884:. Leaning support, but there are a few niggles. Still, I don't have as much to say about the article as I implied I might earlier. I feel like I've read this half-a-dozen times over the last couple of months, and that's probably not far off. As during the peer review, I couldn't find a lot wrong with the article, so I don't have much to add to what's already been said. To repeat what's been noted above, it would be nice if you could find a good source that mentions the fan reaction. We have critical reaction, and general audience reaction (to a certain extent—through the box office), but we work with what we've got—if there isn't anything decent about the fans, fair enough. One exception I have is with the lead, which isn't as well-written as the rest of the article. Some notes:
1173:", but that's kind of irrelevant in this case. I've reworded the fabrics to "literal tons of fabrics" (because it is that much, but leaving the structure as it was might suggest tons of just one kind of fabric.) Cited the leading trail, and while I think the use of styrofoam and such was used in a generic way, I've respected trademarks and capitalized :) For the Vulcan bit... I'm unsure of how to reword this. The ornaments are supposed to be a symbol for the Vulcan's
254:. No dab links and no dead external links. Alt text is present, except for the video, which also needs it. But there are also some points in the existing alt text that need work. Alt text needs to be verifiable for a non-expert who looks at the image only, and I, for one, wouldn't be able to verify from the first image that this guy is called Spock, or any of the other names mentioned. There are a few similar problems in the other images.
842:. As Star Trek fans are an opinionated group of folks, what is there written about how fans have received this film in comparison to other films, TNG, Voyager, and installments of the general franchise. I understand one of the movies is absolutely hated by fans. Can you include a couple sentences or a paragraph about how this film was received? Very thorough otherwise, and well-written. Let me know if you have questions. --
834:: There do not appear to be any references to the film as a continuation of a hit TV show with the same cast and characters, or background of the premise of the Star Trek franchise are included in the introductory sections. I don't know if this was included in other Star Trek articles you've written. I think some of these elements are worth placing in the article. One sentence at the beginning of Plot:
203:
857:
You beat me to the punch on this; I was going to mention it as part of a longer review (tonight), but as it's been brought up, I might as well mention it now. The article currently says, "The film's production acknowledged certain expectations from fans," so it seems odd not to mention whether those
761:
Thanks for the review! I've taken a stab at all the above, save the comments about
Genesis (I'll have to dig through what I've got and see if I missed anything, I'm sure there's a good paragraph there :P) I chopped down Nimoy's quote as it could be explained a lot better with paraphrasing the first
709:
So I can't even look to see if the actor I am playing the scene with is looking anything like I think he should look...I realize this is a Nimoy quote, but could you check your source and make sure you've not missed a word or a punctuation mark? If you haven't, could you add editorially the proper
545:"...to their surprise, discover a life form on the surface." Since the technology included a built-in "life matrix" and had already demonstrated an ability to create life (in cavern in the second film), how is this a surprise? I think instead the signature was of a life form they could not identify.
646:
I've added a citation for the Mr. Adventure cast bit. As to plot: basically it's accepted that most of the time when in an article discussing a work's plot, the work itself is the source (this doesn't count if you're discussing the work in another article, however, as this is not presumed.) As the
1045:
article from David, and probably the single finest resource available about the film anywhere online. I'm happy with the rationales provided for the potentially-borderline sources, and I'm delighted he's managed to craft another fine fair-use claim to include a movie clip. I have a few remaining
576:
Thanks for the review! In response: the plot summary is mostly (by default) cited directly to the film; unfortunately there aren't that many good reliable sources that cover the plot summary and unfortunately ones like that on the official Star Trek site are geared more to those familiar to the
199:
1083:"Fletcher developed a mythology behind each outfit; the stone ornaments on Sarek's robe, for instance, were intended to be representative of a Vulcan's level of consciousness."—I don't know what this means, how stone ornaments can be "representative of a Vulcan's level of consciousness".
634:
Carol Marcus says that the device creates a habitat for life to be added as seen fit, so I think this points to the idea that they weren't expecting anything to be there. Regardless, you're right that it might be a little confusing, and so I've tweaked it :)
994:
I've made tweaks following your suggestions to the lead. I'm looking through what I've got to see if I can find information on fan reaction, but given the difficulty in finding even a good, reliable summary of critical reaction, I'm not that hopeful :/
215:(other mentions may not be the same person, so those are the only ones I'm sure of). In short I believe both are reliable, although the Slashfood one can be readily removed (it's referenced to the same point as the Tenuto ref) if people here disagree.
974:
And that's pretty much it for the lead. As I say, the rest looks largely fine. I'm going to make a couple of tweaks here and there. I'll explain each through edit summaries; please feel free to revert if you disagree with any of them. Nice work once
926:"Nimoy took over directing duties, the first Star Trek cast member to do so."—by not mentioning Meyer, the question of from whom he "took over" arises in the reader's mind. Better to simplify? ("Nimoy directed", "Nimoy directed the film" or similar).
794:
I hope you'll find something more on the destruction of
Genesis. in the plot summary, first you say that the planet is off limits and the next sentence, Saavik and David are there, and later, there is reference to McCoy being in detention, but no
586:
Is it a wikipedia convention then that the film itself can serve as a source for the plot summary? (I haven't seen this written up, and it's hard to track all the ongoing changes.) Otherwise I am unclear how this satisfies the need for reliable
811:
very nice. I made a couple word changes, and added one word. Hope that is okay. (changed the ground caves to the ground collapses, and added again to the bit about
Deforest Kelley) Thanks for such an interesting and well done article.
611:
Okay I'll concede two of the unsourced sentences. However, for the statement that "Scott McGinnis" plays a young man whom Uhura forces into the closet at gunpoint, the only reference I can find is McGinnis played a character called "Mr.
710:
words/punctuation to make this intelligible? (So I can't even look to see if the actor I am playing the scene ... anything like I think he should look...something like that. I read it three times before I could figure it out.
134:
194:: At the PR, two references, trekmovie.com and slashfood, were brought up as possible issues in regards to RS. The Trekmovie site is mostly blog-style. The post's author, John Tenuto, is a sociology professor at
605:
The final sentences of the cast section are unsourced as they are straightforward information for the credits, with no elaboration or additional information that would in my opinion be likely to be challenged.
703:
Spock's former Vulcan trainee..... She isn't formerly a Vulcan, she's formerly a trainee. The ill-fated captain of the
Grissom (or SS Grissom?) Could it be captain of the ill-fated Grissom? Or the doomed
696:. (reviewed from Prose crit. only) Nice job at presenting a complex subject (and one over which a lot of people might want to extend "ownership"). I have a couple of minor points to clear up in the prose:
350:
1177:
level, basically, but I'm not sure how I can make it plainer. I'll probably swap the lead bit to conform with the reception section, but I'm still looking for a ref for that... I might have to send out for
783:
Yes, it looks better...all those little tweaks. You took out Mr. Adventure, although I thought that was fine, I guess another reviewer objected. That is certainly a great line. A few more comments: -
1086:"The costumer had the advantage of access to Paramount's store rooms, which contained expensive fabrics by the ton."—a metaphorical ton (i.e. lots) or a literal one? (Which seems unlikely, but I dunno.)
821:
806:
772:
221:
753:
657:
125:
313:
299:
245:
482:
673:
641:
503:
469:
1201:
1188:
1014:
1001:
258:
1161:
851:
288:
968:(In fact, I'm not even sure "alternately" is a good choice, either. They didn't "take turns" to criticise and praise the story and effects, they just did it, presumably much at the same time).
524:
567:
983:
866:
457:
Usage: Good. Significantly explicates sourced critical commentary on primary image content, which is of central importance to film and could not be effectively conveyed via still image(s).
390:. Caption contains information not included in running text ("while the red feather design on the ship's underside was a remnant of its planned Romulan origins"). This needs to be sourced.
181:
651:
style guide states: "Since films are primary sources in their articles, basic descriptions of their plots are acceptable" (of course, making sure not to introduce original claims.)
1073:"—no context. The bar scene hasn't been mentioned yet, so for the uninformed reader the point will be meaningless. Perhaps add a line here, or in the plot section, to explain it?
942:
as the previous film, it's probably unnecessary at this point to name it again. Suggest, "Composer James Horner returned to expand his themes from the previous film" or similar.
476:
I've added references. I realize now that it's not explicitly laid out that the design was a
Romulan thread that made it into the final design, which is hopefully clearer now.
858:
expectations were met. It would be good to state their 1984 reaction, and maybe even where it stands in fan affections these days (if the sources stretch that far).
790:
A bar scene where McCoy attempts to charter a spaceflight to
Genesis before he is detained opens with two officers playing a World War I-era dogfight video game."
370:
88:
83:
1038:
440:
275:
92:
896:". Probably best to either pick one style and stick with it throughout, or use the full name at the first instance of each, with the shorter title thereafter.
417:
75:
230:
Everything seems fine. I lean slightly reliable on both the sources mentioned above, but other editors should give their own opinion here for consensus.
909:
lore; it's not evident that essence and katra are referring to the same concept, without following the link. Inserting commas around "or katra"
155:
330:
150:
63:
40:
407:
Usage: Good. Significantly explicates sourced critical commentary on primary image content, which is of central importance to film.
380:
Usage: Good. Significantly explicates sourced critical commentary on primary image content, which is of central importance to film.
79:
97:
662:
Thank you for your responses; I'll have to take your word for the plot citation issue. I've change my preference to
Support.—
30:
17:
109:
720:
the bit about Takei and the "tiny" comment....this needs more context. He's referred to as "Tiny" under what circumstance?
630:
On the
Genesis point... I believe that there wasn't supposed to be any complicated life, in the form of animals, etc. In
533:—It looks pretty good to me, and essentially of FA quality. I just have a few small issues to raise before supporting it:
397:
172:
71:
64:
921:
that way. Lastly, "essence" is a little vague; the katra article uses "immortal spirit"; might that be more descriptive?
105:
962:
This better not be another silly BrE/AmE thing, else there'll be significant lobbying on my part for the repeal of
1114:
received generally positive reviews from critics."—conflicts with the lead, which says "mixed". Can this be cited?
955:
box office". Plus, that "domestic" is well redundant; the US has already been established as its "home" country.
101:
963:
1041:(see the intermediate edit summaries for the rationales for each), but nothing major. This is another fine
938:
s composer, returned to expand his themes from the previous film."—with this already the third mention of
725:
Hansen continues that the issues of personal liberty (in themes section). Shouldn't it be "contends"....?
840:
television show that followed the crew of a ship sent from Earth to explore the outer boundaries of space
513:—My concerns have been addressed. The article is of good quality and appears to satisfy the FA criteria.—
1193:
Oops. Just realised that I never revisited this. Consider all my comments above resolved. All the best,
170:
Arson. Explosions. William
Shatner going through a dozen shirts. All this you'll find in the article on
1046:
niggles, but nothing that should impact promotion IMO (I'm sure they'll be dealt with in short order):
715:
Do you have more on the destruction of the
Genesis planet? I'd really like to know how they did that!
1170:
1066:
905:
is held in the mind of Leonard McCoy"—I think this might confuse those unfamiliar with the film, or
269:
188:, and I've taken my own stab at cutting down redundancies and making it a little more accessible.
947:"It went on to make $ 76 million in the US domestic box office"—the more idiomatic term would be "
817:
802:
749:
195:
540:
The plot summary only has a single reference. Was that intended to cover the entire summary?
499:
8:
309:
284:
238:
1182:
from interlibrary loan again in the hope that it might have a decent summary I can ref.
201:
1119:
766:
article? Maybe if there was anyone else interested in the topic I'd feel protective :)
914:
902:
813:
798:
745:
690:
465:
185:
53:
1183:
1174:
1169:
I've axed the tribble quote entirely (it's actually referring to the bar scene in "
1100:
to represent the ancient alien mysticism and culture of Spock and Vulcan."—uncited.
996:
767:
667:
652:
636:
620:
595:
561:
518:
477:
294:
255:
216:
207:
120:
847:
648:
495:
57:
305:
293:
I've added alt text for the video, and modified the existing alt descriptions.
280:
400:: Screenshot (fair use) of unusual-looking adversaries and tasty-looking worm.
351:
File:Phil Tippett, Robert Watts, Richard Edlund, Ben Burtt and Ken Ralston.jpg
1149:
Are Plexiglass and Styrofoam proper nouns? If so, they should be capitalised.
960:"critics alternatively praised and lambasted"—you mean "alternately", right?
918:
743:
but I hope you'll go through and tweak a few sections just a weeeee bit more.
461:
663:
616:
591:
557:
514:
786:
perhaps William Shatner reprises his long-term role as James T. Kirk....
135:
Featured article candidates/Star Trek III: The Search for Spock/archive1
1194:
1154:
1030:
1007:
976:
877:
859:
843:
731:
1061:
39:
Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in
1125:
550:
The last two sentences of the "Cast" section are lacking citations.
1146:
The alt text uses a lot of colours, which IIRC are discouraged.
205:
John Devore of Slashfood has had some of his work appear in
913:
do the trick; a clearer way would be to pipe katra with "
212:
160:
1153:
Other than that ... nice work once again. All the best,
371:
File:S03-The Search for Spock-Bird of Prey decloaks.png
441:
File:S03-The Search For Spock-Enterprise destructs.ogv
333:: Movie poster (fair use), used as main infobox image.
276:
File:S03-The Search For Spock-Enterprise destructs.ogv
892:"—then, two paragraphs later, "went on to direct ...
353:: Commons image of five creative/technical personnel.
418:
File:DĂĽrer, Kupferstichpassion 15, Auferstehung.jpg
494:- The Klingon Bird-of-Prey image seems very dark.
1213:The above discussion is preserved as an archive.
1096:"The theme was expanded in a way not possible in
1037:. OK, screw it, I found time to read it again. I
1065:, Kelley asserted that the opposite was true. '
581:and relatively accessible summary rather poor.
373:: Screenshot (fair use) of adversary spaceship.
273:for guidance about what alt text to supply for
43:. No further edits should be made to this page.
1219:No further edits should be made to this page.
443:: 25-second screen capture (fair use) of the
29:The following is an archived discussion of a
836:The film continues the premise of the 1960s
331:File:003-the search for spock poster art.png
176:, the middle chapter of a loose trilogy of
1132:s wrote that ..."—missing the name of the
1069:,' he said, 'started the first bar scene.
41:Knowledge talk:Featured article candidates
741:I'm looking forward to reading it again,
1006:Struck lead comments. Others to follow.
14:
901:"When learns that Spock's essence or
184:and separate copyedit by the obliging
304:Thanks, the alt text looks good now.
18:Knowledge:Featured article candidates
788:? - a bit awkward, this sentence: "
577:series, making its use in citing a
420:: Commons image of DĂĽrer engraving.
398:File:S03-kruge fights the worms.png
198:and is quoted in other publications
180:films. The article has undergone a
173:Star Trek III: The Search for Spock
72:Star Trek III: The Search for Spock
65:Star Trek III: The Search for Spock
23:
24:
1231:
1055:"Responding to suggestions that
427:License: PD-Art. Unquestionable.
917:", but you might fall afoul of
13:
1:
1202:20:26, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
1189:13:23, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
1162:12:02, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
1015:11:53, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
1002:02:39, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
984:23:17, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
894:Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home
867:16:17, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
852:15:56, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
822:20:12, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
807:23:18, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
773:02:27, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
754:02:07, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
674:19:18, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
658:02:27, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
642:23:39, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
568:20:56, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
525:19:18, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
504:18:55, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
360:License: CC-BY-2.0. Verified.
246:02:12, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
483:21:02, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
470:11:07, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
314:02:29, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
300:00:07, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
289:23:04, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
270:WP:ALT#Videos and animations
259:19:37, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
222:19:18, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
126:19:18, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
7:
31:featured article nomination
10:
1236:
1185:Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs
1171:The Trouble with Tribbles
998:Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs
769:Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs
730:Oh, and there's a dab on
654:Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs
638:Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs
479:Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs
296:Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs
218:Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs
122:Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs
1216:Please do not modify it.
56:20:21, 28 February 2010
36:Please do not modify it.
888:"during the events of
340:Usage: Good, standard.
196:College of Lake County
762:part. Ownership on a
326:: Five still images:
1180:The Art of Star Trek
1112:The Search for Spock
694:Conditional Support
363:Quality: Acceptable.
1078:Costumes and makeup
832:Conditional support
1120:The New York Times
436:One moving image:
1117:"Janet Maslin of
1105:Critical response
1098:The Wrath of Khan
967:
933:The Wrath of Khan
890:The Wrath of Khan
460:Rationale: Good.—
244:
168:
167:
129:
1227:
1218:
1199:
1186:
1175:operating thetan
1159:
1131:
1072:
1039:made some tweaks
1035:
1012:
999:
981:
961:
937:
882:
876:(resolved) from
864:
770:
655:
639:
613:
588:
480:
449:
410:Rationale: Good.
383:Rationale: Good.
343:Rationale: Good.
297:
236:
235:
219:
208:The New York Sun
140:
139:
123:
117:
113:
95:
48:The article was
38:
1235:
1234:
1230:
1229:
1228:
1226:
1225:
1224:
1223:
1214:
1195:
1184:
1155:
1129:
1070:
1031:
1008:
997:
977:
935:
931:"James Horner,
878:
860:
768:
653:
637:
610:
585:
478:
447:
430:Quality: DĂĽrer.
295:
231:
228:Source comments
217:
121:
86:
70:
68:
34:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
1233:
1222:
1221:
1209:
1208:
1207:
1206:
1205:
1204:
1151:
1150:
1147:
1143:
1142:
1138:
1137:
1115:
1107:
1106:
1102:
1101:
1093:
1092:
1088:
1087:
1084:
1080:
1079:
1075:
1074:
1052:
1051:
1024:
1023:
1022:
1021:
1020:
1019:
1018:
1017:
987:
986:
972:
971:
970:
957:
944:
928:
923:
898:
870:
869:
829:
828:
827:
826:
825:
824:
778:
777:
776:
775:
739:
738:
737:
736:
727:
722:
717:
712:
706:
685:
684:
683:
682:
681:
680:
679:
678:
677:
676:
628:
627:
626:
603:
602:
601:
571:
570:
553:
552:
547:
542:
536:
535:
507:
506:
488:
487:
486:
485:
473:
472:
458:
452:
451:
450:s destruction.
434:
433:
432:
431:
428:
422:
421:
414:
413:
412:
411:
408:
402:
401:
394:
393:
392:
391:
384:
381:
375:
374:
367:
366:
365:
364:
361:
355:
354:
347:
346:
345:
344:
341:
335:
334:
321:
320:
319:
318:
317:
316:
249:
248:
166:
165:
164:
163:
161:External links
158:
153:
145:
144:
138:
137:
131:
130:
119:Nominator(s):
67:
62:
61:
46:
45:
25:
15:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1232:
1220:
1217:
1211:
1210:
1203:
1200:
1198:
1192:
1191:
1190:
1187:
1181:
1176:
1172:
1168:
1167:
1166:
1165:
1164:
1163:
1160:
1158:
1148:
1145:
1144:
1140:
1139:
1135:
1128:
1127:
1122:
1121:
1116:
1113:
1109:
1108:
1104:
1103:
1099:
1095:
1094:
1090:
1089:
1085:
1082:
1081:
1077:
1076:
1068:
1064:
1063:
1058:
1054:
1053:
1049:
1048:
1047:
1044:
1040:
1036:
1034:
1028:
1016:
1013:
1011:
1005:
1004:
1003:
1000:
993:
992:
991:
990:
989:
988:
985:
982:
980:
973:
969:
965:
958:
956:
954:
950:
945:
943:
941:
934:
929:
927:
924:
922:
920:
916:
912:
908:
904:
899:
897:
895:
891:
886:
885:
883:
881:
875:
872:
871:
868:
865:
863:
856:
855:
854:
853:
849:
845:
841:
837:
833:
823:
819:
815:
810:
809:
808:
804:
800:
796:
791:
787:
782:
781:
780:
779:
774:
771:
765:
760:
759:
758:
757:
756:
755:
751:
747:
744:
735:
733:
728:
726:
723:
721:
718:
716:
713:
711:
707:
705:
701:
700:
699:
698:
697:
695:
692:
689:
675:
671:
670:
665:
661:
660:
659:
656:
650:
645:
644:
643:
640:
633:
629:
624:
623:
618:
614:
608:
607:
604:
599:
598:
593:
589:
583:
582:
580:
575:
574:
573:
572:
569:
565:
564:
559:
555:
554:
551:
548:
546:
543:
541:
538:
537:
534:
532:
528:
527:
526:
522:
521:
516:
512:
509:
508:
505:
501:
497:
493:
490:
489:
484:
481:
475:
474:
471:
467:
463:
459:
456:
455:
454:
453:
446:
442:
439:
438:
437:
429:
426:
425:
424:
423:
419:
416:
415:
409:
406:
405:
404:
403:
399:
396:
395:
389:
385:
382:
379:
378:
377:
376:
372:
369:
368:
362:
359:
358:
357:
356:
352:
349:
348:
342:
339:
338:
337:
336:
332:
329:
328:
327:
325:
315:
311:
307:
303:
302:
301:
298:
292:
291:
290:
286:
282:
278:
277:
272:
271:
267:. Please see
266:
263:
262:
261:
260:
257:
253:
247:
242:
241:
234:
229:
226:
225:
224:
223:
220:
214:
210:
209:
204:
202:
200:
197:
193:
189:
187:
183:
179:
175:
174:
162:
159:
157:
154:
152:
149:
148:
147:
146:
142:
141:
136:
133:
132:
128:
127:
124:
116:
115:
114:
111:
107:
103:
99:
94:
90:
85:
81:
77:
73:
66:
60:
58:
55:
51:
44:
42:
37:
32:
27:
26:
19:
1215:
1212:
1196:
1179:
1156:
1152:
1133:
1124:
1118:
1111:
1097:
1060:
1056:
1042:
1032:
1026:
1025:
1009:
978:
964:certain Acts
959:
952:
948:
946:
939:
932:
930:
925:
910:
906:
900:
893:
889:
887:
879:
873:
861:
839:
835:
831:
830:
814:Auntieruth55
799:Auntieruth55
793:
789:
785:
763:
746:Auntieruth55
742:
740:
729:
724:
719:
714:
708:
702:
693:
687:
686:
668:
632:Star Trek II
631:
621:
609:
596:
584:
578:
562:
549:
544:
539:
530:
529:
519:
510:
491:
444:
435:
387:
324:Media review
323:
322:
274:
268:
264:
251:
250:
239:
232:
227:
206:
191:
190:
186:Brianboulton
177:
171:
169:
156:Citation bot
118:
69:
54:SandyGeorgia
49:
47:
35:
28:
612:Adventure".
556:Thank you.—
182:peer review
795:explanatio
732:Brainstorm
691:Auntieruth
496:SunCreator
445:Enterprise
388:Needs cite
192:References
1136:reviewer?
1062:Star Wars
1057:Star Trek
838:Star Trek
764:Star Trek
386:Caption:
306:Eubulides
281:Eubulides
1134:Newsweek
1126:Newsweek
1067:Tribbles
953:domestic
874:Comments
704:Grissom?
649:WP:FILMS
587:sources.
252:Comments
151:Analysis
50:promoted
1141:General
1059:copied
1027:Support
975:again.
951:the US
915:essence
688:SUPPORT
579:concise
531:Comment
511:Support
492:Comment
462:DCGeist
265:Comment
143:Toolbox
89:protect
84:history
919:WP:EGG
256:Ucucha
93:delete
1197:Steve
1157:Steve
1091:Music
1033:Steve
1029:from
1010:Steve
979:Steve
911:might
903:katra
880:Steve
862:Steve
844:Moni3
110:views
102:watch
98:links
16:<
1123:and
1050:Cast
1043:Trek
940:Khan
907:Trek
848:talk
818:talk
803:talk
797:n.
750:talk
669:talk
622:talk
597:talk
563:talk
520:talk
500:talk
466:talk
310:talk
285:talk
233:RB88
211:and
178:Trek
106:logs
80:talk
76:edit
664:RJH
617:RJH
592:RJH
558:RJH
515:RJH
213:CNN
52:by
949:at
850:)
820:)
805:)
792:-
752:)
672:)
566:)
523:)
502:)
468:)
312:)
287:)
279:.
108:|
104:|
100:|
96:|
91:|
87:|
82:|
78:|
59:.
33:.
1130:'
1110:"
1071:'
966:.
936:'
846:(
816:(
801:(
748:(
734:.
666:(
625:)
619:(
615:—
600:)
594:(
590:—
560:(
517:(
498:(
464:(
448:'
308:(
283:(
243:)
240:T
237:(
112:)
74:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.