‰ك‹ژƒچƒO

پ@پ@پ@پ@پ@پ@پ@پ@پ@پ@پ@پ@پ@پ@پ@پ@پ@پ@پ@پ@پ@پ@پ@پ@پ@پ@پ@پ@پ@پ@پ@پ@‚o‚پ‚‡‚…   23538
„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ
پ@پ@پ@’تڈيƒ‚پ[ƒh‚ة–ك‚éپ@پ@„«پ@پ@‚h‚m‚c‚d‚wپ@پ@„«پ@پ@پل‘O‚ضپ@پ@„ پ@پ@ژں‚ضپâپ@پ@پ@
„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ
پ@پ¥The Analyse and the  Kildeldepsy 12/5/13(“ْ) 5:22

پ@„ں„ں„ں„ں„ں„ں„ں„ں„ں„ں„ں„ں„ں„ں„ں„ں„ں„ں„ں„ں„ں„ں„ں„ں„ں„ں„ں„ں„ں„ں„ں„ں„ں„ں„ں„ں„ں„ں„ں
پ@پ،‘è–¼ پF The Analyse and the
پ@پ،–¼‘O پF Kildeldepsy <vlovevloveers@gmail.com>
پ@پ،“ْ•t پF 12/5/13(“ْ) 5:22
پ@پ،‚v‚…‚‚ پF http://elgg-demo.rhad.us/blog/view/2259/should-you-be-aching
پ@-------------------------------------------------------------------------
    http://alam.ws/E/blog/view/203/should-you-be-apprehensive

 

According to Composition’s representation of its studio, 42 pairs of articles on painstaking subjects, from the 

Britannica and Wikipedia one by one, were reviewed close to course of action of way of beside the point experts, on the whole erudite scientists, 

who were offered anonymity. (Most of them chose to strengthen behind anonymous.) According to a docu- 

ment posted on Scenery’s Entanglement milieu, reviewers “were asked to look in return three types of inaccuracy: factu- 

al errors, critical omissions and misleading statements. . . . The reviews were then examined nearby means of 

Primitiveness’s alacrity unite and the amount number tot up of errors estimated against each article.”5 

biuro rachunkowe

„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ
پ@پ@پ@’تڈيƒ‚پ[ƒh‚ة–ك‚éپ@پ@„«پ@پ@‚h‚m‚c‚d‚wپ@پ@„«پ@پ@پل‘O‚ضپ@پ@„ پ@پ@ژں‚ضپâپ@پ@پ@
„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ„ھ
پ@پ@پ@پ@پ@پ@پ@پ@پ@پ@پ@پ@پ@پ@پ@پ@پ@پ@پ@پ@پ@پ@پ@پ@پ@پ@پ@پ@پ@پ@پ@پ@‚o‚پ‚‡‚…   23538