adding the the 'repealed/amended' info in the table header for the two EEC regulations, did not remark on the WHMIS (far right column). That implies that WHMIS must not have changed, as nothing was said about it, when it has changed. Those were aligned with GHS in 2015. The changes to WHMIS were something I did point this out in my 23:27, June 8, 2024 UTC edit. (To be very clear, I believe this was completely accidental.)
751:
284:
61:
21:
2032:
and following my restoring the table to the article with the 23:27, June 8, 2024 edit, this was added into the Hazard
Symbols article directly. We can't place all information into the table, the table is part of a larger article. It is not the article. The reason I put the table was to show the symbols, matched by type ('flammable', 'toxic', etc.) was to do a comparison of various systems.
1736:, a deletion discussion for an article about the ISO standardization of the radiation hazard symbol, and comment there if you have an opinion. One potential outcome of that discussion (depending on participant concensus) would be to merge that article here, or to split off more of the content from here to expand the other article. —
2372:). I'd been holding it back since it wasn't complete, and I wasn't quite in the mood to work on it lately. I was also still making some decisions on what to put on it, but if you're ready to do some editing, then I'll put into the article, so that it's in place, and we can incorporate it verse trying to work it in later.
1932:
cuts both ways. "Deliberately mislead our readers" means that the article is not giving the full picture without expecting the reader to decode the detail (the table should be providing "the essentials at a glance" overview); to do that knowingly is indeed "deliberately misleading". I do not suggest
643:
The radiation symbol has not changed. A symbol for ionising radiation has been introduced to differentiate ionising radiation from other kinds of radiation (laser light gets the radiation symbol, for instance - it's not good enough to label a source with the radiation symbol if could be confused with
1964:
undid my 18:06, June 8, 2024 UTC edit, with his 21:04, June 8, 2024 UTC edit, and then left me the talk message he quoted above. When I reverted JMF's 21:04, June 8, 2024 edit, I added information about the phase-out of the symbols to the sections below the table, and made it clear there. I don't
2238:
I concluded that the added line is good enough and further debate had reached the point of diminishing returns. My "happiness" or otherwise is irrelevant: what matters is that visitors who need just the essential information are not misdirected by an overly legalistic record. The very fact that the
2219:
thing started with your concerns that the original version of the table I created was misleading to readers, due to it not including what symbols were and were not in force; it's amazing to now hear that you're saying that there's nothing wrong with grouping two sets of symbols that have absolutely
2006:
Just to be clear: I did not say that you are trying deliberately to mislead. In fact, as I have already said, I recognised your good faith and described the outcome as an effect , not an intent to deceive. "AGF works both ways" means that you should equally respect my good faith in questioning that
595:
It's awesome that they changed the radiation symbol. The chemical weapons and the biological hazard signs aren't exactly threatening looking though, if one didn't know what they stood for. The biohazard one sort of looks like some kind of cotton plant or something. The laser sign too. It isn't
2031:
Nowhere on the table did I state these were current symbols, in date symbols, active systems, etc. Just because information is placed into a table does not mean that said information is current. The headers had clear labels as to what each system was, using internal
Wikilinks to relevant articles,
2010:
The essence of the dispute is clarity of the table. If we present information in this way (which is good, a busy reader gets the essential information at a glance and only needs to read the detail in the text if they need further information), then the table must make clear that the columns headed
934:
Nah, we could use FU images mostly anywhere, but that shouldn't be a problem since in my opinion, Mr. Yuk is notable enough to have an image of him in this article. At the most, we should only mention it in the article somewhere and link to the Mr. Yuk article, but we don't need to have a picture.
2294:
thing started with you reverting my original edit, rather than trying to make changes yourself, over a personal opinion that the way I did the table was wrong, and making it my problem to fix. Then deciding that my changes actually weren't good enough, implementing changes your way, poorly, which
1710:
I've looked at multiple international standards (ISO 7010, GHS, etc) for the "chemical weapons" symbol as shown, and done every google search I can think of, and can find no evidence that the symbol on the page is actually used officially by any body. The page linked in the citation (the page for
2310:
Combining symbols that are still on the books and have legal force with ones that have been removed and have no legal authority is not appropriate. This is inaccurate and is potentially confusing, especially considering that the citation you were using, doesn't even back up that position anyway,
2197:
The 'Non-binding guidelines regarding
Directive 92/58/EEC' says that 92/58/EEC is the base level and that any member state or employer who uses ISO7010 is in compliance since the ISO standard meets and exceeds 92/58/EEC. So it seems to me that the table as it stands is legalistically correct but
2084:
I am inclined to agree with JMF. Presenting the
European Union/Canada symbols adjacent to the international standard gives the impression that they are in current use. For me, the clarity gained from adding "(repealed 2008)" or similar in the column headings is worth the added "clutter".
1206:
2303:. The third party agrees with you and I make the changes to the table with no complaints or pushback, that are consistent with your position on the table's design. You then edit that, making changes that, once again, create the problem you were complaining about in the first place.
618:
As I am unfamiliar with merge, I don't know if this is redundant, but when you merge, don't forget to keep Mr Yuk. This is a more useful page than
Warning Symbol for me, because I wanted the history of the symbols. However, I think I may be retarded, so this probably doesn't
2193:
That would be a very big IF indeed, since ISO standards are developed by the consensus of national standards bodies. It is vanishingly improbable that a new standard would be published against the consensus of EU member states to the extent that they resolved to ignore
2223:
Frankly though, I'm happy to hear you don't wish to spend more time on this, because the amount of time I've spent dealing with this has been infuriating. I'm tired of ending up with additional work because you aren't happy with my edits. Have a good day.--
2162:
Hypothetically, if ISO 7010 implemented drastic deviations from 92/58/EEC (Ex:Replaced the flame in W021 - Flammable material with something that bore no resemblance to a flame), then you'd have to revert to the 92/58/EEC design, as that's the legislative
1207:
http://scholar.google.com.hk/scholar?as_q=safety+sign&num=10&btnG=Search+Scholar&as_epq=&as_oq=&as_eq=&as_occt=title&as_sauthors=&as_publication=&as_ylo=&as_yhi=&as_sdt=1.&as_sdtp=on&as_sdts=5&hl=en
1832:
A revert may have seemed heavy handed but I felt that showing invalid information would not be an improvement (and I suspect that it is fairly easy for you to correct and resubmit, since most of the pictograms have not changed since the 1975 law).
1181:
I live in Canada, which might be at play, but I remember learning about a set of product safety labels where the triangle, rectangle, and octagon represented severity, and explosive hazard, skull and crossbones, and others were represented.
2295:
ironically resulted in the circumstance you were concerned about in the first place, and while doing so, leaving a smug, inappropriate remark in the edit history that suggests, by any reasonable reading, I was trying to deliberately mislead.
1248:
1971:- This statement outright calls my edits as trying to intentionally do this. This isn't "this could confuse readers", "this is confusing", "could be unclear", "is ambiguous", "accidentally mislead readers" or even "mislead readers". It's "
700:
Dark Green, yes, it is treated differently. The symbols have diffrent meanings and are inturpreted a totaly different way. It is in no way being discriminatory to countries outside the US. Tag removed unless someone else sees differently.
1269:
1099:
I beg to differ. Inflammable may be just as correct as flammable, but why not use the word that is easier to understand? Why make people have to look it up? If you search for "inflammable" in
Knowledge, you are taken to the article on
935:
Articles are for discussing everything on the subject, including the history, so in this case the blue trefoil is completely notable. If you really think having an image of Mr. Yuck is needed, go ahead and add it, I'll mod the FUR.--
2298:
You then cried about it when I reverted that edit. I go get someone to give us an opinion on it because neither of us is moving from our position and this talk page sees virtually no users. You cry about that, despite you saying
673:
I am converting a few hazard symbols to vector format. I noticed there are some unreadable details in the raster images - looks like it's manufacturing identifier and a UN conformance... I would like some help in converting
2157:, page 2-3. It did not repeal any other symbols in the Directive 92/58/EEC. Further, the directive still has legal standing, while European Normative ISO 7010 is in use in Europe; it coexists with Directive 92/58/EEC.
1107:“Inflammable” means the same thing as “flammable”: burnable, capable of being ignited or inflamed. So many people mistake the “in-” prefix as a negative, however, that it has been largely abandoned as a warning label.
246:
1937:
the table you added; if other editors feel that they have good reason to improve the article, you must allow them to do so provided that their additions and changes are reliably sourced (as mine were) and not
1249:
http://images.google.com.hk/images?um=1&hl=en&safe=strict&tbs=isch%3A1&sa=1&q=allintitle%3A+office+safety+sign&btnG=Search&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=&start=0
1978:
I actually addressed your concern when I was reverting your original 21:04, June 8, 2024 UTC edit, to add the table back to the article. Something you don't acknowledge in your description of the events
2052:
I would be content if, under the EU Directive numbers, we had the word "repealed" in parentheses. Same for Canada, presumably. That tells the reader that they need to read the text if currency matters (
1065:
Flammable may be easier to understand by many, but inflammable is still correct. I suggest that we use the word inflammable but we link it to either
Wiktionary or the linguistics section of the article
1270:
http://images.google.com.hk/images?um=1&hl=en&safe=strict&tbs=isch%3A1&sa=1&q=allintitle%3A+cleaning+sign&btnG=Search&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=&start=0
1711:
chemical weapons) does not show the symbol, nor can I find the symbol in that page's history. If we can't find a better reference (or, well, a reference at all), perhaps the symbol should be removed?
1372:
I have also seen this, which might work in
English, French, Portuguese, and Spanish, but I don't know if it works for others. I think the chaining of the C's to suggest the DNA molecule is creative:
2174:
92/58/EEC was explicitly repealed, another legislation amended in a way that effectively repealed it, or was amended in a way that the original 92/58/EEC symbols were replaced with other symbols
573:
1354:
886:
Whether it's trademarked or not doesn't mean we cannot use it in this article, its just that it would have little purpose as Mr.Yuk is not nearly as widely used as the skull and cross bones. --
1415:
The relative sizes of the graphical elements described are completely wrong. I tried to draw it like described, but the symbol looks too fat then. The correct measurements are described here:
1825:
is definitely worth doing but only if it is done right. It makes no sense to give the 1967 and 1975 EU laws (which have been repealed), but not the current status (2008!) - see page 325 of
1705:
1634:
1526:
920:. Mr. Yuk IS a well-known and recognized symbol, if perhaps a bit dated. Is this article only for symbols that are in current use? Why include the blue and purple radiation symbol, then?
1349:
Is there a commonly used sign to indicate something is carcinogenic? If there isn't there should be. As far as I know, there isn't one in the U.S. There's a symbol, which can be seen at
1983:...if other editors feel that they have good reason to improve the article, you must allow them to do so provided that their additions and changes are reliably sourced (as mine were)...
1908:
In that case, we must make it clear that the table is showing historical pictograms and the laws that established them have been repealed, We cannot deliberately mislead our readers.
872:
Um...nevermind. *sigh* Was looking for the symbol on the main page. I figured out it was trademarked, but then didn't check back to see if someone had already done what I suggested.
2352:
1019:
if you're lazy, or if you're in doubt, you can delete that section because material that is entered without a citation can be removed. Also, if it's really bugging you to find out,
2444:
563:
1652:
1648:
1544:
1540:
2364:- I noticed your recent work on the safety sign/traffic warning sign articles, I actually was working on a table to bring in to replace the original table on this article under
2449:
2439:
1290:
240:
2375:
Apologies for disrupting the updating you had done to that table in your recent edits, but I think you'll agree this is an improvement for the article going forward.--
1048:
734:
1166:
1003:
539:
2274:
14 1/2 years editing and this is hands down the worst interaction I've had with an editor and I suspect will remain that way. Topping this would take actual effort.
1357:, but I have never seen it in use anywhere. Moreover, I personally find it unclear. I might know now that it means (potentially) carcinogenic, but I didn't before.
1227:
1784:
2131:
Thank you. I tweaked it further to show all three as "no longer used". Yes, you are correct to say that one
Directive has been repealed and one amended, but the
1867:
Those would be the GHS symbols in column one, they're the same symbols. The EU adopted GHS symbols with CLP regulations in 2008, and phased them in through 2017.
1424:
1301:
1280:
1259:
1238:
1217:
1965:
think including it in the information in the header is necessary and makes the header look cluttered. (The edit also introduced issues, which I discuss below.)
1401:
620:
1722:
1104:
where there is a discussion of the two words and the confusion "inflammable" sometimes produces. The only citation in the entire article says the following:
2198:
misleading because the 'Non-binding guidelines' represent the
Commission's advice on best practice for the 21st century, but the table fails to present it.
1718:
1120:
Inflammable can be misinterpreted as an antonym of flammable and so taken to have the opposite meaning to that intended. Where such confusion might arise,
530:
507:
1988:
Additional point, the citation you used for the Directive 92/58/EEC signage was incorrect, as that wasn't modified by the 2008 regulations. It was 2014's
2315:
symbol and a few technical changes, that aren't relevant to this discussion. It was amended to remove the one sign. The rest of it still has standing.--
484:
1919:
I conveyed that these are obsolete adequately, and I take direct offense with the "deliberately mislead our readers" comment in your prior edit summary
1324:
2384:
1791:. I would keep it limited to warning/hazard symbols. (e.g. Not including: prohibited, mandatory, firefighting, safe condition/equipment symbols.)--
395:
1847:
Hazard pictograms as laid down in Annex V shall have a black symbol on a white background with a red frame sufficiently wide to be clearly visible.
1196:
1176:
2159:
Hypothetically, if ISO 7010 suddenly changed symbols regulated by Directive 92/58/EEC, and . (Say, changing the flammable symbol to plain circle).
1870:
I reverted it back to my version, but added some more text to the sections below to point out the phase-outs of the old EU and Canadian symbols.--
1727:
1714:
796:
645:
1768:
I feel that this is a more informative table, that would provides an easier way to see contrast between symbols that is not currently present.
1745:
1338:
1191:
881:
867:
590:
2220:
no legal force and have been removed from legislation, with a set of symbols that are still part of active legislation and approved for use.
1305:
1284:
1263:
1242:
1221:
2419:
998:"European hazard sign, saying highly inflammable (33) - gasoline (1203)" - Is it vandalism? Why is there a warning for highly inflammable?
605:
389:
1492:
2429:
1319:
634:
474:
95:. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see
2239:
EC published the 'Non-binding guidelines' report should tell you that listing 92/58/EEC without qualification is not especially helpful.
1329:
Expanded the section mentioned above and removed notice. Also changed plain images into thumbnails. Please notify me if this is wrong.
1052:
948:
929:
899:
172:
1036:
2014:
I am happy to be corrected on the date of modification. I suggest that the fact that I got it wrong tends to underline my main point.
1291:
http://images.google.com.hk/images?hl=en&safe=strict&q=occupational%20safety%20sign&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wi
738:
1700:
1630:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
782:
2007:
effect, without taking it personally. But I take on board your point that a better choice of words would have been more effective.
1449:
1144:
916:
Yeah, but it's "fair use"...I thought that meant it could only be used on the actual article for the topic itself...in this case,
2434:
2424:
1733:
1228:
http://images.google.com.hk/images?num=10&hl=en&q=allintitle%3A%20safety%20sign&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wi
76:
2166:
720:
1428:
2125:
648:
596:
immediately obvious that whatever it is, can be really bad for you. Are there any attempts at all to change these, I wonder?
2414:
1170:
178:
137:
261:
2121:
1590:
1405:
1044:
804:
730:
450:
825:
228:
1800:
1410:
1391:
1366:
1183:
1162:
1093:
1079:
999:
597:
790:
365:
123:
1396:
I have seen it indicated as the biohazard trefoil in a triangle on a purple background with "Carcinogen" beneath it.
663:
1595:
1420:
1297:
1276:
1255:
1234:
1213:
1135:
Let's change it to "flammable" and keep it that way unless there's a good reason to prefer the more confusing word.
988:
690:
2399:
1612:
709:
I thought the biohazard symbol orignates from a Japanese feudal banner, but I can't find this anywhere. Any ideas?
2094:
1762:
project have been using tables to layout comparisons of symbols across various standards, such as on this article,
1397:
1344:
1060:
2368:(Now: "Examples of common symbols") with a version similar to ones being used over on the German project (Example:
2246:. I will not respond further, other than to note that the independent adjudicator concurred with my assessment. --
713:
1811:
1750:
1455:
1150:
441:
418:
192:
42:
1651:
to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
1543:
to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
1007:
766:
659:
I think that the European symbols are treated as "different", thereby not giving the article a worldwide view.--
2324:
2255:
2233:
2210:
2185:
2144:
2068:
2047:
2026:
2001:
848:
668:
535:
222:
197:
113:
2268:
2243:
623:
356:
320:
167:
2154:
2090:
1826:
1695:
1310:
Nice links to information about safety signs, but are you suggesting that something be done to the article?
1016:
to see if the first revision has been changed. You can use this automated tool to search for that revision
704:
295:
1933:
that The Navigators set out to mislead, but only that this is effect. Finally, The Navigators, you do not
218:
654:
158:
2365:
1989:
1954:
1670:
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
1562:
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
1014:
2117:
2053:
1611:. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit
1493:
http://web.archive.org/web/20160106213644/http://www.michigan.gov/documents/CIS_WSH_part476_54539_7.pdf
962:
2176:
then I would like to see it, and you should include that source if you redo your edit to the table.--
40:
on 23 December 2021. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see
1805:
268:
72:
795:
I added an SVG of what the Radioactive trefoil first looked like in 1946, I hope this is alright. --
2380:
2320:
2229:
2181:
2043:
1997:
1875:
1829:. I can see that maybe there is a place somewhere for historic symbols but not in the main table.
1796:
1741:
1439:
925:
877:
863:
844:
637:
538:
on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
449:
on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
364:
on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
2086:
2079:
1975:". It says I did this on purpose, I'm sorry, that's how that reads, and I'm not happy about that.
1686:
1187:
676:
I believe my talk would be the best place to do this but I'm adding this to the watchlist anyway.
601:
283:
202:
1655:
before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template
1620:
1547:
before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template
1496:
1416:
1671:
1563:
854:
Well, I guess it's a trademarked symbol, so it can only be used on the actual article page for
1375:
1658:
1582:
1550:
1334:
745:
301:
1042:
2109:
1678:
1570:
1517:
1445:
1158:
984:
726:
234:
8:
2376:
2369:
2316:
2225:
2177:
2150:
2113:
2039:
1993:
1914:
1871:
1792:
1788:
1780:
1763:
1737:
1435:
921:
873:
859:
840:
148:
968:
2395:
2135:
of those actions (which is what the table shows) is that they are no longer current. --
1637:, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by
1529:, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by
1387:
1362:
1315:
1140:
1089:
1075:
993:
800:
163:
2201:
However, I have decided that I no longer wish to spend any more time on this issue. --
1677:
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
1569:
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
100:
1474:
1110:
1032:
979:. Wondering why the DHS wants us to run from Backstreet Boys and Michael Bolton. --
944:
895:
144:
88:
33:
96:
1759:
1578:
1330:
830:
685:
2149:
Edit reverted - You need to carefully read the citation, because the citation for
254:
1939:
1608:
1482:
1468:
1350:
980:
763:
660:
67:
28:
522:
501:
1017:
628:
348:
2171:
it was repealed, amended in such a way that it removed/replaced those symbols,
2059:
I am disappointed that we can't resolve this without asking for mediation. --
1643:. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
1535:. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
2408:
2391:
2359:
2251:
2206:
2165:
It's explained on pages 9, 10, and continued on the first sentence of 11, of
2140:
2064:
2022:
1950:
1934:
1929:
1925:
1890:
1854:
1838:
1822:
1604:
1464:
1383:
1358:
1311:
1136:
1085:
1071:
610:
117:
92:
37:
1755:
I feel this article could benefit from major overhaul of the opening table.
2074:
1101:
1070:. That way it would be both linguistically correct and easy to understand.
1067:
1024:
1020:
936:
887:
818:
775:
759:
47:
809:
433:
412:
332:
314:
1644:
1536:
1198:
972:
679:
1902:
At 00:08, 9 June 2024 UTC, I attempted to clarify the table by adding
1827:
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32008R1272
1479:
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add
534:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to
1960:
So I want to start by pointing out that this entire thing started when
1355:
Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals
710:
342:
2106:- I made an edit that I think will resolve the issue with the table.
1906:
under the two obsoleted EU regulations, writing in the Edit summary:
446:
976:
750:
2262:
2247:
2202:
2136:
2101:
2060:
2018:
1961:
1946:
1886:
1862:
1850:
1834:
1776:
1487:
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
1772:
917:
855:
836:
633:
I read in the paper today that the radiation symbol has changed.
361:
1945:
At this point, I stand back and invite other editors to advise.
758:
I think adding 'laser hazard' symbol is a good idea... pic from
2283:
And frankly, go read it yourself. It describes you quite well:
1013:
I'm no expert but you can try delving into the article history
1621:
https://web.archive.org/web/20110722200125/http://ecb.jrc.it/
1497:
http://www.michigan.gov/documents/CIS_WSH_part476_54539_7.pdf
1417:
http://www.michigan.gov/documents/CIS_WSH_part476_54539_7.pdf
1502:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the
1990:
Official Journal of the European Union, L 065, 5 March 2014
1814:, with the aim to get other opinions to resolve the dispute
1376:
http://www.safety.vanderbilt.edu/training/hazcom/haz_15.htm
2011:"European Union" (and Canada) are historical, not current.
1615:
for additional information. I made the following changes:
2353:
Replacing the old/original 'List of Common Symbols' table
2285:...editors who are consistently disruptive and uncivil...
1127:
1785:
Health and Safety (Safety Signs and Signals) Regulations
1463:
I have just added archive links to one external link on
2445:
High-importance Occupational Safety and Health articles
1771:
My idea is replace the existing table, eliminating the
1084:
Since no one opposed, I, being bold, made the changes.
1041:
is there confusion about this flammable vs inflammable?
253:
2017:
We have no dispute about ends, but only about means.
1624:
1155:
What is the history of the Chemical warfare symbol?
1124:, one may prefer to use flammable or another synonym.
2167:
Non-binding guidelines regarding Directive 92/58/EEC
548:
Knowledge:WikiProject Occupational Safety and Health
445:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
360:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
338:
108:
2450:
WikiProject Occupational Safety and Health articles
2440:
Start-Class Occupational Safety and Health articles
1647:using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
1539:using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
551:
Template:WikiProject Occupational Safety and Health
2311:because it was only regarding the deletion of the
1706:Does the "chemical weapons" symbol actually exist?
1111:http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/inflammable.html
394:This article has not yet received a rating on the
1885:as other editors may help resolve the dispute. --
2406:
2301:I stand back and invite other editors to advise.
1845:FYI: The document is in mono but §1.2.1.1. says
695:
126:for general discussion of the article's subject.
1787:, and the United States, similar to the one on
858:. Does it deserve a non-pictured mention here?
1633:This message was posted before February 2018.
1525:This message was posted before February 2018.
2242:As to your "infuriation", I suggest you read
835:Dunno if it's been mentioned, but what about
267:
2153:only removed the 'harmful/irritant' symbol (
1122:especially where this may be a safety hazard
1969:We cannot deliberately mislead our readers.
1882:
281:
46:; for the discussion at that location, see
1603:I have just modified one external link on
1023:would be the place to ask this question.--
531:WikiProject Occupational Safety and Health
1883:talk:Hazard symbol#Chemical symbols table
1177:Where is the triangle/rectangle/octagon?
749:
1775:from the table, and doing a table with
1734:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/ISO 361
1728:Related AfD for radiation hazard symbol
554:Occupational Safety and Health articles
2407:
1917:reverted again, with the edit summary
1812:user talk:The Navigators#Hazard symbol
1928:violation so I can only observe that
1881:I am copying this discussion over to
1514:to let others know (documentation at
591:Chemical Weapon and Biological Hazard
2169:. If you do have a source that says
1128:http://en.wiktionary.org/inflammable
528:This article is within the scope of
439:This article is within the scope of
354:This article is within the scope of
277:
55:
15:
2420:Unknown-importance science articles
300:It is of interest to the following
116:for discussing improvements to the
13:
2430:High-importance Chemistry articles
2189:; edited 18:51, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
1924:I cannot counter-revert without a
808:
14:
2461:
1607:. Please take a moment to review
1467:. Please take a moment to review
644:a laser assembly, for instance).
615:just merge it, cant see why not.
2073:
1353:, that has been proposed by the
1325:Expanding "warning sign" section
521:
500:
432:
411:
341:
331:
313:
282:
138:Click here to start a new topic.
59:
19:
1817:The discussion thus far reads:
754:A typical laser warning symbol.
568:This article has been rated as
479:This article has been rated as
459:Knowledge:WikiProject Chemistry
2435:WikiProject Chemistry articles
2425:Start-Class Chemistry articles
1746:05:36, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
545:Occupational Safety and Health
536:occupational safety and health
508:Occupational Safety and Health
462:Template:WikiProject Chemistry
1:
2277:That should speak for itself.
2269:Knowledge:Collaboration first
2244:Knowledge:Collaboration first
1591:12:09, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
1037:03:52, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
1008:00:53, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
783:00:59, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
767:10:47, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
714:09:29, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
638:18:11, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
624:03:39, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
606:20:38, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
542:and see a list of open tasks.
453:and see a list of open tasks.
374:Knowledge:WikiProject Science
368:and see a list of open tasks.
135:Put new text under old text.
2415:Start-Class science articles
2306:I'm going to be clear here:
1913:At 04:25, 9 June 2024 UTC,
1810:Discussion transferred from
1751:Proposal - Overhaul of table
1701:15:34, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
1450:08:30, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
1339:10:39, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
989:21:18, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
826:02:45, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
805:21:03, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
377:Template:WikiProject Science
7:
2400:21:38, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
2390:Ooh actually quite busy rn
2385:03:27, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
1878:) 23:27, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
1857:) 21:20, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
1841:) 21:15, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
1411:Drawing of Biohazard Symbol
143:New to Knowledge? Welcome!
10:
2466:
1893:) 10:49, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
1809:
1664:(last update: 5 June 2024)
1600:Hello fellow Wikipedians,
1556:(last update: 5 June 2024)
1485:|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
1460:Hello fellow Wikipedians,
1392:15:31, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
1367:15:21, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
1320:15:10, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
1306:08:22, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
1285:08:08, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
1264:08:06, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
1243:08:04, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
1222:08:02, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
1145:15:07, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
1053:08:39, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
816:
791:Added First Trefoil Design
649:00:37, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
574:project's importance scale
485:project's importance scale
396:project's importance scale
2325:04:32, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
2256:11:14, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
2234:07:45, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
2211:22:08, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
2186:03:13, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
2145:20:46, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
2126:01:53, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
2095:21:44, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
2069:16:55, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
2048:16:04, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
2027:10:03, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
1758:Recently, editors on the
1723:22:06, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
1429:17:07, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
1192:15:56, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
1094:08:37, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
1080:18:26, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
949:05:46, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
930:13:22, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
900:04:17, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
882:04:16, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
868:17:00, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
849:16:48, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
739:15:43, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
567:
516:
478:
427:
393:
326:
308:
173:Be welcoming to newcomers
99:; for its talk page, see
2002:20:16, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
1955:10:49, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
1406:04:46, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
1345:Carcinogenicity Warning?
1197:Info about the topic of
1171:00:00, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
1061:Inflammable vs flammable
817:That's great! Thanks! --
691:19:48, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
664:23:45, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
1801:09:57, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
1596:External links modified
1456:External links modified
1151:Chemical weapons symbol
2366:List of common symbols
1900:
1806:Chemical symbols table
813:
755:
669:Hazard symbols details
290:This article is rated
168:avoid personal attacks
2267:Regarding the "cute"
2155:2015 Amendment source
2087:~~ AirshipJungleman29
1819:
812:
753:
442:WikiProject Chemistry
193:Neutral point of view
26:The contents of the
1645:regular verification
1537:regular verification
1471:. If necessary, add
723:what do you think?
705:Origin of biohazard?
198:No original research
87:. Its contents were
83:with a consensus to
2151:Directive 92/58/EEC
2054:WP:Knowledge is not
1849:Hope that helps. --
1781:Directive 92/58/EEC
1635:After February 2018
1527:After February 2018
1506:parameter below to
655:Explanation for tag
357:WikiProject Science
1689:InternetArchiveBot
1640:InternetArchiveBot
1625:http://ecb.jrc.it/
1532:InternetArchiveBot
967:I was looking for
963:DHS Safety symbols
814:
756:
465:Chemistry articles
296:content assessment
179:dispute resolution
140:
71:was nominated for
2128:
2112:comment added by
1821:Your addition to
1665:
1589:
1557:
1161:comment added by
1117:Wiktionary says:
741:
729:comment added by
688:
588:
587:
584:
583:
580:
579:
495:
494:
491:
490:
406:
405:
402:
401:
276:
275:
159:Assume good faith
136:
107:
106:
81:25 September 2021
54:
53:
2457:
2363:
2313:Harmful/Irritant
2266:
2215:Given that this
2107:
2105:
2077:
1866:
1760:German Knowledge
1699:
1690:
1663:
1662:
1641:
1585:
1584:Talk to my owner
1580:
1555:
1554:
1533:
1521:
1486:
1478:
1452:
1173:
1028:
940:
891:
822:
779:
724:
684:
682:
556:
555:
552:
549:
546:
525:
518:
517:
512:
504:
497:
496:
467:
466:
463:
460:
457:
436:
429:
428:
423:
415:
408:
407:
382:
381:
380:science articles
378:
375:
372:
351:
346:
345:
335:
328:
327:
317:
310:
309:
293:
287:
286:
278:
272:
271:
257:
188:Article policies
109:
63:
62:
56:
45:
23:
22:
16:
2465:
2464:
2460:
2459:
2458:
2456:
2455:
2454:
2405:
2404:
2357:
2355:
2260:
2190:
2175:
2172:
2164:
2160:
2099:
1860:
1815:
1808:
1753:
1730:
1708:
1693:
1688:
1656:
1649:have permission
1639:
1613:this simple FaQ
1598:
1588:
1583:
1548:
1541:have permission
1531:
1515:
1480:
1472:
1458:
1443:
1413:
1351:Carcinogenicity
1347:
1327:
1203:
1179:
1156:
1153:
1130:(emphasis mine)
1063:
1026:
996:
965:
938:
889:
833:
820:
793:
777:
748:
707:
698:
680:
671:
657:
631:
621:128.113.198.122
613:
593:
570:High-importance
553:
550:
547:
544:
543:
511:High‑importance
510:
481:High-importance
464:
461:
458:
455:
454:
422:High‑importance
421:
379:
376:
373:
370:
369:
347:
340:
294:on Knowledge's
291:
214:
209:
208:
207:
184:
154:
60:
41:
20:
12:
11:
5:
2463:
2453:
2452:
2447:
2442:
2437:
2432:
2427:
2422:
2417:
2403:
2402:
2377:The Navigators
2354:
2351:
2350:
2349:
2348:
2347:
2346:
2345:
2344:
2343:
2342:
2341:
2340:
2339:
2338:
2337:
2336:
2335:
2334:
2333:
2332:
2331:
2330:
2329:
2328:
2327:
2317:The Navigators
2304:
2296:
2288:
2281:
2280:
2278:
2275:
2272:
2240:
2226:The Navigators
2221:
2199:
2195:
2188:
2178:The Navigators
2173:
2170:
2161:
2158:
2114:The Navigators
2057:
2040:The Navigators
2036:
2035:
2033:
2015:
2012:
2008:
1994:The Navigators
1986:
1980:
1976:
1966:
1915:The Navigators
1899:
1898:
1897:
1896:
1895:
1894:
1872:The Navigators
1868:
1807:
1804:
1793:The Navigators
1767:
1752:
1749:
1738:David Eppstein
1729:
1726:
1707:
1704:
1683:
1682:
1675:
1628:
1627:
1619:Added archive
1597:
1594:
1581:
1575:
1574:
1567:
1500:
1499:
1491:Added archive
1457:
1454:
1448:comment added
1436:Composcompos12
1433:
1412:
1409:
1381:
1380:
1379:
1378:
1346:
1343:
1326:
1323:
1294:
1293:
1273:
1272:
1252:
1251:
1231:
1230:
1210:
1209:
1202:
1195:
1178:
1175:
1152:
1149:
1148:
1147:
1133:
1132:
1131:
1125:
1115:
1114:
1113:
1108:
1062:
1059:
1058:
1057:
1056:
1055:
1045:71.204.128.185
995:
992:
964:
961:
960:
959:
958:
957:
956:
955:
954:
953:
952:
951:
922:Applejuicefool
907:
906:
905:
904:
903:
902:
874:Applejuicefool
860:Applejuicefool
841:Applejuicefool
832:
829:
792:
789:
788:
787:
786:
785:
747:
744:
743:
742:
731:213.134.28.144
706:
703:
697:
694:
677:
675:
670:
667:
656:
653:
652:
651:
630:
627:
612:
609:
592:
589:
586:
585:
582:
581:
578:
577:
566:
560:
559:
557:
540:the discussion
526:
514:
513:
505:
493:
492:
489:
488:
477:
471:
470:
468:
451:the discussion
437:
425:
424:
416:
404:
403:
400:
399:
392:
386:
385:
383:
366:the discussion
353:
352:
349:Science portal
336:
324:
323:
318:
306:
305:
299:
288:
274:
273:
211:
210:
206:
205:
200:
195:
186:
185:
183:
182:
175:
170:
161:
155:
153:
152:
141:
132:
131:
128:
127:
121:
105:
104:
79:was closed on
77:The discussion
64:
52:
51:
24:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
2462:
2451:
2448:
2446:
2443:
2441:
2438:
2436:
2433:
2431:
2428:
2426:
2423:
2421:
2418:
2416:
2413:
2412:
2410:
2401:
2397:
2393:
2389:
2388:
2387:
2386:
2382:
2378:
2373:
2371:
2367:
2361:
2326:
2322:
2318:
2314:
2309:
2305:
2302:
2297:
2293:
2289:
2286:
2282:
2279:
2276:
2273:
2270:
2264:
2259:
2258:
2257:
2253:
2249:
2245:
2241:
2237:
2236:
2235:
2231:
2227:
2222:
2218:
2214:
2213:
2212:
2208:
2204:
2200:
2196:
2192:
2191:
2187:
2183:
2179:
2168:
2156:
2152:
2148:
2147:
2146:
2142:
2138:
2134:
2130:
2129:
2127:
2123:
2119:
2115:
2111:
2103:
2098:
2097:
2096:
2092:
2088:
2083:
2081:
2076:
2072:
2071:
2070:
2066:
2062:
2058:
2055:
2051:
2050:
2049:
2045:
2041:
2037:
2034:
2030:
2029:
2028:
2024:
2020:
2016:
2013:
2009:
2005:
2004:
2003:
1999:
1995:
1991:
1987:
1984:
1981:
1977:
1974:
1970:
1967:
1963:
1959:
1958:
1957:
1956:
1952:
1948:
1943:
1941:
1936:
1931:
1927:
1922:
1920:
1916:
1911:
1909:
1905:
1892:
1888:
1884:
1880:
1879:
1877:
1873:
1869:
1864:
1859:
1858:
1856:
1852:
1848:
1844:
1843:
1842:
1840:
1836:
1830:
1828:
1824:
1823:hazard symbol
1818:
1813:
1803:
1802:
1798:
1794:
1790:
1786:
1782:
1778:
1774:
1769:
1765:
1761:
1756:
1748:
1747:
1743:
1739:
1735:
1725:
1724:
1720:
1716:
1712:
1703:
1702:
1697:
1692:
1691:
1680:
1676:
1673:
1669:
1668:
1667:
1660:
1654:
1650:
1646:
1642:
1636:
1631:
1626:
1622:
1618:
1617:
1616:
1614:
1610:
1606:
1605:Hazard symbol
1601:
1593:
1592:
1586:
1579:
1572:
1568:
1565:
1561:
1560:
1559:
1552:
1546:
1542:
1538:
1534:
1528:
1523:
1519:
1513:
1509:
1505:
1498:
1494:
1490:
1489:
1488:
1484:
1476:
1470:
1466:
1465:Hazard symbol
1461:
1453:
1451:
1447:
1441:
1437:
1431:
1430:
1426:
1422:
1418:
1408:
1407:
1403:
1399:
1394:
1393:
1389:
1385:
1377:
1374:
1373:
1371:
1370:
1369:
1368:
1364:
1360:
1356:
1352:
1342:
1340:
1336:
1332:
1322:
1321:
1317:
1313:
1308:
1307:
1303:
1299:
1292:
1289:
1288:
1287:
1286:
1282:
1278:
1271:
1268:
1267:
1266:
1265:
1261:
1257:
1250:
1247:
1246:
1245:
1244:
1240:
1236:
1229:
1226:
1225:
1224:
1223:
1219:
1215:
1208:
1205:
1204:
1200:
1194:
1193:
1189:
1185:
1184:68.144.80.168
1174:
1172:
1168:
1164:
1163:71.59.187.104
1160:
1146:
1142:
1138:
1134:
1129:
1126:
1123:
1119:
1118:
1116:
1112:
1109:
1106:
1105:
1103:
1098:
1097:
1096:
1095:
1091:
1087:
1082:
1081:
1077:
1073:
1069:
1054:
1050:
1046:
1043:
1040:
1039:
1038:
1034:
1030:
1029:
1022:
1018:
1015:
1012:
1011:
1010:
1009:
1005:
1001:
1000:64.231.106.61
991:
990:
986:
982:
978:
974:
971:after seeing
970:
950:
946:
942:
941:
933:
932:
931:
927:
923:
919:
915:
914:
913:
912:
911:
910:
909:
908:
901:
897:
893:
892:
885:
884:
883:
879:
875:
871:
870:
869:
865:
861:
857:
853:
852:
851:
850:
846:
842:
838:
828:
827:
824:
823:
811:
807:
806:
802:
798:
784:
781:
780:
773:
772:
771:
770:
769:
768:
765:
761:
752:
746:Laser symbol?
740:
736:
732:
728:
722:
718:
717:
716:
715:
712:
702:
693:
692:
689:
687:
683:
666:
665:
662:
650:
647:
642:
641:
640:
639:
636:
626:
625:
622:
616:
608:
607:
603:
599:
598:192.33.240.95
575:
571:
565:
562:
561:
558:
541:
537:
533:
532:
527:
524:
520:
519:
515:
509:
506:
503:
499:
498:
486:
482:
476:
473:
472:
469:
452:
448:
444:
443:
438:
435:
431:
430:
426:
420:
417:
414:
410:
409:
397:
391:
388:
387:
384:
367:
363:
359:
358:
350:
344:
339:
337:
334:
330:
329:
325:
322:
319:
316:
312:
311:
307:
303:
297:
289:
285:
280:
279:
270:
266:
263:
260:
256:
252:
248:
245:
242:
239:
236:
233:
230:
227:
224:
220:
217:
216:Find sources:
213:
212:
204:
203:Verifiability
201:
199:
196:
194:
191:
190:
189:
180:
176:
174:
171:
169:
165:
162:
160:
157:
156:
150:
146:
145:Learn to edit
142:
139:
134:
133:
130:
129:
125:
119:
118:Hazard symbol
115:
111:
110:
102:
98:
94:
93:Hazard symbol
90:
86:
82:
78:
74:
70:
69:
65:
58:
57:
49:
48:its talk page
44:
39:
38:Hazard symbol
35:
31:
30:
25:
18:
17:
2374:
2356:
2312:
2307:
2300:
2291:
2284:
2216:
2132:
2108:— Preceding
2078:
1982:
1973:deliberately
1972:
1968:
1944:
1923:
1918:
1912:
1907:
1903:
1901:
1846:
1831:
1820:
1816:
1770:
1757:
1754:
1731:
1713:
1709:
1687:
1684:
1659:source check
1638:
1632:
1629:
1602:
1599:
1576:
1551:source check
1530:
1524:
1511:
1507:
1503:
1501:
1462:
1459:
1432:
1414:
1395:
1382:
1348:
1341:Astatine211
1328:
1309:
1295:
1274:
1253:
1232:
1211:
1180:
1154:
1121:
1102:Flammability
1083:
1068:Flammability
1064:
1025:
997:
966:
937:
888:
834:
819:
815:
794:
776:
760:Laser safety
757:
708:
699:
678:
672:
658:
632:
617:
614:
594:
569:
529:
480:
440:
355:
302:WikiProjects
264:
258:
250:
243:
237:
231:
225:
215:
187:
112:This is the
84:
80:
66:
27:
2370:Warnzeichen
2271:suggestion.
1789:Warnzeichen
1764:Warnzeichen
1732:Please see
1518:Sourcecheck
1444:—Preceding
1421:91.47.69.52
1419:--TeakHoken
1331:Astatine211
1298:58.38.47.48
1277:58.38.47.48
1256:58.38.47.48
1235:58.38.47.48
1214:58.38.47.48
1199:Safety sign
1157:—Preceding
725:—Preceding
292:Start-class
241:free images
124:not a forum
97:its history
43:its history
2409:Categories
2163:benchmark.
1904:(repealed)
1696:Report bug
1434:link lost
1398:86.44.41.1
994:Vandalism?
981:John Moser
969:this stuff
764:FourBlades
719:See this:
661:Dark Green
32:page were
2082:Response:
1679:this tool
1672:this tool
1571:this tool
1564:this tool
619:matter.--
456:Chemistry
447:chemistry
419:Chemistry
181:if needed
164:Be polite
114:talk page
2392:Gringinu
2360:Gringinu
2122:contribs
2110:unsigned
1942:detail.
1940:WP:UNDUE
1777:ISO 7010
1715:Elfchief
1685:Cheers.—
1577:Cheers.—
1475:cbignore
1384:Ileanadu
1359:Ileanadu
1312:Ileanadu
1159:unsigned
1137:Ileanadu
1086:Kotiwalo
1072:Kotiwalo
1027:penubag
939:penubag
890:penubag
831:Mr. Yuk?
821:penubag
797:888gavin
778:Penubag
727:unsigned
721:Hagakure
646:Mattabat
149:get help
122:This is
120:article.
73:deletion
2056:aside).
1773:Unicode
1609:my edit
1587::Online
1504:checked
1469:my edit
1446:undated
918:Mr. Yuk
856:Mr. Yuk
837:Mr. Yuk
774:Done.--
572:on the
483:on the
371:Science
362:Science
321:Science
247:WP refs
235:scholar
68:ISO 361
29:ISO 361
2292:entire
2248:𝕁𝕄𝔽
2217:entire
2203:𝕁𝕄𝔽
2137:𝕁𝕄𝔽
2133:effect
2061:𝕁𝕄𝔽
2019:𝕁𝕄𝔽
1979:above.
1947:𝕁𝕄𝔽
1935:WP:OWN
1930:WP:AGF
1926:WP:3RR
1887:𝕁𝕄𝔽
1851:𝕁𝕄𝔽
1835:𝕁𝕄𝔽
1512:failed
1483:nobots
681:MaxDZ8
674:those.
629:Change
298:scale.
219:Google
89:merged
34:merged
2290:This
1201:.....
1021:WP:RD
977:these
611:Merge
262:JSTOR
223:books
177:Seek
91:into
85:merge
36:into
2396:talk
2381:talk
2321:talk
2252:talk
2230:talk
2207:talk
2182:talk
2141:talk
2118:talk
2091:talk
2065:talk
2044:talk
2023:talk
1998:talk
1951:talk
1891:talk
1876:talk
1855:talk
1839:talk
1797:talk
1742:talk
1719:talk
1508:true
1440:talk
1425:talk
1402:talk
1388:talk
1363:talk
1335:talk
1316:talk
1302:talk
1281:talk
1260:talk
1239:talk
1218:talk
1188:talk
1167:talk
1141:talk
1090:talk
1076:talk
1049:talk
1033:talk
1004:talk
985:talk
973:some
945:talk
926:talk
896:talk
878:talk
864:talk
845:talk
801:talk
762:...
735:talk
686:talk
635:A.Z.
602:talk
564:High
475:High
255:FENS
229:news
166:and
101:here
2308:No.
2263:JMF
2194:it.
2102:JMF
1992:.--
1962:JMF
1863:JMF
1653:RfC
1623:to
1545:RfC
1522:).
1510:or
1495:to
1442:)
975:of
711:kzm
696:Tag
390:???
269:TWL
75:.
2411::
2398:)
2383:)
2323:)
2254:)
2232:)
2209:)
2184:)
2143:)
2124:)
2120:•
2093:)
2080:3O
2067:)
2046:)
2025:)
2000:)
1953:)
1921:.
1910:.
1799:)
1783:,
1779:,
1744:)
1721:)
1666:.
1661:}}
1657:{{
1558:.
1553:}}
1549:{{
1520:}}
1516:{{
1481:{{
1477:}}
1473:{{
1427:)
1404:)
1390:)
1365:)
1337:)
1318:)
1304:)
1296:--
1283:)
1275:--
1262:)
1254:--
1241:)
1233:--
1220:)
1212:--
1190:)
1169:)
1143:)
1092:)
1078:)
1051:)
1035:)
1006:)
987:)
947:)
928:)
898:)
880:)
866:)
847:)
839:?
803:)
737:)
604:)
249:)
147:;
2394:(
2379:(
2362::
2358:@
2319:(
2287:.
2265::
2261:@
2250:(
2228:(
2205:(
2180:(
2139:(
2116:(
2104::
2100:@
2089:(
2063:(
2042:(
2021:(
1996:(
1949:(
1889:(
1874:(
1865::
1861:@
1853:(
1837:(
1795:(
1766:.
1740:(
1717:(
1698:)
1694:(
1681:.
1674:.
1573:.
1566:.
1438:(
1423:(
1400:(
1386:(
1361:(
1333:(
1314:(
1300:(
1279:(
1258:(
1237:(
1216:(
1186:(
1165:(
1139:(
1088:(
1074:(
1047:(
1031:(
1002:(
983:(
943:(
924:(
894:(
876:(
862:(
843:(
799:(
733:(
600:(
576:.
487:.
398:.
304::
265:·
259:·
251:·
244:·
238:·
232:·
226:·
221:(
151:.
103:.
50:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.