-
Levitt, J.M.; Thelwall, M.; Oppenheim, C.: Variations between subjects in the extent to which the social sciences have become more interdisciplinary (2011)
0.00
3.5022903E-4 = product of:
0.008055268 = sum of:
0.008055268 = product of:
0.016110536 = sum of:
0.016110536 = weight(_text_:29 in 4465) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016110536 = score(doc=4465,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08290443 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.19432661 = fieldWeight in 4465, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4465)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
- Date
- 4. 7.2011 19:39:29
-
Thelwall, M.; Sud, P.; Vis, F.: Commenting on YouTube videos : From guatemalan rock to El Big Bang (2012)
0.00
3.5022903E-4 = product of:
0.008055268 = sum of:
0.008055268 = product of:
0.016110536 = sum of:
0.016110536 = weight(_text_:29 in 63) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016110536 = score(doc=63,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08290443 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.19432661 = fieldWeight in 63, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=63)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
- Abstract
- YouTube is one of the world's most popular websites and hosts numerous amateur and professional videos. Comments on these videos might be researched to give insights into audience reactions to important issues or particular videos. Yet, little is known about YouTube discussions in general: how frequent they are, who typically participates, and the role of sentiment. This article fills this gap through an analysis of large samples of text comments on YouTube videos. The results identify patterns and give some benchmarks against which future YouTube research into individual videos can be compared. For instance, the typical YouTube comment was mildly positive, was posted by a 29-year-old male, and contained 58 characters. About 23% of comments in the complete comment sets were replies to previous comments. There was no typical density of discussion on YouTube videos in the sense of the proportion of replies to other comments: videos with both few and many replies were common. The YouTube audience engaged with each other disproportionately when making negative comments, however; positive comments elicited few replies. The biggest trigger of discussion seemed to be religion, whereas the videos attracting the least discussion were predominantly from the Music, Comedy, and How to & Style categories. This suggests different audience uses for YouTube, from passive entertainment to active debating.
-
Kousha, K.; Thelwall, M.: Disseminating research with web CV hyperlinks (2014)
0.00
3.5022903E-4 = product of:
0.008055268 = sum of:
0.008055268 = product of:
0.016110536 = sum of:
0.016110536 = weight(_text_:29 in 1331) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016110536 = score(doc=1331,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08290443 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.19432661 = fieldWeight in 1331, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1331)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
- Abstract
- Some curricula vitae (web CVs) of academics on the web, including homepages and publication lists, link to open-access (OA) articles, resources, abstracts in publishers' websites, or academic discussions, helping to disseminate research. To assess how common such practices are and whether they vary by discipline, gender, and country, the authors conducted a large-scale e-mail survey of astronomy and astrophysics, public health, environmental engineering, and philosophy across 15 European countries and analyzed hyperlinks from web CVs of academics. About 60% of the 2,154 survey responses reported having a web CV or something similar, and there were differences between disciplines, genders, and countries. A follow-up outlink analysis of 2,700 web CVs found that a third had at least one outlink to an OA target, typically a public eprint archive or an individual self-archived file. This proportion was considerably higher in astronomy (48%) and philosophy (37%) than in environmental engineering (29%) and public health (21%). There were also differences in linking to publishers' websites, resources, and discussions. Perhaps most important, however, the amount of linking to OA publications seems to be much lower than allowed by publishers and journals, suggesting that many opportunities for disseminating full-text research online are being missed, especially in disciplines without established repositories. Moreover, few academics seem to be exploiting their CVs to link to discussions, resources, or article abstracts, which seems to be another missed opportunity for publicizing research.
-
Kousha, K.; Thelwall, M.: Are wikipedia citations important evidence of the impact of scholarly articles and books? (2017)
0.00
3.5022903E-4 = product of:
0.008055268 = sum of:
0.008055268 = product of:
0.016110536 = sum of:
0.016110536 = weight(_text_:29 in 3440) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016110536 = score(doc=3440,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08290443 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.19432661 = fieldWeight in 3440, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3440)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
- Date
- 16.11.2017 13:29:45
-
Kousha, K.; Thelwall, M.: How is science cited on the Web? : a classification of google unique Web citations (2007)
0.00
3.470785E-4 = product of:
0.007982805 = sum of:
0.007982805 = product of:
0.01596561 = sum of:
0.01596561 = weight(_text_:22 in 586) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01596561 = score(doc=586,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08253069 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 586, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=586)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
- Abstract
- Although the analysis of citations in the scholarly literature is now an established and relatively well understood part of information science, not enough is known about citations that can be found on the Web. In particular, are there new Web types, and if so, are these trivial or potentially useful for studying or evaluating research communication? We sought evidence based upon a sample of 1,577 Web citations of the URLs or titles of research articles in 64 open-access journals from biology, physics, chemistry, and computing. Only 25% represented intellectual impact, from references of Web documents (23%) and other informal scholarly sources (2%). Many of the Web/URL citations were created for general or subject-specific navigation (45%) or for self-publicity (22%). Additional analyses revealed significant disciplinary differences in the types of Google unique Web/URL citations as well as some characteristics of scientific open-access publishing on the Web. We conclude that the Web provides access to a new and different type of citation information, one that may therefore enable us to measure different aspects of research, and the research process in particular; but to obtain good information, the different types should be separated.
-
Thelwall, M.; Sud, P.; Wilkinson, D.: Link and co-inlink network diagrams with URL citations or title mentions (2012)
0.00
3.470785E-4 = product of:
0.007982805 = sum of:
0.007982805 = product of:
0.01596561 = sum of:
0.01596561 = weight(_text_:22 in 57) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01596561 = score(doc=57,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08253069 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 57, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=57)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
- Date
- 6. 4.2012 18:16:22
-
Li, X.; Thelwall, M.; Kousha, K.: ¬The role of arXiv, RePEc, SSRN and PMC in formal scholarly communication (2015)
0.00
3.470785E-4 = product of:
0.007982805 = sum of:
0.007982805 = product of:
0.01596561 = sum of:
0.01596561 = weight(_text_:22 in 2593) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01596561 = score(doc=2593,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08253069 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2593, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2593)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
- Date
- 20. 1.2015 18:30:22
-
Thelwall, M.: Are Mendeley reader counts high enough for research evaluations when articles are published? (2017)
0.00
3.470785E-4 = product of:
0.007982805 = sum of:
0.007982805 = product of:
0.01596561 = sum of:
0.01596561 = weight(_text_:22 in 3806) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01596561 = score(doc=3806,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08253069 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 3806, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3806)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
- Date
- 20. 1.2015 18:30:22
-
Thelwall, M.; Kousha, K.; Abdoli, M.; Stuart, E.; Makita, M.; Wilson, P.; Levitt, J.: Why are coauthored academic articles more cited : higher quality or larger audience? (2023)
0.00
3.470785E-4 = product of:
0.007982805 = sum of:
0.007982805 = product of:
0.01596561 = sum of:
0.01596561 = weight(_text_:22 in 995) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01596561 = score(doc=995,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08253069 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 995, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=995)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
- Date
- 22. 6.2023 18:11:50
-
Barjak, F.; Thelwall, M.: ¬A statistical analysis of the web presences of European life sciences research teams (2008)
0.00
3.149623E-4 = product of:
0.0072441325 = sum of:
0.0072441325 = product of:
0.014488265 = sum of:
0.014488265 = weight(_text_:international in 1383) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014488265 = score(doc=1383,freq=2.0), product of:
0.078619614 = queryWeight, product of:
3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.18428308 = fieldWeight in 1383, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1383)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
- Abstract
- Web links have been used for around ten years to explore the online impact of academic information and information producers. Nevertheless, few studies have attempted to relate link counts to relevant offline attributes of the owners of the targeted Web sites, with the exception of research productivity. This article reports the results of a study to relate site inlink counts to relevant owner characteristics for over 400 European life-science research group Web sites. The analysis confirmed that research-group size and Web-presence size were important for attracting Web links, although research productivity was not. Little evidence was found for significant influence of any of an array of factors, including research-group leader gender and industry connections. In addition, the choice of search engine for link data created a surprising international difference in the results, with Google perhaps giving unreliable results. Overall, the data collection, statistical analysis and results interpretation were all complex and it seems that we still need to know more about search engines, hyperlinks, and their function in science before we can draw conclusions on their usefulness and role in the canon of science and technology indicators.
-
Thelwall, M.: Quantitative comparisons of search engine results (2008)
0.00
3.149623E-4 = product of:
0.0072441325 = sum of:
0.0072441325 = product of:
0.014488265 = sum of:
0.014488265 = weight(_text_:international in 2350) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014488265 = score(doc=2350,freq=2.0), product of:
0.078619614 = queryWeight, product of:
3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.18428308 = fieldWeight in 2350, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2350)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
- Abstract
- Search engines are normally used to find information or Web sites, but Webometric investigations use them for quantitative data such as the number of pages matching a query and the international spread of those pages. For this type of application, the accuracy of the hit count estimates and range of URLs in the full results are important. Here, we compare the applications programming interfaces of Google, Yahoo!, and Live Search for 1,587 single word searches. The hit count estimates were broadly consistent but with Yahoo! and Google, reporting 5-6 times more hits than Live Search. Yahoo! tended to return slightly more matching URLs than Google, with Live Search returning significantly fewer. Yahoo!'s result URLs included a significantly wider range of domains and sites than the other two, and there was little consistency between the three engines in the number of different domains. In contrast, the three engines were reasonably consistent in the number of different top-level domains represented in the result URLs, although Yahoo! tended to return the most. In conclusion, quantitative results from the three search engines are mostly consistent but with unexpected types of inconsistency that users should be aware of. Google is recommended for hit count estimates but Yahoo! is recommended for all other Webometric purposes.
-
Kousha, K.; Thelwall, M.; Rezaie, S.: Assessing the citation impact of books : the role of Google Books, Google Scholar, and Scopus (2011)
0.00
3.149623E-4 = product of:
0.0072441325 = sum of:
0.0072441325 = product of:
0.014488265 = sum of:
0.014488265 = weight(_text_:international in 4920) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014488265 = score(doc=4920,freq=2.0), product of:
0.078619614 = queryWeight, product of:
3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.18428308 = fieldWeight in 4920, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4920)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
- Abstract
- Citation indictors are increasingly used in some subject areas to support peer review in the evaluation of researchers and departments. Nevertheless, traditional journal-based citation indexes may be inadequate for the citation impact assessment of book-based disciplines. This article examines whether online citations from Google Books and Google Scholar can provide alternative sources of citation evidence. To investigate this, we compared the citation counts to 1,000 books submitted to the 2008 U.K. Research Assessment Exercise (RAE) from Google Books and Google Scholar with Scopus citations across seven book-based disciplines (archaeology; law; politics and international studies; philosophy; sociology; history; and communication, cultural, and media studies). Google Books and Google Scholar citations to books were 1.4 and 3.2 times more common than were Scopus citations, and their medians were more than twice and three times as high as were Scopus median citations, respectively. This large number of citations is evidence that in book-oriented disciplines in the social sciences, arts, and humanities, online book citations may be sufficiently numerous to support peer review for research evaluation, at least in the United Kingdom.
-
Thelwall, M.; Maflahi, N.: Academic collaboration rates and citation associations vary substantially between countries and fields (2020)
0.00
3.149623E-4 = product of:
0.0072441325 = sum of:
0.0072441325 = product of:
0.014488265 = sum of:
0.014488265 = weight(_text_:international in 5952) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014488265 = score(doc=5952,freq=2.0), product of:
0.078619614 = queryWeight, product of:
3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.18428308 = fieldWeight in 5952, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5952)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
- Abstract
- Research collaboration is promoted by governments and research funders, but if the relative prevalence and merits of collaboration vary internationally then different national and disciplinary strategies may be needed to promote it. This study compares the team size and field normalized citation impact of research across all 27 Scopus broad fields in the 10 countries with the most journal articles indexed in Scopus 2008-2012. The results show that team size varies substantially by discipline and country, with Japan (4.2) having two-thirds more authors per article than the United Kingdom (2.5). Solo authorship is rare in China (4%) but common in the United Kingdom (27%). While increasing team size associates with higher citation impact in almost all countries and fields, this association is much weaker in China than elsewhere. There are also field differences in the association between citation impact and collaboration. For example, larger team sizes in the Business, Management & Accounting category do not seem to associate with greater research impact, and for China and India, solo authorship associates with higher citation impact in this field. Overall, there are substantial international and field differences in the extent to which researchers collaborate and the extent to which collaboration associates with higher citation impact.
-
Thelwall, M.: ¬A comparison of sources of links for academic Web impact factor calculations (2002)
0.00
2.0495258E-4 = product of:
0.0047139092 = sum of:
0.0047139092 = product of:
0.0094278185 = sum of:
0.0094278185 = weight(_text_:1 in 4474) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0094278185 = score(doc=4474,freq=2.0), product of:
0.057894554 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.16284466 = fieldWeight in 4474, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4474)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
- Source
- Journal of documentation. 58(2002) no.1, S.66-78
-
Thelwall, M.: Interpreting social science link analysis research : a theoretical framework (2006)
0.00
2.0495258E-4 = product of:
0.0047139092 = sum of:
0.0047139092 = product of:
0.0094278185 = sum of:
0.0094278185 = weight(_text_:1 in 4908) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0094278185 = score(doc=4908,freq=2.0), product of:
0.057894554 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.16284466 = fieldWeight in 4908, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4908)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 57(2006) no.1, S.60-68
-
Thelwall, M.; Vaughan, L.: New versions of PageRank employing alternative Web document models (2004)
0.00
2.0495258E-4 = product of:
0.0047139092 = sum of:
0.0047139092 = product of:
0.0094278185 = sum of:
0.0094278185 = weight(_text_:1 in 674) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0094278185 = score(doc=674,freq=2.0), product of:
0.057894554 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.16284466 = fieldWeight in 674, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=674)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
- Source
- Aslib proceedings. 56(2004) no.1, S.24-33
-
Thelwall, M.: Extracting accurate and complete results from search engines : case study windows live (2008)
0.00
2.0495258E-4 = product of:
0.0047139092 = sum of:
0.0047139092 = product of:
0.0094278185 = sum of:
0.0094278185 = weight(_text_:1 in 1338) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0094278185 = score(doc=1338,freq=2.0), product of:
0.057894554 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.16284466 = fieldWeight in 1338, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1338)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 59(2008) no.1, S.38-50
-
Angus, E.; Thelwall, M.; Stuart, D.: General patterns of tag usage among university groups in Flickr (2008)
0.00
2.0495258E-4 = product of:
0.0047139092 = sum of:
0.0047139092 = product of:
0.0094278185 = sum of:
0.0094278185 = weight(_text_:1 in 2554) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0094278185 = score(doc=2554,freq=2.0), product of:
0.057894554 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.16284466 = fieldWeight in 2554, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2554)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
- Source
- Online information review. 32(2008) no.1, S.89-101
-
Thelwall, M.; Wilkinson, D.; Uppal, S.: Data mining emotion in social network communication : gender differences in MySpace (2009)
0.00
2.0495258E-4 = product of:
0.0047139092 = sum of:
0.0047139092 = product of:
0.0094278185 = sum of:
0.0094278185 = weight(_text_:1 in 3322) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0094278185 = score(doc=3322,freq=2.0), product of:
0.057894554 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.16284466 = fieldWeight in 3322, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3322)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 61(2010) no.1, S.190-199
-
Shema, H.; Bar-Ilan, J.; Thelwall, M.: Do blog citations correlate with a higher number of future citations? : Research blogs as a potential source for alternative metrics (2014)
0.00
2.0495258E-4 = product of:
0.0047139092 = sum of:
0.0047139092 = product of:
0.0094278185 = sum of:
0.0094278185 = weight(_text_:1 in 1258) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0094278185 = score(doc=1258,freq=2.0), product of:
0.057894554 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.16284466 = fieldWeight in 1258, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1258)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
- Date
- 1. 5.2014 18:06:01
