Document stringlengths 87 1.67M | Source stringclasses 5 values |
|---|---|
What Are The Benefits of TMJ Exercises?
What Are The Benefits of TMJ Exercises?
The jaw is that part of the body that is attached to a bone in one’s head. This bone is known as the temporal bone and the attached joint is known as the temporomandibular joint. With this said, it is now clear why discomforts and pains associated to this joint is called the TMJ syndrome.
Research has shown that the slightest shift in the balance of the temporal bone, then there is problem. When the pulling of the muscles of the jaw is not even, then there is every possibility that the jaw could give way. When this happens, one may experience several discomforts which include but not limited to jaw lock, jaw clicking, incessant headaches, swollen jaws, aching ears and inflammations. Naturally, one would seek solution or remedy to this type of suffering. This is where the exercises for TMJ come in. The TMJ exercises are aimed at helping one alleviate the pains and distress one is going through. It soothes and relaxes the muscles and the more this happens, the more a sufferer gets relief from the pains.
One of the exercises for TMJ that one can conveniently engage in is first, taking a standing or erect sitting position, then, gradually one opens his or her mouth until the mouth is wide open, as wide as possible. Then gradually, he or she begins to close the mouth till the mouth is properly closed. The next step is the sideways opening of one’s mouth. First, the right side of the mouth is gradually opened until it is stretched to its limit. Then, gradually that side of the mouth is closed. The left side of the mouth is made to go through the same exercise. This exercise is advised to be carried out three times daily until one gets relieved from the pains.
Comments are closed. | ESSENTIALAI-STEM |
Page:The poetical works of Matthew Arnold, 1897.djvu/63
Rh To paint ill as I have done,
Proves forgetfulness begun?
Time's gay minions, pleased you see,
Time, your master, governs me;
Pleased, you mock the fruitless cry,—
"Quick, thy tablets. Memory!"
Ah, too true! Time's current strong
Leaves us true to nothing long.
Yet, if little stays with man,
Ah, retain we all we can!
If the clear impression dies,
Ah, the dim remembrance prize!
Ere the parting hour go by,
Quick, thy tablets, Memory!
THE NEW SIRENS.
In the cedar-shadow sleeping,
Where cool grass and fragrant glooms
Late at eve had lured me, creeping
From your darkened palace rooms,—
I, who in your train at morning
Strolled and sang with joyful mind,
Heard, in slumber, sounds of warning;
Saw the hoarse boughs labor in the wind.
Who are they, O pensive Graces,
(For I dreamed they wore your forms)
Who on shores and sea-washed places
Scoop the shelves and fret the storms? | WIKI |
Munthir Khalaf
Munthir Khalaf (1 July 1970 – 14 March 2008) was an Iraqi football midfielder who played for Iraq at the 1994 World Cup qualification. He played for the national team between 1992 and 1993.
Khalaf was assassinated in front of his home at the Yarmouk area in Baghdad on 14 March 2008.
International goals
Scores and results list Iraq's goal tally first. | WIKI |
FRC
FRC may refer to:
Organizations
* Fatah - Revolutionary Council, a defunct terrorist organization
* Federacion de Radioaficionados de Cuba, a Cuban amateur radio organization
* First Responders Children's Foundation, an American non-profit organization; see Disney Princess
* Financial Reporting Council, an independent regulator in the UK and Ireland
* Finnish Red Cross
Finance
* First Republic Bank, an American bank
* First Round Capital, an American venture capital firm
* First Reserve Corporation, an American private equity firm
Education
* Feather River College, in California, US
* Fort Richmond Collegiate, a high school in Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
Government
* Family Records Centre, a defunct British genealogical library
* Federal Radio Commission, a defunct regulatory agency of the US federal government
* Federal Republic of China, a proposed federal republic encompassing mainland China, Macau, and Hong Kong
* Federal Record Centers, one of the National Archives facilities
Religion
* Family Research Council, an American conservative Christian organization
* Family Rosary Crusade, a Roman Catholic prayer movement
* Family Rosary Crusade (TV program), a Philippine television program
* Fraternitas Rosae Crucis, an American Rosicrucian organization
* Free Reformed Churches (disambiguation)
Science and technology
* Fiber-reinforced composite
* Fiber-reinforced concrete
* Field-reversed configuration, a type of plasma device studied as a means of producing nuclear fusion
* Flame-resistant clothing
* Frame rate control, in displays
* Fibroblastic reticular cells, a type of reticular cell
* Fourier ring correlation, in structural biology
* Functional residual capacity, the volume of air present in the lungs at the end of passive expiration
Music
* "F.R.C." (song), a 1991 single by Australian rock band The Screaming Jets
* Futuristic Retro Champions, a Scottish band
Transportation
* Franca Airport (IATA code), in Brazil
* Fast Response Car, of the Singapore Police Force
* Fast Response Cutter, of the United States Coast Guard
* Functional road class, in road functional classification
Other uses
* FIRST Robotics Competition, an annual international robotics competition for students aged 14-18
* Cajun French (ISO 639-3 language code)
* Fischer Random Chess, a chess variant
* Folk Research Centre, in Saint Lucia
* Frater Rosae Crucis, a title in the Rosicrucian Order
* French Republican calendar | WIKI |
What role does fate play in Beowulf?
This question can be difficult to answer, as Beowulf is an epic poem with many different interpretations. However, one thing that is clear is that Beowulf believes that fate plays a role in his life.
Throughout the poem, Beowulf often refers to himself as “the luckiest of men” (lines 3182-3183). This could be interpreted as him feeling that he is blessed by fate. He also talks about how he has been able to overcome seemingly impossible odds throughout his life, which could be seen as a result of fate being on his side.
In the end, Beowulf dies fighting the dragon. Some might see this as his fate finally catching up with him. Others might see it as a sign that even the mightiest of heroes are mortal and their end is ultimately determined by fate.
Fate appears to be a recurrent theme in the novels of Boethius and Beowulf. Whether it’s Christian providence or pagan fatalism, the writers of these works are deeply concerned about fate and how it affects people’s lives. The notion of fate is most frequently applied to the sequence of events in a person’s life that leads them to an unavoidable death at some point.
In Beowulf, fate is shown to be a powerful force that can shape a person’s life, for better or for worse. It is also worth noting that Beowulf himself is no stranger to the concept of fate. As a young man, Beowulf was prophesied to become a great king and defeat the dragon that terrorized his kingdom.
Beowulf’s faith in himself and his destiny helped him overcome great challenges and achieve great things. However, Beowulf’s belief in fate does not always work out in his favor. In the end, Beowulf meets his demise because of a rash decision he makes in an effort to achieve glory. This just goes to show that even the strongest of men are not immune to the power of fate.
While Beowulf’s story may be a tragedy, it also serves as a reminder that fate is something that we all must face in our lives. No matter how strong or brave we may be, death is an inevitability that we cannot escape. What we can do, however, is try to live our lives in such a way that we can be proud of the legacy we leave behind. Beowulf is an excellent example of this. Even though he met a tragic end, Beowulf’s life was one full of adventure, courage, and honor. His story reminds us that it is not the length of our lives that matters, but rather how we choose to live them.
So whatever your beliefs may be, remember that fate is a powerful force that can shape our lives in ways we never could have imagined. And while we may not be able to control our destiny, we can control how we react to the hand that fate deals us.
Beowulf is a prime example of this. He could have chosen to live a life of ease and comfort, but instead he chose to face his challenges head-on and fight for what he believed in. His courage and determination are an inspiration to us all, and his story is a reminder that even in the face of death, we can achieve great things if we never give up.
Throughout the poem Beowulf, the characters are haunted by fate and know its great impact in everything they do. The presence of fate seems to lurk in the darkness of these individuals’ souls, and it is this power that they acknowledge their own mortality as human beings. Boethius wrote The Consolation of Philosophy, which may help us interpret the significance of fate in the epic poem Beowulf. Boethius creates a female character called Fate who tries to heal a sick man’s mind.
This may be helpful in understanding the role of fate in Beowulf because it personifies fate as an entity that has power over humans. Beowulf is a hero who fights against monsters and defeats them, but he is not invincible. At the end of the poem, Beowulf dies after being mortally wounded by a dragon.
His death is foreshadowed earlier in the poem when Beowulf tells his men that he will fight the dragon alone and that none of them should follow him. Beowulf’s death is a result of his hubris and his belief that he is stronger than anyone else. He fails to see his own mortality and this ultimately leads to his downfall.
While Beowulf’s death may be seen as a result of his own actions, it is also important to acknowledge the role that fate played in his demise. Beowulf was destined to die at the hands of the dragon and there was nothing that he could do to change this. Fate is often seen as something that is out of our control and it can be interpreted in different ways.
Some people may believe that fate is predetermined and that our actions cannot change what is already written for us. Others may believe that we have control over our own destiny and that fate is something that we create for ourselves. Regardless of how you interpret fate, it is clear that it played a role in Beowulf’s death.
The poem Beowulf highlights the importance of acknowledging Fate and its role in our lives. Beowulf’s death is a reminder that we are all mortal and that our time on this earth is limited. We may not be able to control everything that happens to us, but we can control how we react to it. Acknowledging Fate can help us to accept the things that happen to us, even if they are out of our control. It can also help us to live our lives in a way that is authentic and true to ourselves. Understanding the role of Fate in Beowulf can help us to better understand ourselves and the world around us.
Although Beowulf is a work of fiction, it is also an epic poem. As a result, its narrative reflected the culture and history of its characters, the Anglo-Saxons. Epic poems were stories about heroes and legends written during or near to the time period in which their characters lived. They were intended to convey both cultural and historical information to future generations throughout the world. As a result, Beowulf is an accurate depiction of Anglo-Saxon culture and religion during the sixth century, when it was written.
One of the most important aspects of Anglo-Saxon culture that Beowulf accurately portrays is the role of fate. In Beowulf, fate is an unseen force that governs the lives of everyone in the story. It is fate that determines when a person will be born, when they will die, and everything in between. Even Beowulf himself is not immune to the power of fate. Although he is one of the strongest and bravest heroes ever to live, his death is ultimately predetermined by fate.
The belief in fate was common among the Anglo-Saxons. They believed that everything that happened in their lives was controlled by fate. This included both good and bad events. They believed that there was nothing they could do to change their fate. This fatalistic outlook on life is reflected in Beowulf.
The role of fate in Beowulf has two sides. On one hand, it is the force that drives Beowulf to perform great deeds. It is what motivates him to fight dragons and monsters. Beowulf believes that it is his destiny to perform these great acts. On the other hand, fate is also responsible for Beowulf’s death. No matter how strong or brave he is, his death is inevitable. | FINEWEB-EDU |
User:Shinchanheena/sandbox
What is friction? To stop a moving object, a force must act in the opposite direction to the direction of motion.For instance, if you push your book across your desk,the book will move.The force of the push moves the book. As the book slides across the desk,it slows down and stop moving. The force that opposes the motion of an object is called friction. | WIKI |
iQOS meeting big moment for Philip Morris International and Altria
Philip Morris International started making its case on Wednesday for its heat-not-burn tobacco product to be marketed as less risky than cigarettes. The tobacco company presented its evidence and answered questions from an independent advisory committee. The panel will make a recommendation on whether the Food and Drug Administration should approve PMI's application to advertise its iQOS system as less risky than smoking conventional cigarettes. The FDA is not required to follow the suggestion. Committee members wanted to know how the product would affect kids and teens, even though iQOS is meant for adult smokers. Altria, which would receive sole distribution rights in the U.S., said it recognizes the balance it will need to find. "The challenge is maximizing the reach and support so (adult smokers) can switch completely," said Sarah Knakmuhs, vice president of heated tobacco for Altria's Philip Morris USA. "On the other hand, we want to limit reach to unintended audiences, such as non-smokers and youth." Online, the company plans to use a third party to verify shoppers' age. One idea it has for commercialization is opening iQOS stores, where it would identify whether customers are old enough to shop and are smokers. If PMI's modified-risk tobacco product application is approved, iQOS would be the first heat-not-burn product allowed to advertise itself as being less risky than smoking conventional cigarettes. PMI, which sells Marlboro outside the U.S., thinks iQOS will appeal to adult smokers who want to quit but want an alternative that's closer to the real thing than e-cigarettes. The pen-like device holds "HeatSticks" that are made with tobacco and would carry the Marlboro brand name. Altria sells Marlboro in the U.S. The company has already launched iQOS in more than 30 markets, including Japan, where it has become wildly popular. Analysts see an enormous opportunity for iQOS in the U.S. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates 36.5 million adults currently smoke cigarettes. Among all U.S. adult smokers, nearly 70 percent say they want to quit, according to the CDC. Under FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb, the FDA has adopted the idea that nicotine products exist on a continuum of risk, with smoke particles in combustible cigarettes being the most harmful. PMI will try to convince the committee that iQOS falls on the other side of the spectrum while noting the product is not risk-free. The Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids urged the FDA on Monday to address how youths will perceive the risk of iQOS and the potential for youths to start using tobacco with it. The group was responding to the FDA's review of iQOS published Monday ahead of the hearing. The FDA's review of iQOS identified lower levels of toxic chemicals than in cigarettes. It could not say that using the device led to a decreased risk of illnesses associated with smoking because doing so would require a longer study. Even if the advisory committee suggests the FDA approve PMI's modified risk tobacco product application, the FDA is not guaranteed to follow the recommendation. The timing of the agency's ultimate decision is unclear. Some have suggested May, which would mark one year since the FDA said it would review the application. PMI has another application under FDA review that would simply allow iQOS to be sold in the U.S., without the lower-risk claims. The Tobacco Control Act calls for the FDA to respond to premarket tobacco applications within 180 days. It began reviewing PMI's in August, so a decision could come in February. | NEWS-MULTISOURCE |
Aprea doses HPV+ HNSCC subject in cohort 5 of APR-1051 trial
Aprea Therapeutics has dosed a subject with human papillomavirus (HPV)-positive head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) in Cohort 5 of the Phase I ACESOT-1051 trial evaluating APR-1051.
In this cohort, 70mg of the therapy one-time-a-day is given.
The trial, which is assessing monotherapy APR-1051 in individuals with advanced solid tumours, has enrolled the latest subject at MD Anderson Cancer Center, US.
This centre is the lead site, and the trial will be conducted at three to ten sites in the country.
A material transfer agreement (MTA) between the company and MD Anderson supports preclinical research into the therapy’s potential for treating both HPV+ and HPV—HNSCC expressing replication stress genomic markers.
The trial is structured to evaluate the pharmacokinetics, safety, preliminary efficacy, and pharmacodynamics of the therapy in advanced solid tumours harbouring cancer-associated gene alterations.
Oral administration of the therapy occurs one time a day in 28-day cycles, with Part 1 focusing on dose escalation, anticipating up to 39 subject enrolments.
The Bayesian Optimal Interval (BOIN) design is employed for dose levels of 50mg and above, following accelerated titration for the initial doses of 10mg, 20mg, and 30mg.
Part 2 will focus on dose optimisation and determine the recommended Phase II dose (RP2D).
The trial’s primary objectives are to measure RP2D, dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs), maximum tolerated dose or maximum administered dose (MTD/MAD), and safety.
Secondary objectives involve assessing pharmacokinetics and preliminary efficacy, while pharmacodynamics is an exploratory objective.
Aprea noted that the trial’s open-label data is anticipated in the latter half of this year.
Aprea Therapeutics WEE1 Clinical Development lead and senior medical advisor Philippe Pultar said: “We are pleased with the progress of the trial and encouraged by the safety profile of APR-1051 to date.
“We look forward to continuing the study as we work toward identifying the optimal dose for future studies.”
In January 2023, the company dosed the first subject in a Phase I/IIa study of ATRN-119.
"Aprea doses HPV+ HNSCC subject in cohort 5 of APR-1051 trial" was originally created and published by Clinical Trials Arena, a GlobalData owned brand.
The information on this site has been included in good faith for general informational purposes only. It is not intended to amount to advice on which you should rely, and we give no representation, warranty or guarantee, whether express or implied as to its accuracy or completeness. You must obtain professional or specialist advice before taking, or refraining from, any action on the basis of the content on our site. | NEWS-MULTISOURCE |
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hazard (2005 film)
The result was keep. Reviews of the subject fulfill WP:GNG, and as several ediors noted, such sources were in the article at the time of nomination. (non-admin closure) I, Jethrobot drop me a line (note: not a bot!) 20:45, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
Hazard (2005 film)
* – ( View AfD View log • Stats )
The article appears to have been added as promotional material for a low-budget, non-notable film. A request for citations to prove notability has gone unanswered since 2008. JoshuSasori (talk) 23:03, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
* Keep No seems to have RS and GNG with coverage in Asia Pacific Arts and the Japan Times. Lugnuts (talk) 06:42, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
* Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. 19:16, 16 August 2012 (UTC) • Gene93k (talk) 19:16, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
* Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. 19:17, 16 August 2012 (UTC) • Gene93k (talk) 19:17, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
* Definite Keep... In considering WP:NOEFFORT and WP:UGLY, the nominator's complaint that the article sat unsourced is a pretty weak deletion rationale when even a little WP:BEFORE shows sources toward the topic are available... and more, sources need NOT have been in the article for topic notability to exist. Heck... per WP:HANDLE and WP:ATD, he might even have improved it himself. Of course, now that this AFD has forced cleanup we can close this and move on. Kudos to User:Tokyogirl79 for showing the spirit that builds an encyclopdia. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 05:29, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
* The above is a personal attack. JoshuSasori (talk) 06:29, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
* If you feel my pointing to WP:ATA or relevant policy is a personal attack, then by all means take this to WP:ANI. Cheers. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 23:20, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
* No, I don't think your pointing to policies, or the use of the letter Q in your user name, or the fact that it's Saturday today, are personal attacks. However, I do in fact think that your snide remarks are a personal attack. I hope I have clarified this for you. If you have any more queries about what I might or might not think are personal attacks, then please feel free to ask. JoshuSasori (talk) 00:00, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
* My point was that what was first nominated "had" minor issues that have proven easily addressable through regular editing. Topic notability was met through available sources even before being brought to AFD and article is now improved. Can it be further improved? Sure. Does it require deletion because of addressable issues with style, format, or sourcing? Nope. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 05:50, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
* Keep. After a quick search, I was able to find several reviews, especially this one. Clearly notable. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 02:16, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
| WIKI |
The Keto Diet – Beauty Style Health
The Keto Diet – Beauty Style Health
The ketogenic eating plan is extra fat reduction and a lot a lot more complications at the same time. As you remain in this way of consuming, you can shed lbs fast. You stabilize your blood sugar and insulin ranges. Simply because the foods you take in can help stabilize your hormones, you really don’t war with hunger, cravings, and other difficulties that preserve your fat and ordinary wellness hostage.
How the keto food plan will help in lessening body fat: At the exact same time as you consume a good deal much significantly less than 50 grams of carbs an afternoon, your frame finally runs out of gasoline it could use briefly. This ordinarily normally takes 3 to 4 times. Then you will commence to interrupt down protein and extra fat for electrical power, which would make you, drop lbs. This is known as ketosis. It’s crucial to look that the ketogenic bodyweight decline system is a quick-time period fat-reduction strategy it is focused on excess weight loss in the drive to go after health and fitness blessings.
Keto balanced having approach meal plan:
1. Protect your fat intake excessively. To get and dwell in ketosis, you are going to eat a fat reduction method which is about 80% to 90% fats. In distinctive phrases, most of your fat reduction program will contain nutritional fats.
2. Checking protein intake. More protein can transform into glucose, which inhibits ketosis. You will limit the amount of protein you take in on a keto body weight reduction strategy.
3. Keeping carbs reduced. To maintain ketosis, you want to maintain your carb consumption to all-around 20 grams to 50 grams each and every working day. To set that into viewpoint: An apple has approximately 25 grams of carbohydrates.
4. Look at out whether or not or not you are in ketosis. You really do not will have to do that, but you can diploma the amount of ketones your frame generates in blood, urine, or breath assessments.
Easy keto diet regime plan: Keto elements are generally lower in carbs and abnormal in fat. Here’s an inventory of elements you can try to eat at some phase in a keto foodstuff strategy:
02221009 1 Seafood
Seafood in the keto food plan
Seafood: Though wealthy in B vitamins, selenium, potassium, salmon, and varied types of fish are certainly carbohydrate cost-free. This makes it very keto welcoming. The carbohydrate information materials differs with the support of seafood. You are going to typically decide on small-carb varieties to encompass your keto bodyweight loss program.
02221009 2 Cheese
Cheese in the keto diet regime
Cheese: Cheese is nutritious and delicious, and cheese is normally lower in carbs and excessive in excess fat. Consequently, they’re excellent for ketogenic excess weight reduction applications. In spite of the pretty simple fact that cheese is higher in saturated extra fat, it is now not been revealed to maximize the risk of cardiovascular dysfunction. Fairly, some reports declare that this foodstuff can also lessen this menace.
02221009 3 Low carbohydrates vegetables
Minimal carbohydrate veggies in the keto diet plan
Lower carbohydrate vegetables: Non-starchy veggies like broccoli, cauliflower, mushrooms, and lettuce are small on electrical energy and carbohydrates, but too much in plenty of natural vitamins, inclusive of vitamins and minerals. Not like carbs, veggies contain fibers that the body are not able to digest. The anti-oxidants in this vegetable assistance protect bones from unfastened radicals, or unstable molecules designed to wipe out cells.
02221009 4 Eggs
Eggs in the keto diet plan
Eggs: A steady egg incorporates an extended way a great deal less than 1 gram of carbohydrates and some length much less than 6 grams of protein. This helps make it an fantastic food for a ketogenic food items plan. Eggs additionally enhance the human get pleasure from at the identical time as retaining blood sugar ranges sturdy.
02221009 5 Meat
Meat in the keto food plan
Meat: Meat and hen are a staple of a ketogenic meals prepare many thanks to the fact they comprise no carbohydrates and are wealthy in B vitamins and a great deal of minerals. It is also the initially-class supply of better protein to help protect muscle mass with out the carbs. Herbivores’ decision of meat is sweet due to the truth they devour additional omega-three fatty acids and anti-oxidants much more than the grain-eaters.
Positive aspects of the keto diet program: These low-carb diets do have their blessings, though. Right here are the next benefits of the keto eating plan.
Lessened hunger: One of the most critical sides and the effects of adhering to a foodstuff strategy is hunger cravings. Though this might consequence in many people, giving up on their meal plans, a keto fat decline prepare outcomes in the reduction of one’s urge for food items. Investigation has shown that this transpires since of the lowering down of carbs, and for that reason the expanded protein and excess fat consumption. This quicker or later on prospects to a lower calorie intake.
Body weight reduction: A strong way to cut down could be to in actuality minimize your carb intake. Analysis has demonstrated that minimal-carb meal plans function far better than low-unwanted fat weight loss plans on the topic of weight loss. This is frequently despite the low-body fat diet programs actively restricting electrical power. Reduced-carb eating plans support postpone further water from the body. This lowers insulin levels, ensuing in speedy bodyweight decline in just the initially couple of months.
Enhanced coronary coronary heart exercise: A keto diet regime program can influence be very inexperienced in improving one’s coronary coronary heart health. Consuming extra fat facilitates bettering HDL or ideal LDL cholesterol, levels inside the system. Lower-carb eating plans, a bit like the keto bodyweight-reduction prepare, have several fats.
Also can enhance mind perform: While more experiments are needed to verify this, some scientific studies do advocate that ketogenic eating plans do provide neuroprotective gains. One precise review has also indicated that kids next a keto body weight loss strategy show enhanced cognitive questioning and application.
Lessened blood glucose tiers: Very low-carb diet programs experienced been regarded to be especially useful for men and women with diabetic issues or too much blood glucose amounts. Experiments have shown that reducing your carb intake can lessen both of those blood glucose and insulin ranges substantially. Even so, for individuals who take blood sugar medication, it’s ideal to seek the advice of your health practitioner right before generating improvements in your carb consumption.
May furthermore reduced Blood stress: As a problem, hypertension or large crucial sign levels are a sizable threat issue for plenty of coronary heart sicknesses like heart attack, stroke, and renal failure.
Lessened stomach fats: Types of fat noticed inside of the human body are subcutaneous fat that are found under the pores and pores and skin, and visceral fat, which accumulate in the stomach cavity. Surplus visceral fat might consequence in infection and insulin resistance.
Conclusion: The keto diet is acknowledged for its unbelievably speedy benefits, but it’s not constantly our alternative of comfort anymore. The nutrition industry experts hugely advise skipping the keto eating plan and deciding on a a lot more balanced weight reduction prepare.
Leave a Reply | ESSENTIALAI-STEM |
Page:The Biographical Dictionary of America, vol. 10.djvu/215
TRUXTUN
TRYON
Jersey, later removing to Philadelphia, where he was high slieriff of the city and county of Phila- delphia. 1816-19, and where he died, May 5, 1823.
TRUXTUN, William Talbot, naval officer, was born in Philadelphia, Peun., March 11, 1824; grandson of Thomas Truxtun (q.v.). He entered the navy as a midshipman, Feb. 9, 1841, and on being graduated from the U.S. Naval academy, was advanced to passed midshipman in 1847. He served on board the Brandyivine, and when he returned it was as prize captain of the Independ- ence, a slave-ship captured off Rio de Janeiro, in 1848. He saw service in the Pacific, and assisted in laying the trans- Atlantic cable in 1853. He was commissioned master, Sept. 14, 1855, and the following day was promoted lieutenant. He was on the Perr?/ during the threatened trouble with Paraguay in 1859, and after serving on the Dale as second officer, was promoted lieutenant-com- mander, and given command of his vessel in 1861. He served through the civil war, taking part in nearly all the naval operations around North Carolina ; was promoted commander, July 25, 1866, captain, Sept. 25, 1873, and commodore, May 11, 1882. He was commandant of the Nor- folk navy-yard, 1885-86 ; and was nominated for rear-admiral, Feb. 18, 1886, but before his nomi- nation was confirmed, he was retired, March 11, 1S86. He died in Norfolk. Va., Feb. 25, 1887.
TRYON, Dwight William, artist, was born in Hartford, Conn., Aug. 13, 1849; son of Anson and Delia O. (Roberts) Tryon ; grandson of Isaac and Abigail (Shailer) Tryon, and of Jon- athan and Ann (Hills) Roberts, and a descendant of William Tryon and Saint, his wife, who settled in Weathersfield, Conn., in 1663. He attended the common schools ; was clerk in a book-store in Hartford, 1866-74, sj^ending his leisure in the study of art, and having opened a studio in 1874, devoted himself to landscaije-jjainting. He studied art in Paris under Chevreuse, Daubigny and Guillemet, and at the Ecole des Beaux Arts, 1876-81, in the latter j^ear exhibiting his Hai~vest Time in Normandy and On the Maas at the Salon. He settled in a New York city, 1881, became pro- fessor of art in Smith college, Northampton, Mass., in 1888, and was director of the Hartford School of Arts, 1885-87. He was married in 1874, to Alice H., daughter of Seabury and Celestia Belden of Hartford. He became a member of the National Academy of Design ; also of the Society of American Artists, 1882, and of the American Water Color society, 1883. His works, nearly all of them landscapes, won many honors, including the following : medal at Boston, 1882 ; gold medal, American Art association, New York, 1886 and 1887 ; Hallgarten prize. National Aca- demj' of Design, 1887 ; Webb prize. Society of American Artists, 1889 ; Ellsworth prize, Chicago,
1889 ; Palmer prize. International State exposi- tion, Chicago, 1889 ; 1st class gold medal, Munich International exposition ; 13 medals, World's Columbian exposition, 1893 ; 1st prize, Cleveland exposition, 1895, and Nashville Centennial expo- sition, 1897 ; 1st prize gold medal and $1500, Car- negie Institute, 1898 ; Chronological Medal, Car- negie Art Institute, Pittsburg, Pa., 1899; gold medal, Pan-American exposition, 1901. Among his paintings are: A New England Village; Moonlight (1884) ; ^4 November Day (1886) ; Eveningin Autumn ; Night {18S6); Daybreak ; The Rising Moon (1889) ; Ttie First Leaves (1889), owned by Smith college ; Early Spring, Neto England (1897) ; May (1898), owned by the Car- negie Art Institute ; Neiv England Hills (1901) ; Tlie Brook (1902) ; Clearing after Storms, owned by the Corcoran art gallery ; Evening, Early Spring, and Neio Bedford Harbor.
TRYON, George Washington, conchologist, was born in Philadelphia, Pa., May 20, 1838. He attended the Friends school, Philadelphia ; en- gaged in business until 1868, and thereafter de- voted himself to conchology. He was elected a member of the Philadelphia Academy of Natural Sciences in 1859, and in 18G5 took the initiative toward the erection of a new building, which was completed in 1876, and to which he contributed $3,000, as did also the conchological department. He served as curator of the academy, 1869-75, and conservator of the conchological section, 1875-88, raising its collection of specimens to a higher rank than that of any other similar insti- tution at home or abroad. He was a member of various scientific societies ; edited the American Journal of Conchology, 1865-71, and with William G. Binney, "The Complete Writings of Constau- tine S. Rafinesque on Recent and Fossil Conchol- ogy," 1864, and is the author of: List of Ameri- can Writers on Conchology ; On the Molluscs of Ha7-per's Ferry, and Synojysis of the Recent Spe- cies of Gastrochcenidce (1861) ; Monograph of the Order of Pholadacea (1862) ; Monograph of the Terrestrial Mollusks of the United States and Synoj^sis of the Species Strepomatidae (1865) ; Land and Fresh-Jf ater Shells of North America (4 vols., 1873) ; American Marine Conchology (1873) ; Structural and Systematic Conchology (3 vols., 1882); Manual of Conchology, including Marine Shells, 9 vols., and Land Shells, 3 vols. (1879-85). He died in Philadelphia, Feb. 5, 1888.
TRYON, William, colonial governor, was born in Ireland in 1725 ; a descendant of Abraham Tryon of Bulwick, Northamptonsliire. He had held the commissions of captain and lieutenant- colonel in a regiment of foot-guards, before his appointment as lieutenant-colonel of North Car- olina, where lie arrived, June 27, 1704, having previously married a Miss Wake, a woman of | WIKI |
Previous research has found men and women cooperate differently. But few studies have examined what's happening in their brains while they cooperate.
Now, a team led by Allan Reiss, MD, a Stanford professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences and of radiology, has gained insight using a technique called hyperscanning. As explained in a press release:
Hyperscanning involves simultaneously recording the activity in two people's brains while they interact. And instead of using an MRI that requires participants to lie perfectly still and flat, the scientists used near-infrared spectroscopy, or NIRS, in which probes are attached to a person's head to record brain function, allowing them to sit upright and interact more naturally.
The 222 participants in the study were each assigned a partner. Pairs consisted of two males, two females or a male and a female. Then, while wearing the NIRS probes, each person sat in front a computer, across the table from their partner. Partners could see each other, but were instructed not to talk. Instead, they were asked to press a button when a circle on the computer screen changed color. The goal: to press the button simultaneously with their partner. After each try, the pair were told who had pressed the button sooner and how much sooner. They had 40 tries to get their timing as close as possible.
The researchers found that participants in male-male pairs and female-female pairs showed brain activity similar to their partners. Yet the male-female pairs performed just as well, even though their brain activity was different.
"It's not that either males or females are better at cooperating or can't cooperate with each other," Reiss said. "Rather, there's just a difference in how they're cooperating."
The study, which appears today in Scientific Reports, has several limitations, the authors say. It doesn't examine the entire brain and it only focuses on one type of cooperative task. But this type of work has applications for some types of disorders, says lead author Joseph Baker, PhD, a postdoctoral research fellow in psychiatry. "There are people with disorders like autism who have problems with social cognition," he said. "We're absolutely hoping to learn enough information so that we might be able to design more effective therapies for them."
Photo by Kristin Wall | FINEWEB-EDU |
SQL Server Multi-Subnet Clustering (SQL Server)
THIS TOPIC APPLIES TO: yesSQL ServernoAzure SQL DatabasenoAzure SQL Data Warehouse noParallel Data Warehouse
A SQL Server multi-subnet failover cluster is a configuration where each failover cluster node is connected to a different subnet or different set of subnets. These subnets can be in the same location or in geographically dispersed sites. Clustering across geographically dispersed sites is sometimes referred to as stretch clusters. As there is no shared storage that all the nodes can access, data should be replicated between the data storage on the multiple subnets. With data replication, there is more than one copy of the data available. Therefore, a multi-subnet failover cluster provides a disaster recovery solution in addition to high availability.
SQL Server Multi-Subnet Failover Cluster (Two-Nodes, Two-Subnets)
The following illustration represents a two node, two subnet failover cluster instance (FCI) in SQL Server 2017.
Multi-Subnet Architecture with MultiSubnetFailover
Multi-Subnet Failover Cluster Instance Configurations
The following are some examples of SQL Server FCIs that use multiple subnets:
• SQL Server FCI SQLCLUST1 includes Node1 and Node2. Node1 is connected to Subnet1. Node2 is connected to Subnet2. SQL Server Setup sees this configuration as a multi-subnet cluster and sets the IP address resource dependency to OR.
• SQL Server FCI SQLCLUST1 includes Node1, Node2, and Node3. Node1 and Node2 are connected to Subnet1. Node 3 is connected to Subnet2. SQL Server Setup sees this configuration as a multi-subnet cluster and sets the IP address resource dependency to OR. Because Node1 and Node2 are on the same subnet, this configuration provides additional local high availability.
• SQL Server FCI SQLCLUST1 includes Node1 and Node2. Node1 is on Subnet1. Node2 is on Subnet1 and Subnet2. SQL Server Setup sees this configuration as a multi-subnet cluster and sets the IP address resource dependency to OR.
• SQL Server FCI SQLCLUST1 includes Node1 and Node2. Node1 is connected to Subnet1 and Subnet2. Node2 is also connected to Subnet1 and Subnet2. The IP address resource dependency is set to AND by SQL Server Setup.
NOTE: This configuration is not considered as a multi-subnet failover cluster configuration because the clustered nodes are on the same set of subnets.
IP Address Resource Considerations
In a multi-subnet failover cluster configuration, the IP addresses are not owned by all the nodes in the failover cluster, and may not be all online during SQL Server startup. Beginning in SQL Server 2012 (11.x), you can set the IP address resource dependency to OR. This enables SQL Server to be online when there is at least one valid IP address that it can bind to.
NOTE: In the SQL Server versions earlier than SQL Server 2012 (11.x), a stretch V-LAN technology was used in multi-site cluster configurations to expose a single IP address for failover across sites. With the new capability of SQL Server to cluster nodes across different subnets, you can now configure SQL Server failover clusters across multiple sites without implementing the stretch V-LAN technology.
IP Address Resource OR Dependency Considerations
You may want to consider the following failover behavior if you set the IP address resource dependency is set to OR:
• When there is a failure of one of the IP addresses on the node that currently owns the SQL Server cluster resource group, a failover is not triggered automatically until all the IP addresses valid on that node fail.
• When a failover occurs, SQL Server will come online if it can bind to at least one IP address that is valid on the current node. The IP addresses that did not bind to SQL Server at startup will be listed in the error log.
When a SQL Server FCI is installed side-by-side with a standalone instance of the SQL Server Database Engine, take care to avoid TCP port number conflicts on the IP addresses. Conflicts usually occur when two instances of the Database Engine are both configured to use the default TCP port (1433). To avoid conflicts, configure one instance to use a non-default fixed port. Configuring a fixed port is usually easiest on the standalone instance. Configuring the Database Engine to use different ports will prevent an unexpected IP Address/TCP port conflict that blocks an instance startup when a SQL Server FCI fails to the standby node.
Client Recovery Latency During Failover
A multi-subnet FCI by default enables the RegisterAllProvidersIP cluster resource for its network name. In a multi-subnet configuration, both the online and offline IP addresses of the network name will be registered at the DNS server. The client application then retrieves all registered IP addresses from the DNS server and attempts to connect to the addresses either in order or in parallel. This means that client recovery time in multi-subnet failovers no longer depend on DNS update latencies. By default, the client tries the IP addresses in order. When the client uses the new optional MultiSubnetFailover=True parameter in its connection string, it will instead try the IP addresses simultaneously and connects to the first server that responds. This can help minimize the client recovery latency when failovers occur. For more information, see Always On Client Connectivity (SQL Server) and Create or Configure an Availability Group Listener (SQL Server).
With legacy client libraries or third party data providers, you cannot use the MultiSubnetFailover parameter in your connection string. To help ensure that your client application works optimally with multi-subnet FCI in SQL Server 2017, try to adjust the connection timeout in the client connection string by 21 seconds for each additional IP address. This ensures that the client’s reconnection attempt does not timeout before it is able to cycle through all IP addresses in your multi-subnet FCI.
The default client connection time-out period for SQL Server Management Studio and sqlcmd is 15 seconds.
Related Content
Content Description Topic
Installing a SQL Server Failover Cluster Create a New SQL Server Failover Cluster (Setup)
In-place upgrade of your existing SQL Server Failover Cluster Upgrade a SQL Server Failover Cluster Instance (Setup)
Maintaining your existing SQL Server Failover Cluster Add or Remove Nodes in a SQL Server Failover Cluster (Setup)
Use the Failover Cluster Management snap-in to view WSFC events and logs View Events and Logs for a Failover Cluster
Use Windows PowerShell to create a log file for all nodes (or a specific a node) in a WSFC failover cluster Get-ClusterLog Failover Cluster Cmdlet | ESSENTIALAI-STEM |
Since the inception of Follicular Unit Extraction hair transplant techniques, docs have been looking for ways to increase the effectiveness of procedures, whilst reducing the labout intensity involved. One such solution has been heralded as the NeoGraft system.
Essentially the NeoGraft hair transplant procedure uses a specially designed machine to aid the extraction and insertion of hair grafts, for (in theory) a more accurate, natural looking result. NeoGraft is the latest in a line of machine-assisted options, similar to the ARTAS robotic transplant option.
Safety concerns
There are those within the industry however, who are concerned about the impact that semi-automated systems could have on patient care. Spencer Kobren of hit US radio show The Bald Truth, highlighted his concerns back in 2010 when the NeoGraft solution was first introduced. The other issue however is potentially very harmful, and that is the possibility that poorly trained, unqualified and inexperienced individuals could offer hair transplant procedures to the general public. On the NeoGraft website the manufacturer itself states:
"The FUE procedure using NeoGraft is not so dependent on the skill of the doctor"
However we are completely in agreement with Dr Bauman when he says:
"NeoGraft is still just a tool, it is not a substitute for a qualified hair transplant surgeon and surgical team"
In reality it is unlikely that hair restoration practices will open in the United States and United Kingdom, utilising unqualified surgeons. There is however a major concern about such clinics opening in overseas hair transplant epicentres that are less heavily regulated, for example in India, Thailand or Turkey. There is a very real possibility that in pursuit of more profit and lower prices, machines such as NeoGraft and ARTAS could be used to replace the skills, experience and judgment of a real human transplant doctor. As Dr Bauman puts it:
“How the harvested follicles (grafts) are handled by the surgical team and how they are artistically placed into the scalp by the surgeon still determines the naturalness, density and results from the procedure. If the follicles are ‘mishandled’ by an inexperienced team of technicians or without appropriate magnification and instrumentation, graft survival may be impacted – thereby squandering precious donor hair follicles. Also, if the surgeon does not have an aesthetic sense and understand the subtle nuances of hairline design, the naturalness of the results can ultimately suffer. In the worst cases, these unnatural hairlines may require repair.”
SHARE STORY
AUTHOR
By Damien
RELATED
Free Consultation | ESSENTIALAI-STEM |
Presentation layer
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
In the seven-layer OSI model of computer networking, the presentation layer is layer 6 and serves as the data translator for the network.[1][2] It is sometimes called the syntax layer.[3]
Description[edit]
The presentation layer is responsible for the delivery and formatting of information to the application layer for further processing or display.[4] It relieves the application layer of concern regarding syntactical differences in data representation within the end-user systems. An example of a presentation service would be the conversion of an EBCDIC-coded text computer file to an ASCII-coded file.
The presentation layer is the lowest layer at which application programmers consider data structure and presentation, instead of simply sending data in the form of datagrams or packets between hosts. This layer deals with issues of string representation - whether they use the Pascal method (an integer length field followed by the specified amount of bytes) or the C/C++ method (null-terminated strings, e.g. "thisisastring\0"). The idea is that the application layer should be able to point at the data to be moved, and the presentation layer will deal with the rest.
Serialization of complex data structures into flat byte-strings (using mechanisms such as TLV or XML) can be thought of as the key functionality of the presentation layer.
Encryption is typically done at this level too, although it can be done on the application, session, transport, or network layers, each having its own advantages and disadvantages.[1] Decryption is also handled at the presentation layer. For example, when logging on to bank account sites the presentation layer will decrypt the data as it is received.[1] Another example is representing structure, which is normally standardized at this level, often by using XML. As well as simple pieces of data, like strings, more complicated things are standardized in this layer. Two common examples are 'objects' in object-oriented programming, and the exact way that streaming video is transmitted.
In many widely used applications and protocols, no distinction is made between the presentation and application layers. For example, HyperText Transfer Protocol (HTTP), generally regarded as an application-layer protocol, has presentation-layer aspects such as the ability to identify character encoding for proper conversion, which is then done in the application layer.
Within the service layering semantics of the OSI network architecture, the presentation layer responds to service requests from the application layer and issues service requests to the session layer.
In the OSI model: the presentation layer ensures the information that the application layer of one system sends out is readable by the application layer of another system. For example, a PC program communicates with another computer, one using extended binary coded decimal interchange code (EBCDIC) and the other using ASCII to represent the same characters. If necessary, the presentation layer might be able to translate between multiple data formats by using a common format.
Services[edit]
Sublayers[edit]
The presentation layer can be composed of two sublayers: common application service element (CASE) and specific application service element (SASE).[5]
CASE[edit]
The common application service element sublayer provides services for the application layer and request services from the session layer. It provides support for common application services, such as:
SASE[edit]
The specific application service element sublayer provides application specific services (protocols), such as
• FTAM (File Transfer, Access and Manager)
• VT (Virtual Terminal)
• MOTIS (Message Oriented Text Interchange Standard)
• CMIP (Common Management Information Protocol)
• JTM (Job Transfer and Manipulation) a former OSI standard
• MMS (Manufacturing Messaging Service)
• RDA (Remote Database Access)
• DTP (Distributed Transaction Processing)
Protocols[edit]
Other protocols sometimes considered at this level (though perhaps not strictly adhering to the OSI model) include:
References[edit]
1. ^ a b c Dean, Tamara (2010). Network+ Guide to Networks. Delmar. pp. 44–47.
2. ^ a b c d e Microsoft TechNet
3. ^ Grigonis, Richard (2000). Computer telephony encyclopedia. CMP. p. 331.
4. ^ http://www.linfo.org/presentation_layer.html Linux Information Project
5. ^ a b Hura, Gurdeep (2001). "Application Layer". Data and Computer Communications: Networking and Internetworking. CRC Press LLC. pp. 710–712. | ESSENTIALAI-STEM |
Talk:Pampered Menial
Dates
Where are the recording and release dates from? According to Discogs the ABC and original CBS versions came out in 1975. Neither version says anything about recording dates in the liner notes. Also, the follow-up was released in 1976, not 1975, according to Discogs. -- <IP_ADDRESS> (talk) 09:55, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
Daron Surkamp?
All music written by Daron Surkamp -- Who is Daron Surkamp? Is he related to David Surkamp? Is it a misspelling? Or a pseudonym? Pavlov's Dog doesn't mention him. Clarification needed! --Meillo (talk) 17:43, 21 July 2019 (UTC) | WIKI |
Talk:Wat Doi Mae Pang
Doi not part of the name
I think that "Doi" is not part of the name of the temple. With Street View a sign can be seen (at 19.217044, 99.182018) on Road 1001 showing วัดแม่ปั๋ง (Wat Mae Pang, without Doi) as name of the temple. --FredTC (talk) 12:15, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
* Different temple. Google Maps appears to mess up search results. --Paul_012 (talk) 15:02, 10 June 2018 (UTC) | WIKI |
Key Oils – A Rookies Guide to Better Health Via Ancient Practices
Diet is definitely a huge concern regarding many people today who also can be either trying to help control a good preventable condition or people who are trying to get rid of the surplus weight that they happen to be carrying all around with them all. Not only has our diet as Americans been progressively getting worse but because each of our population has grown there were very few tries to withstand the unfavorable effects that over running our food has done. Each Single American, who features eaten the hot en-cas at university remembers and even has the quality understanding of the taste regarding preservative chemicals and manufactured flavoring of the food they dined on during their formative many years joining Fundamental through High College.
To get a knowing of our diet we all need to start to see the just what has already been while in front of each of our faces for ages. Throughout fact at least a couple of ages. The only technology in its whole to be able to to not see food that was processed in addition to packaged for “shelf-life” seemed to be that of our biggest technology… those people who else fought and won World War II. Several of them were exposed to that during his or her time in the Navy nonetheless up until next experienced probably grown almost all of his or her food their selves or, at a minimum, had access to fresh, foodstuff without preservatives. What was this about that time framework that has right now brought about the finest lack of essential constituents that meals possesses ever before known? My goal is to deal with that in another write-up.
You, like me have got gone on the store in addition to bought a field regarding cereal, or some sort of case of flour, grain, or other grain or maybe scripted vegetable to see typically the words and phrases “enriched” or perhaps “fortified” quietly or label. Just what do those words suggest? Exactly why will do food want enrichment or maybe fortification? This answer is very easy, hence simple in fact that that this next period you go grocery store shopping, you will begin to see the idea everywhere! It will be on from least 1 thing you bring residence in the store and dependent on the way you shop, an individual might be lucky to have home with one matter which is not fortified or enriched. They need to be enriched plus fortified because they have got been stripped together with improved prior to getting shelved for your local food market store.
Due to this process of removing our foodstuff of crucial nutrients, nutrients, and necessary compounds, most Americans will be explained to that people need in order to be taking a “good supplements. ” There are usually so many out there that it must be confusing to identify which ones are going to be helpful in our attempt to be able to beef up our own eating plans. It is a meager attempt as most of the nutritional vitamins that we consume are passed through our own digestive tract with nominal assimilation by our intestines. We guess you could very well hypothesize that the sturdy device kind are going out the same technique that they went in… since junk.
The worst is however to come just as far as our well being plus wellness if most of us can’t or even don’t alter the way all of our meals is distributed and organized. That which vital constituents happen to be being eliminated aside coming from the vitamins and vitamins that we happen to be certainly not replacing on a moment to day routine? Perhaps there is anyway to counter the negative effects of our over-processed, quickly on typically the go, canned, fortified and enriched food source? The solution is a good resounding YES!
Sad to say, the stripping of our meals is usually permanent after it can be done. we can’t make same matters that comprised our benefits and veggies or even herbs and reconstitute them all consequently that the same meals have the same chemical make-up and even advantages to us because we take in them. At this time there are substances which are presently being reintroduced among a few of the most beneficial ingredients that may be stripped throughout the processing of the dietary foods is that staying essential oils.
Essential Oils are the essence associated with the seed and will be never derived from a creature source. This doesn’t mean that My partner and i advocate vegetarianism or veganism as the fact that is the certain decision with it’s very own diet needs and choices. Nevertheless essential oils are a way for vegetarians and vegans to help supplement what they can be with a lack of their diets except when they develop all their very own food themselves, but I actually digress. Significant oils are usually part of the Alternative Medicine class but are growing to be more and more suitable in Conventional Medicine as researchers are realizing this importance of these very basic substances utilizing their vast variety of constituents.
Important oils are natural aromatic materials found in the various parts of the rose, from the bark to the beginnings to often the leaves to the bouquets. They can be both equally beautifully in addition to powerfully aromatic. To test this, consider the leaf of almost any fresh botanical herb, like thyme or cilantro, and caress the leaves in your own palms. Take a full breath and you can certainly smell the oils. In case you have ever appreciated typically the gift of the rose, walked by a good field of violescent or the fresh smell of cut mint then a person have experienced the aromatic characteristics regarding essential oils. Vital oils are ten periods more efficient and healthful when compared with their dried herbal alternative which have been usually bottled and even scattered to give foodstuff specific tastes and nose. These basic oils provide the plants they are really found in a distinctive smell nevertheless also provide protection against predators in addition to support in pollination.
Essential essential oils are non water-based phytochemicals made up of unstable organic chemical substances. Although they will are fat accesible, they will do not include fat fats or acids found in vegetable and animal oils. Significant oils can be very clean, almost clean, to the touch in addition to are quickly absorbed simply by the skin. Credit rating around their pure form, they are going to never leave an fatty residue or even feeling in the skin. Pure, unadulterated important oils are translucent and range in color via crystal clear clear to deep blue.
In addition to help their intrinsic benefits to plants and being superbly good smelling to, essential oils have been utilized all over history in many nationalities for their medicinal together with therapeutic benefits. Modern technological analysis and trends toward additional holistic approaches for you to wellness are driving the revival together with new breakthrough of petrol well being applications. The Egyptians were being quite a few of the first individuals to use fragrant essential skin oils extensively in medical exercise, beauty remedy, food preparing, because religious ceremony. Frankincense, Sandalwood, Myrrh and Cinnamon had been considered very useful valuables along caravan industry routes and were often exchanged for gold and some other precious commodities.
Apart from the beginning, these same oils mentioned previously mentioned are still used in Center Eastern Civilizations as the way to protect against widespread infant and youngster maladies that, we in the western world, find inocculated from or any form of prescription medicine when we or perhaps our little ones get sick. Is it any wonder of which 2 of these items in whose necessary oils are nowadays being explored scientifically, have been placed at the feet of Jesus Christ like he put in the manger?
Nowadays, the strong healing qualities of necessary oils have been rediscovered around 1937 simply by a Norwegian chemist, Rene-Maurice Gattefosse, who healed the badly burned hand with genuine violescent oil. Some sort of Finnish modern day, Dr. Jean Valnet, utilized therapeutic-grade essential skin oils to be able to successfully treat harmed members of the military during World War II. Doctor Valnet went in to come to be a earth leader in the development of alternative medicine practices. Since Ww ii, the modern use associated with essential oils has continuing to grow quickly seeing as health scientists, doctors of both alternative in addition to regular disciplines carry on to research in addition to validate the numerous overall wellness benefits of therapeutic-grade essential herbal oils.
Dr. Brian Incline is often a medical expert who else has also been studying often the effects and works by using of essential oils together with declares “Essential oils are used for a good very wide range of psychological and physical health software. They can get used as a one oil at a moment or within complex blends depending on user encounter and desired gain. Key oils are usually given by one of a couple of methods: diffused aromatically, used topically, or taken inside the camera since dietary supplements. ” When some of these methods are chosen, the idea is even now important to remember of which until that is a good pure essential oil, you happen to be only taking a chemical substance of chemicals into your current system. It is vital that you consult a professional in the discipline associated with important oils before beginning an active plan.
The sense of smell has a bearing on a lot of physiological pathways including the stimulation of the and also other metabolic processes. Alternative medicine can be founded on often the body’s predictable answer for you to specific olfactory stimuli. Fundamental oils are broadly made use of in aromatherapy applications. Selected essential oils, when dissipated in the air, will be very stimulating while some can be calming and tranquilizing. Beyond emotional benefits, calming essential oils can certainly detox air of undesired odors created by domestic pets or perhaps derived from cigarette use in addition to some air-borne pathogens. Lower or no-heat essential oil diffusers can be recommended, as they tend not to change the chemical structure with the oil being diffused. Necessary oils can in addition be used as purifying and purifying additives in order to laundry and surface cleansers throughout the home.
Since our senses can right influence our hormone equilibrium and various other bodily capabilities, it is important and important to find the stimuli that can help to help preserve the balance in our body. It is no wonder that a lot of individuals today feel often the after effects of and so many man-made chemicals that were stored and built way up for the human body be it by inhalation, or maybe ingestion, many of us still have these you.
We have all ingested processed foods that are just good as empty unhealthy calories, if we are usually blessed. Then, when we are usually losing strength, we supplementation deficiency of energy from these kind of fat-laden puffs of nothing-ness with strength drinks that will are so loaded complete of artificial stimulants that you’re hoping to have the proverbial “Popeye moment” with a can associated with green spinach and spring directly into action with nothing but typically the villainy you are privately experiencing destroyed with a quick one-two combo. The particular reality is this, the results is usually the smoothies as well as jitters that precedes a new crash leaving you lacking the rest of the day. Just like all stimulant medications, eventually an individual will need to boost the dosing in order to get the common results. All these habits plus behaviors are usually caused mainly because we just as Americans have got decided that we need “bigger, better, faster, considerably more! ” and we would like it last week! flu bomb essential oils need to start “deciding” together with choosing to regain control of every aspect of our own health.
To rebalance your own body and take back the particular natural energy that a person should be getting from some sort of food source, you require only explore the world regarding licensed pure therapeutic rank essential oils.
Leave a Reply
Comment
Name*
Mail*
Website* | ESSENTIALAI-STEM |
Note: This page describes the development version of GPSBabel. It may substantially differ from the latest released GPSBabel.
Garmin PCX5 (pcx)
This format can...
• read and write waypoints
• read and write tracks
• read and write routes
This format has the following options: deficon, cartoexploreur .
Garmin documents only PCX5, an older format limited to the lame NMEA six-character waypoint names that's treated as a second-class citizen in current versions of MapSource. In Mapsource, use file->import to read these files. If you name the files *.wpt, Mapsource will find them more easily.
In general, you should prefer the "mapsource" file format to this one.
This format has been extended to handle many - but not all - files from GPS Utility. If you encounter something that GPSBabel does not handle well, use the free version of GPSUtil to read it and save as something more common.
deficon option
Default icon name.
The deficon option is used to control the icon output when writing to this format. It overrides any icon information that might be present in the source data.
cartoexploreur option
Write tracks compatible with Carto Exploreur.
Carto Exploreur requires a slightly incompatible variation of the PCX format when written. Specifying this option on write tells us to create that strain of PCX.
| ESSENTIALAI-STEM |
Page:United States Statutes at Large Volume 37 Part 1.djvu/680
SIXTY-SECOND CONGRESS. Sm III. Cris. 25, 26. i913. 657 "That it shall be unlawful for any owner or occupant of any wharf m“!,gQ_¤gngg{;;; or dock, any captain or master of any vessel, or any other n or r¤L' persons to cast, throw, deposit, or drop in any dock or in the waters of the Potomac River or its tributaries in the District of Columbia any dead fish, Hsh offal, dead animals of any kind condemned oysters in the shell, watermelons, cantaloupes, vegetables, fruits, shavings, hay, straw, or filth of any kind whatsoever. ‘That nothing in this Act contained shall be construed to interfere mgg¤;m,*yu£,g;’eg: with the work of improvement in or along the said river and harbor under the supervision of the United States Government. _ _ "That an rson ogdpersons violating any of the provisions of this 1,§$h"‘°°"°' "°` section shall lifdeem guilty of a misdemeanor, and on conviction shall be punished by a fine not exceeding one hundred dollars, or by imprisonment not exceeding six months, or both, in the discretion of the court." ' Approved, February 3, 1913. GEAP. 26.-—A.n Act To regula to the business of leaning` mone on sec¤nty` ol Y*¤¤•¥!¢· N13- ingykhndubgtmmm, _Err_ns, and corporattions ers, companies, sa, rulding amen , an · Pubuc,.Ro.$¤¤. estate brokers in the District of Elumbia. an [ I Be it enacted by the Se·nateundHm:se3 of the United States d America in Congress, t hereafter it shall be ,,,1;"“'*°‘ °* °°“‘“‘ unlawful and illegal to engage in the District of Columbia in the ¤¤¤¤r-1¤¤¤i¤¤ business of leaning money upon which ai rate of interest greater than '°fi]$§gT; 4..; N. six per eentum per an.num recharged on any security of any kind, 9“*'°“· direct or collateral, tangible or intangible, without procuring 'cense; and all persons, firms, voluntary associations, joint-stock companies, incorporated societies, and corporations engaged in said business shall pay a license tax of five hundred dollarpeser annum to the District of Columbia. No license shall be gran to any person, firm, pclgfjs gm '”"’°“' or voluntary association unless such person and the members of any ' such firm or voluntary association shall be bona fide residents of the District of Columbia, and no license shall be granted for a period °°'P°“"·‘°'“ longer than one year, and no license shall be granted to any jointstock company, incorporated society, or coglporation unless and until such company, society, or corporation sh in writing and in due form, to be first approved by and filed with the Commissioners of the District of Colum ia, aplpomt an agent, resident in the District of Columbia, upon whom judicial and other process or legal notice directed to such company, society, or corporation may be served. And in the case of the death, removal from the District or any legal disability or disqualification of any such agent, service of such Iprocess or notice may be made upon the assessor of the District of Co umbia. do { Sec. 2. That applications for license to conduct such busines must u°{'§£E,°‘ "' °' be made in writing to the Commissioners of the District of Columbia, '~`°¤*•¤** and shall contain the full names and addresses of applicants, if natural persons, and in the case of Hrms and voluntary associations, the full names and addresses of all the members thereof, and in the case of joint-stock companies, incorporated societies, and corporations, the full names and addresses of the officers and directors thereof and under what law or laws organized or incorporated, and the place where such business is to be conducted, and such other information as the said commissioners may require. Every license granted shall T¤¤¤· °'*’· date from the first of the month in which it is issued and expire on the thirty-first day of the following October, and such license shall be kept conspicuously displgyed in the place of busines of the licensee. Every application all be filed not less than thirty days H°‘"“g"°““ | WIKI |
Squeeze Me!
Squeeze Me!, also called The Clark Terry Spacemen, is an album by trumpeter/bandleader Clark Terry which was recorded in 1989 and released by the Chiaroscuro label.
Reception
Scott Yanow of AllMusic stated, "This underrated Chiaroscuro CD is a joy from start to finish. Flügelhornist Clark Terry is teamed with an unusually talented group of all-stars which is filled with distinctive and colorful swing stylists. The standards and riff tunes give all of the horn players solo space ... After 55 minutes of music Clark Terry is heard on the 19-minute "Jazzspeak," verbally telling informative stories about his lengthy career, some of which are quite humorous. Highly recommended".
Track listing
All compositions by Clark Terry except where noted
* 1) "Blues for Gypsy" – 9:53
* 2) "Swingin' the Blues" (Count Basie, Eddie Durham) – 5:02
* 3) "Corner Pocket" (Freddie Green) – 8:49
* 4) "Primpin' at the Prom" (Duke Ellington) – 3:55
* 5) "For Dancers Only" (Sy Oliver, Don Raye, Vic Schoen) – 7:24
* 6) "Spacemen" – 6:22
* 7) "Just Squeeze Me" (Ellington. Lee Gaines) – 7:01
* 8) "Jones" – 6:56
* 9) Jazzspeak – 19:00
Personnel
* Clark Terry, Virgil Jones – trumpet
* Al Grey, Britt Woodman – trombone
* Haywood Henry, Phil Woods, Red Holloway – saxophones
* John Campbell – piano
* Marcus McLaurine – bass
* Butch Ballard – drums | WIKI |
Page:Irish minstrelsy, vol 2 - Hardiman.djvu/132
120 called "festering boars,", and in others they are designated fetid goats, wolves, churls, &c. Similar feelings, have given birth to similar expressions amongst the modern Greeks, towards their Turkish oppressors. Accordingly, in their popular songs, we find the Turks called wild rams, wolves, and other opprobrious names. From among many bitter and sarcastic stanzas, current in Ireland, the following epigram is selected, as a striking proof of the national hatred here alluded to. One of our bards seeing an Englishman hanging on a tree, exclaimed extempore:—
Pass on—'tis cheering from yon stately tree, A foe's vile form suspended thus to see; Oh! may each tree that shades our soil, appear Thick with such fruit throughout the lengthen'd year
James the Second, has been accused, not only of overlooking, but even of encouraging the excesses of his soldiery, against the protestants in Ireland; but, whatever were his faults, and they were not few, this was not among the number. The following letter, which I transcribe from the original, is of itself, sufficient to acquit him of that opprobrious charge.—
* "James R.
"Our will and pleasure is that you forthwith repaire to our Towne of Cavan where you are during our pleasure to command in chiefe all our fforces in the said Towne and in our County of Cavan. You are likewise to take care that noe disorder be comitted by any of our Army within the said Towne or County of Cavan. And that you from time to time informe | WIKI |
User:Amanjain1406/sandbox
AMAN KUMAR JAIN
was born on 14th June 1997, Saturday to Mr. Binod Kumar Jain & Mrs. Meena Devi Jain, born in a small town like Umerkote, Orissa. Started his primary education from Saheed Laxman Nayak Public School, but due to lack of facilities and exposure in a very small town was sent to Yugantar Public School, Rajnandgaon(C.G), to pursue higher education. It was yugantar | WIKI |
Automation Anywhere 설명서 읽기 및 검토
Automation Anywhere Version 11.3
콘텐츠 닫기
콘텐츠
콘텐츠 열기
Build advanced bots with the Enterprise Client
• 업데이트: 4/17/2020
• 11.3.x
• 구축
• Enterprise
Build advanced bots with the Enterprise Client
Design different types of bots to do different functions and tasks. MetaBots provide dynamic input and output to other bots.
The role of the MetaBot
Adding a dynamic link library (DLL) to a MetaBot provides a way for bot developers to expose methods that provide dynamic input and output for other bots to use. DLLs allow developers to use a library of functions that can be reused across bots. Managing login activity can be done by a MetaBot that logic and a DLL have been added to.
Using DLLs provides a customizable access that can be managed through the rules based actions of bots. This allows developers to provide dynamic functions without exposing source code.
DLLs versus Client Commands
When Automation Anywhere Client Commands are used in conjunction with a MetaBot provide a configurable experience controlled through the MetaBot and other associated bots.
Tip: Automation Anywhere provides a lot of ready to use commands. Read Client Commands to determine if there are already commands that can be used without the need of creating a DLL.
However, here are scenarios when it's better to create a DLL.
• There is not a client command that does what is needed.
• An existing API provides greater functionality and more efficiency.
Important: All DLLs must be written in C#.
피드백을 보내주십시오 | ESSENTIALAI-STEM |
Page:Herbert Jenkins - The Rain Girl.djvu/296
of M.P.'s. She reproached Nature for her obsolete methods in providing for the continuance of the race. She held up to the open light of day your iniquitous conduct in proposing to marry a road-girl. She implied that I was responsible for your determination, stating in clear and unambiguous terms that I exercise an evil influence upon you. She suggested that no man could know me without wanting to marry a road-girl, tramp or whatever it was she had in mind."
Drewitt paused to sip his whisky-and-soda. With a sigh of weariness he continued:
"She asked me if she were expected to keep you iand your wife to-be, together with any infantile complications that might arise out of the union. I assured her that I was not in your confidence to that extent. Then in a voice that caused the wire to throb she asked who was to keep you and your vagabond wife; the expression is hers. Personally, I disclaimed any such intention, pointing out that it would be neither delicate nor decent for a peer of the realm to keep another man's wife. It was at this juncture that she accused me of coarseness and a lack of that refinement which, as far as I could gather, forms the most attractive bait for unsophisticated heiresses."
Drewitt paused to light a cigarette and once more sip his whisky-and-soda.
"At last," he continued, "I had to remind her that this was the Diplomatic Club, where no one ever speaks his mind or conveys facts except in a form disguised beyond all recognition. Finally, she | WIKI |
FedEx to spend $2.6 bln to replace fleet
SAN FRANCISCO (MarketWatch) -- FedEx Corp. on Monday said it will spend $2.6 billion in a multi-year program to buy and modify about 90 Boeing Co.'s 757-200 aircraft to replace FedEx Express's fleet of Boeing 727-200s. The company said it doesn't expect the program to materially affect earnings. Replacing the planes will result in lower operating costs and reduce green house emissions, it added. FedEx included the capital impact of the program on the current fiscal year in its first-quarter earnings release. It added that its capital spending forecast for 2007 remains at $3 billion. FedEx Express expects to bring the new aircraft into service between 2008 and 2016. Fedex also said it has named ITT Corp. Chief Executive Steven Loranger to its board for a one-year term. | NEWS-MULTISOURCE |
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 63.djvu/367
promoted to the rank of captain, and from 1828 to 1831 commanded the Alligator in the Mediterranean, for the most part in Greek waters. He was M.P. for Reigate 1831–2, and for Cambridgeshire 1832–4. On the death of his uncle, Philip Yorke, third earl of Hardwicke [q. v.], on 18 Nov. 1834, without male issue, Yorke succeeded to the title. In the Peel administration of 1841 he was one of the lords in waiting, and was appointed in 1842 to attend on the king of Prussia during his visit to England. In 1844–5 he commanded the Black Eagle yacht, and carried back to the continent the emperor of Russia, who presented him with a valuable diamond snuff-box. He had no further service in the navy, and on 12 Jan. 1854 was put on the retired list with the rank of rear-admiral, rising by seniority to be vice-admiral on 24 Nov. 1858, and admiral on 3 Dec. 1863. In Lord Derby's ministry of 1852 he was postmaster-general, with a seat in the cabinet, but had no later office except that of lord lieutenant of Cambridgeshire, which he held continuously from his accession to the peerage till his death at Sydney Lodge on 17 Sept. 1873. He was buried at Wimpole on 24 Sept. In October 1833 he married Susan (1810–1886), sixth daughter of Thomas Henry Liddell, first lord Ravensworth, and left, with other issue, Charles Philip (1836–1897), father of Albert Edward Yorke, sixth and present earl of Hardwicke.
[O'Byrne's Nav. Biogr. Dict.; Navy Lists; Harrow School Regist. 1894, p. 28; Times, 18, 25, 29 Sept. 1873; Foster's Peerage.] YORKE, HENRY REDHEAD (1772–1813), publicist, born in 1772, seems to have been a native of the West Indies, but was brought up at Little Eaton, near Derby. In 1792, under his paternal name of Redhead, he published a pamphlet against negro emancipation, but speedily changed his views on that subject, and while on a visit to Paris at the end of the same year wrote, but did not publish, a refutation of his pamphlet. In Paris, ‘madly in love with ideal liberty,’ he witnessed the king's appearance before the convention, and was intimate with the brothers Sheares [see ] and other members of the British club, but seceded from it when a persistent attempt was made to vote an address inviting the convention to liberate England from tyranny. After his departure a warrant for his arrest, as he believed, was issued against him in consequence of the denunciation of Robert Rayment. He had by this time assumed the name of Yorke. He visited Holland either on his way back to England or at a little later period. He joined a radical society at Derby, and in 1793 was sent by it to Sheffield to assist a sister society. On 7 April 1794 he addressed a large outdoor meeting at Sheffield which had been convened to petition for a pardon to Scottish political offenders and for negro emancipation. He was alleged to have exclaimed, ‘You behold before you, young as I am, about twenty-two years of age, a man who has been concerned in three revolutions already, who essentially contributed to serve the revolution in America, who contributed to that in Holland, who materially assisted in that of France, and who will continue to cause revolutions all over the world.’ He was arrested, and at the York spring assize of 1795 true bills were found against him for conspiracy, sedition, and libel. On 23 July 1795 he was tried at York before Sir Giles Rooke [q. v.] for conspiracy, but his co-defendants—Joseph Gale, printer of the ‘Sheffield Register,’ and Richard Davison, compositor—had absconded. Yorke, while advocating parliamentary reform, repudiated the boastful words imputed to him, and declared himself opposed to violence and anarchy. His speech in self-defence, however, was believed to have conduced to his conviction. On 27 Nov. 1795 he was sentenced by the king's bench to two years' imprisonment in Dorchester Castle, fined 100l., and required to give sureties of good behaviour for seven years. He does not appear to have been released till March 1798. Meanwhile his opinions had undergone a complete change. In a Letter to the Reformers (Dorchester, 1798), written in prison, he justified the war with France, and on 3 Aug. 1798, in a private letter to William Wickham [q. v.], he deplored the fate and condemned the views of the brothers Sheares (Castlereagh Memoirs, i. 258). He wrote letters for twelve months in the ‘Star’ under the signature of Alfred or Galgacus (these were reprinted in a small volume), was part proprietor of the ‘True Briton,’ revisited France in 1802, and in 1806 was near having a duel with Sir Francis Burdett [q. v.], both parties being bound over to keep the peace. In 1801, and again in 1811, he issued synopses of lectures in London on political and historical subjects. After a long illness, relinquishing politics, he was induced by Richard Valpy [q. v.] to undertake a new edition and continuation of John Campbell's ‘Lives of British Admirals;’ but before completing this work, and when about to practise as a barrister (he had been a student of the Inner Temple from 1801), he was again struck down by illness, | WIKI |
Page:Journal of botany, British and foreign, Volume 9 (1871).djvu/131
REVIEW OF THE CONTiaBUTlONS TO FOSSIL BOTANY. 115
equal to that in siiniliir areas of the Carboniferous systems. This carbon has been obtained from the deoxidation of carbonic acid by phmts, and con- sequently indicates the existence of plants side by side with the Eozoon. M'Nab, W, R. On the Structure of a Lignite from the Old Red Sand- stone. Trans. Bot. Soc. Edin. vol. x. p. 312. The author proposes to name the wood which he describes PalceopUys MiUer'd. It was found by Hugh Miller at Cromarty. Von Mueller, F., and R. Brough Smyth. Observations on some Vegetable Fossils from Victoria. Geol. Mag. vol. vii. p. 390. The specimens were fruits from surface deposits, and were obtained from one of the deep leads at Haddon. One is a coniferous fruit allied to Solfnoslrobtis, of Bowerbank, to which the name of Spondi/Iostrobus Smylhii is given. Tlie others are not named, but suggestions are given as to their affinities, and these indicate, according to Von Midler, a flora analogous to that of the existing forest-belt of Eastern Australia. Williamson, W. C. Contributions towards the History of Zamia ffiffas, Lindl. and Hutt. Trans. Linn. Soc. vol. xxvi. pp. 663-674, pi. 52, 53. The author gives an account of the different structures which he believes to belong to this plant, describing in detail the stem, leaves, and male and female ffowers.
Synojjsis of the Genera and Species described in the preceding Papers.
FiLlCES.
Chelepteris, Quart. Journ. Geol. Sue. vol. xxvi. p. 352. Osinntidites Dowkeri, Carr. Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc. vol. xxvi. p. 349. Loicer Eocene. Heme Bay.
CvCADEiE.
Bcnnettites Gibsonianns, Carr. Trans. Linn. Soc. vol. xxvi. p. 681,
pi. Iviii-lx. Lower Greensand. Luccombe Chine, Isle of Wight. B. maxinius, Carr. 1. c. Wealden. Isle of Wight. B. Peachianus, Carr. 1. c. ; pi. Ixii. Middle Oolite. Helmsdale, Suther-
landshire. B. Portlandicus, Carr. 1. c. ; pi. hi. Lower Purbeck. Isle of Portland,
Dorsetshire. B. Saxbyanus, Carr. 1. c, ; pi. Ivii. Wealden. Isle of Wight. Bitcklandia a«o;«rt/«, Presl^ Trans. Linn. Soc. vol. xxvi. p. 679; pi. liv.
tig. 1-3. Wealden. Chickfield, Sussex. B. Mantellii, Carr. I.e.; pi. liv. fig. 4. Wealden. Cuckficld, Sussex. B. Milhriana, Carr. I.e.; pi. Iv. tig. 1. Coral Rag. Brora, Sutiier-
landshire.
B. squamosa, Brongn. 1. c. Sto7iesJield Slate. Stonesfield. Crossozamia Buvignieri, Pomel, I.e. p. 680. Jurassic. St. Michel,
France.
C. Moreaui, Pomel, 1. c. Jurassic. St. IMichel, France.
MantelUa inclusa, Carr. I.e. p. 681; pi. Ixiii. tig. 2 and 3. Lower
Greensand. Potton, Cambridgeshire. AI. intermedia, Carr. 1. c. ; pi. Ixiii. fig. 4 and 5. Lower Purbeck. Isle
of Portlaiul, Dorsetshire. 3/. microphylla, Brongn. 1. c. ; pi. Ixiii. fig. 6. Lower Purleck. Isle
of Portland, Dorsetshire.
i2
�� � | WIKI |
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2008 October 15
October 15
This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on October 15, 2008
Rules to consier/Make only links relevant to the context debate → Wikipedia talk:Only make links that are relevant to the context
The result of the debate was No consensus. It seems the community has yet to come to a definitive conclusion on which principle to follow here.--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 05:31, 30 October 2008 (UTC) This redirect out of article space also appears to have one of the oldest typographical errors still existing in the project (from 2001!). Even if the spelling were correct, the title seems obsolete as it appears to be a subpage of Rules to consier (or even Rules to consider). <IP_ADDRESS>, temporarily at <IP_ADDRESS> (talk) 20:10, 15 October 2008 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
* Keep. This is where the page originally existed before being moved. The page was created here long before the creation of the Wikipedia space. Pages this old, especially policy pages that were of interest to academics studying social software, are almost certainly externally linked. Even if you successfully orphan this redirect, it will exist all through history and in those external places. There is no good reason to delete it and several reasonable reasons to keep it. Rossami (talk) 23:05, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
* Delete I consider it highly unlikely that an external source would link to a misspelling like this and any attribution issues can be dealt with via hist merges. MBisanz talk 15:10, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
* To clarify, external sources did (and presumably still do) link to pages like this. This is where the page existed before being moved. A researcher wanting to point to the page might deplore the misspelling but this is where the link pointed at the time. To your other point, please remember that history-merge only solves the attribution problem. It does not fix all the internal references to the title which remain scattered throughout the pagehistories of the project. Rossami (talk) 16:42, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
* Delete Cross namespace redirect from a highly unlikely search term. As for the permanent maintenance of outmoded naming schemes to combat potential linkrot argument, the problem is better handled by solutions such as the Internet Archive Wayback Machine. --Allen3 talk 17:22, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
* Keep and tag with . Tohd8BohaithuGh1 (talk) 22:39, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
* Keep for inbound links. JASpencer (talk) 14:57, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
* Delete, useless cross-namespace redirect. Wizardman 02:00, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
* Delete per nom., plus utterly misspelled. — The Man in Question (sprec) · (forðung) 07:54, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
List of insects → Category:Insects
The result of the debate was Keep. Tikiwont (talk) 13:22, 24 October 2008 (UTC) Cross-namespace redirect. Considering that (according to the article Insect, there are about one million described species of insects on our planet, clearly no "list of insects" article could stand on its own. <IP_ADDRESS>, temporarily at <IP_ADDRESS> (talk) 19:48, 15 October 2008 (UTC) The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
* Keep. It's harmless and it preempts the recreation of the pointless and unmaintainable "list of insects" that anonymous users seem to like to start. Redirects like this are a way to subtly point new users toward the category feature - something they probably didn't know about before. Rossami (talk) 23:08, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
* Delete Hist merge will take care of the GFDL req. Categories are not lists and lists are not categories, if we have only one, we don't need to redirect to the other. MBisanz talk 15:10, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
* Keep, in that people might well search for this, and the redirect prevents someone trying to create an actual 'list of insects'. Redirects to categories aren't always a good idea, but this one looks fine to me. Terraxos (talk) 22:59, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
* Keep per Terraxos (talk · contribs). Tohd8BohaithuGh1 (talk) 22:39, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
* Keep CNR for categories tend to be in a gray area. We generally disallow CNRs because other namespaces are normally not considered encyclopedic content. -- Ned Scott 04:46, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
Bushel and Peck → Category:Units of volume
The result of the debate was Retarget to A Bushel and a Peck. Tikiwont (talk) 13:23, 24 October 2008 (UTC) Cross-namespace redirect created four years ago. While this looks like the name of a law firm, it appears that the redirect was targeted this way because of two potential redirect targets (bushel, peck). Needless to say, this is a redirect in search of a valid target, but none is evident. <IP_ADDRESS>, temporarily at <IP_ADDRESS> (talk) 19:36, 15 October 2008 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
* Delete Errant redirect. MBisanz talk 15:10, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
* Retarget to A Bushel and a Peck. JASpencer (talk) 10:40, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
* Retarget per JASpencer above - the best destination available. Terraxos (talk) 22:57, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
* Retarget per JASpencer (talk · contribs). Tohd8BohaithuGh1 (talk) 22:40, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
* Sounds like a viable option to me. I have no objection to retargeting. <IP_ADDRESS>, temporarily at <IP_ADDRESS> (talk) 20:08, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
Lists of pieces → Category:Lists of musical works
The result of the debate was keep. Wizardman 21:17, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
Four-year old redirect with a confusing title ("piece" has several meanings in various contexts) - could refer to music, art, or... perhaps something else). It redirects from mainspace to a category. Originally this was a list article with the same confusing out-of-context title, but the sea of redlinks is nothing worth reverting to. <IP_ADDRESS>, temporarily at <IP_ADDRESS> (talk) 19:26, 15 October 2008 (UTC) The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
* Keep to ensure compliance with the attribution requirements of GFDL. Looking at the history, the contents of this list were used in the creation of the category and/or the content of other articles. As with the "list of" redirect above, it's harmless and quietly points new users to the category function. Rossami (talk) 23:10, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
* Delete Hist merge will take care of the GFDL req. Categories are not lists and lists are not categories, if we have only one, we don't need to redirect to the other. MBisanz talk 15:10, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
* Please correct me if I'm wrong but I don't believe you can history-merge to a category. There's no actual page history to merge it with. Rossami (talk) 16:43, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
* You can histmerge, there is the category description part of the page, so it would function like any other hist merge. MBisanz talk 04:05, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
* Keep As well as Rossami's arguments the fact that this is four year old address could have inbound links. JASpencer (talk) 10:51, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
* Keep per JASpencer (talk · contribs) above. Tohd8BohaithuGh1 (talk) 22:41, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
* Keep CNR for categories tend to be in a gray area. We generally disallow CNRs because other namespaces are normally not considered encyclopedic content. -- Ned Scott 04:47, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
* Because "piece" has numerous meanings in English (mostly not having anything to do with music), may I suggest a retargeting to Piece, a dab page, as an alternative? <IP_ADDRESS>, temporarily at <IP_ADDRESS> (talk) 20:06, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
* Redirect to piece. All the comments above seem valid to me. Because of the multiple meanings of the word "piece", simply restricting the redirect to one meaning of the word seems inappropriate (and aguably confusing to some, including this chess player who enjoys art while assembling pieces of jigsaw puzzles with my piece nearby). The retargeting will also preserve the history and eliminate the CNR. Now that I've given a piece of my mind... B.Wind (talk) 01:26, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
Wikipolicy → Five pillars
The result of the debate was delete. Wizardman 17:12, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
Unlikely redirect, many wikis out there, our policies are not theirs. MBisanz talk 12:46, 15 October 2008 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
* Delete. Per nom. Knippschild (talk) 06:55, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
Longest article → Longest Wikipedia Article
The result of the debate was delete. Wizardman 01:58, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
Navel-gazing cross-namespace redirect, unlikely to be content reader is searching for. MBisanz talk 12:10, 15 October 2008 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
* Soft redirect to Special:Longpages as current target is also a soft redirect to the same page. "Longest article" is an old redirect, and the special page does indeed present a list of long articles in order of decreasing size. <IP_ADDRESS>, temporarily at <IP_ADDRESS> (talk) 18:53, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
* Actually, this redirect appears to have been created in Feb 2008. (The previously deleted versions were all vandalism and properly deleted as such.) I'm not seeing any history that needs preservation on this page. Longest Wikipedia Article, on the other hand, does have good-faith history going back to 2005. Rossami (talk) 23:18, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
Macquarie Southern Cross Media Radio Stations → Template:MSCMRadio
The result of the debate was Speedy delete, creator permission. MBisanz talk 12:44, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
Unlikely cross-namespace redirect, unlikely to be content reader is searching for. MBisanz talk 12:10, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
* Delete Something I forgot to do after renaming/moved it to a template was to delete the original. Bidgee (talk) 12:32, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
Table of all possible TLAs from AAA to DZZ → TLAs from AAA to DZZ
The result of the debate was delete. Cross-namespace redirects are discouraged by policy. Wizardman 01:59, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
Improper cross-namespace redirect, unlikely to be content reader is searching for. MBisanz talk 12:09, 15 October 2008 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
* Keep. My view is that the lists of TLAs should be in mainspace as a navigation tool. At the very least they should be accessible from mainspace. --Rumping (talk) 17:51, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
Tag team editors → Tag team
The result of the debate was delete. Wizardman 17:12, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
Improper cross-namespace redirect, unlikely to be content reader is searching for. MBisanz talk 12:09, 15 October 2008 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
* Delete - recently created CNR, no history worth preserving. <IP_ADDRESS>, temporarily at <IP_ADDRESS> (talk) 19:01, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
Celipa → Category:Dragon Ball characters
The result of the discussion was Deleted with the exception of Kui. SkierRMH ( talk ) 06:00, 27 October 2008 (UTC) No article in the target category contains the name "Celipa"; otherwise I would have retargeted to such an article. Because of that, it's a confusing redirect and should be deleted. With similar justification, I also nominate:
* Kui (dragonball) → Category:Dragon Ball characters
* Cargo (Dragon Ball) → Category:Dragon Ball characters
* Erasa (Dragon Ball) → Category:Dragon Ball characters
* Jinzo'ningen → Category:Dragon Ball characters
* Jinzō'ningen → Category:Dragon Ball characters
* Ro Dai Kaioshin → Category:Dragon Ball characters
* Rō_Dai_Kaiōshin → Category:Dragon Ball characters
* Serippa → Category:Dragon Ball characters
* Sharpener (Dragon Ball) → Category:Dragon Ball characters
* Totepo → Category:Dragon Ball characters
B.Wind (talk) 05:06, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
* Note without recommendation (for now) - some of the above did not have their rfd tags when I checked. All do now. <IP_ADDRESS>, temporarily at <IP_ADDRESS> (talk) 19:13, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
* While I don't think there is anything we can do for most of these redirects I do have a possibile suggestion for Kui (dragonball). Kui appears to be a mispelling of the character Cui and that character is listed on the character page. Also while I am unable to prove it from what I remember in the dub the C in Cui was prounced like a k as in the word cat. In short a retargeting to List of Dragon Ball characters may be the best option in this case as a plausiable typo. --<IP_ADDRESS> (talk) 01:57, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
* Delete all, unless a justification or appropriate target can be provided for any of them. It's a bad idea in any case to have redirects to categories that refer to just one page in that category; they should just redirect to the page instead, if it exists, and if it doesn't, neither should they. Terraxos (talk) 22:55, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
* What about the suggestion for Kui listed above. --<IP_ADDRESS> (talk) 03:28, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
* Fair point: that one can be redirected to List of Dragon Ball characters as suggested above. Terraxos (talk) 01:20, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
* It seems Kui has been retargeted and we have consensus on the rest. Closing admin, we're ready here! B.Wind (talk) 00:42, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.' | WIKI |
Re: static class variable allocated at heap
From:
"Earl Purple" <earlpurple@gmail.com>
Newsgroups:
comp.lang.c++.moderated
Date:
12 Jul 2006 18:47:01 -0400
Message-ID:
<1152707391.806801.89910@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>
gelbeiche wrote:
Hi,
a project I'm involved in has code in the form:
class toConnectionProvider
{
static std::map<QCString, toConnectionProvider *> *Providers;
...
}
A provider can register itself in the map:
void toConnectionProvider::addProvider(const QCString &provider)
{
checkAlloc();
Provider = provider;
(*Providers)[Provider] = this;
}
and there is a member function which checks if the map is allocated.
void toConnectionProvider::checkAlloc(void)
{
if (!Providers)
Providers = new std::map<QCString, toConnectionProvider *>;
}
I have the following questions:
- AFAIK Providers is never "deleted" until program exit and usually
I expect a new/delete pair for dynamic memory allocation.
So I guess the idiom above(static class variable allocated at heap)
is not kosher ?!
It's not a leak as such but you'll have a hard time debugging your
problem with purify as it will show up as a leak and you could have
trouble working out which ones are valid and which ones are not. I
personally prefer not to have the idiom above.
- Is the code above a candidate for refactoring ?
A quick change would be to convert
map<>* Providers;
to
map Providers;
Is it a essential improvement ?
Do not have a loose static instance because you cannot control
initialisation order. But the best solution in my opinion is to use a
function that has the static member and returns it by reference. Here
there is some control as the member will not be initialised until the
function is first called. If it needs other singletons to already exist
it will call their appropriate function and you'll be safe as long as
there are no circular references.
In addition, should any constructor throw an exception it will be
catchable.
Finally, in a multi-threaded environment, there should be no problems
with race conditions using a static member (compilers have to be
compliant with this though), whereas there might be using a static
pointer.
[ See http://www.gotw.ca/resources/clcm.htm for info about ]
[ comp.lang.c++.moderated. First time posters: Do this! ]
Generated by PreciseInfo ™
Mulla Nasrudin went to the psychiatrist and asked if the good doctor
couldn't split his personality.
"Split your personality?" asked the doctor.
"Why in heaven's name do you want me to do a thing like
that?"
"BECAUSE," said Nasrudin! "I AM SO LONESOME." | ESSENTIALAI-STEM |
3 Warren Buffett Stocks Most Likely to Soar in Q4
Warren Buffett would probably be the last person on the planet to predict how stocks will perform over the short term. The legendary investor is much more focused on the long-term business prospects for the stocks he buys for Berkshire Hathaway (NYSE: BRK.A) (NYSE: BRK.B).
That is absolutely the correct mindset to have. However, if I had to pick the stocks in Berkshire's portfolio that would probably deliver strong gains over the near term, the decision wouldn't be that difficult. Here are the three Buffett stocks I think are most likely to soar in Q4.
1. Chevron
Chevron (NYSE: CVX) now ranks as the fourth-largest position in Buffett's portfolio. It's one of the few stocks that the Berkshire Hathaway CEO has been consistently buying for several consecutive quarters.
The oil and gas giant also stands as one of the few big winners for Buffett so far in 2022. Chevron's share price has jumped close to 30% year to date. This gain stemmed in large part from Russia's invasion of Ukraine, a move that disrupted the global energy market.
I think that Chevron stock will probably move even higher in Q4. Any hopes that the Russia-Ukraine conflict would end quickly have evaporated. European Union leaders agreed to ban 90% of most Russian oil imports by the end of this year. OPEC+ members are meeting this week to consider cutting oil production.
All of this could translate to higher oil prices, which would be bad news for the public but good news for Chevron. With shares trading at around nine times expected earnings, Chevron's valuation isn't so great that the stock wouldn't benefit from further global supply tightening.
2. Occidental Petroleum
Buffett has become a huge fan of Occidental Petroleum (NYSE: OXY). After months of aggressive buying, Berkshire now owns nearly 21% of the oil and gas company.
Occidental has been the best-performing stock in Berkshire's entire portfolio so far this year. Its shares have skyrocketed by more than 120%. At one point, Oxy was up over 150% year to date.
Can Occidental keep its momentum going in Q4? I think so. Importantly, the company benefits from the same global dynamics that should help Chevron. The two stocks also share nearly identical forward earnings multiples.
But there's another factor that could boost Occidental stock even more this year. In August, Berkshire won regulatory authorization to acquire up to 50% of Occidental. If Buffett keeps buying shares, it's almost a certainty that Occidental stock will keep rising.
3. Apple
You could make a good case that Apple (NASDAQ: AAPL) ranks as Buffett's favorite stock after Berkshire itself. Apple is by far the biggest holding in Berkshire's portfolio. Buffett has referred to it as one of Berkshire's "four giants." The other three "giants" -- the insurance business, BNSF Railway, and Berkshire Hathaway Energy -- are Berkshire subsidiaries.
Unlike Chevron and Occidental, Apple has been a loser for Buffett in 2022. Shares of the tech giant have plunged around 20% year to date.
Don't think for a second that Apple can't rebound strongly in Q4, though. One key reason behind the stock's recent slide is a Bloomberg report that Apple asked certain suppliers to scale back production of the new iPhone 14. But stories based on anonymous sources don't always pan out.
At least one Wall Street analyst, Rosenblatt Securities, thinks that consumers in the U.S. and in other countries could enthusiastically buy Apple's new products. All it would take for Apple stock to soar from current levels is for the company to beat sales expectations during the holiday season.
10 stocks we like better than Apple
When our award-winning analyst team has a stock tip, it can pay to listen. After all, the newsletter they have run for over a decade, Motley Fool Stock Advisor, has tripled the market.*
They just revealed what they believe are the ten best stocks for investors to buy right now... and Apple wasn't one of them! That's right -- they think these 10 stocks are even better buys.
See the 10 stocks
*Stock Advisor returns as of September 30, 2022
Keith Speights has positions in Apple and Berkshire Hathaway (B shares). The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Apple and Berkshire Hathaway (B shares). The Motley Fool recommends the following options: long January 2023 $200 calls on Berkshire Hathaway (B shares), long March 2023 $120 calls on Apple, short January 2023 $200 puts on Berkshire Hathaway (B shares), short January 2023 $265 calls on Berkshire Hathaway (B shares), and short March 2023 $130 calls on Apple. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.
The views and opinions expressed herein are the views and opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Nasdaq, Inc. | NEWS-MULTISOURCE |
Page:Thoughts on the Cause of the Present Discontents.pdf/27
Rh ment, was an admirable substitute for a Prerogative, that, being only the offspring of antiquated prejudices, had moulded in its original stamina irresistible principles of decay and dissolution. The ignorance of the people is a bottom but for a temporary system; the interest of active men in the State is a foundation perpetual and infallible. However, some circumstances, arising, it must be confessed, in a great degree from accident, prevented the effects of this influence for a long time from breaking out in a manner capable of exciting any serious apprehensions. Although Government was strong and flourished exceedingly, the Court had drawn far less advantage than one would imagine from this great source of power.
At the Revolution, the Crown, deprived, for the ends of the Revolution itself, of many prerogatives, was found too weak to struggle against all the difficulties which pressed so new and unsettled a Government. The Court was obliged therefore to delegate a part of its powers to men of such interest as could support, and of such fidelity as would adhere to, its establishment. Such men were able to draw in a greater number to a concurrence in the common defence. This connexion, necessary at first, continued long after convenient; and properly conducted might indeed, in all situations, be an useful instrument of Government. At the same time, through the intervention of men of popular weight and character, the people possessed a security for their just portion of im- Rh 5 | WIKI |
Join egghead, unlock knowledge.
Want more egghead?
This lesson is for members. Join us? Get access to all 3,000+ tutorials + a community with expert developers around the world.
Unlock This Lesson
1×
Become a member
to unlock all features
Level Up!
Access all courses & lessons on egghead today and lock-in your price for life.
Autoplay
Avoid Common JavaScript Errors with ESLint
Andy Van SlaarsAndy Van Slaars
eslintESLint
JavaScript is great! JavaScript is also full of features and flexible options that can make it easy to introduce bugs. ESLint uses static analysis to check that your code adheres to a list of rules to help you avoid some specific runtime errors. ESLint is highly configurable, so in this lesson, we'll install ESLint and configure some baseline rules for our boilerplate.
Code
Code
Become a Member to view code
You must be a Member to view code
Access all courses and lessons, track your progress, gain confidence and expertise.
Become a Member
and unlock code for this lesson
Transcript
Transcript
Instructor: 00:00 Let's add ESLint to this project to help us avoid some common JavaScript errors. We'll start with an npm i -d to save this as a dev dependency, and we're going to install ESLint. Because this project uses React, we're also going to install ESLint plugin React.
00:20 With that installed let's open up our package.json. In our script section, we're going to add a script we'll call lint. The body of the script is going to be a call to ESLint. We're going to have it basically just have it lint all of our JavaScript files.
00:38 I'll save that. Now, in the terminal, I'm going to run that script with npm run lint, and we're going to get this error that ESLint couldn't find a configuration file. We can set that up with this ESLint init command.
00:53 Let's clear out our terminal and we're going to use NPX to do this, npx eslint. We'll pass it that init flag. We're going to get a series of prompts, and let's walk through those now. We can pick between using a popular style guide, answering questions about our style, or inspecting our JavaScript files.
01:11 We're going to go with the answer questions about your style option. It's going to ask which version of that kind of ECMAScript we use. We're going to go down to ES2018. Are we using ES6 modules? The answer to that is yes. Where will you code run? The answer to this is actually both, because we also want to lint things like our webpack config files.
01:32 I'm going to use A to toggle both browser and Node on. Because we're using both browser and Node, we do use common JS, JSX, and React. Our style of indentation is spaces. We use single quotes. Unix line endings, semicolons, we'll say no, and the format for our config file can just be JSON. It's going to create this ESLintRc.json file.
01:59 It's also going to tell us that we have a dependency, this eslint-plugin-react, which we installed along with ESLint, so that's handled. We can get rid of this, and in our ESLint RC, we'll see that it's created this config file with quite a few options. At the top of this file, we have this ENV key, and that defines the environments that our code can run in.
02:21 As you'll see, we have multiple environments. Some of our code is Node-based. Some is meant for the browser. This is going to make sure that things like the window global in our browser code doesn't throw an error, because it's not defined somewhere. This environment's going to say that window is an acceptable global to use.
02:38 Then we have the extends key. This allows us to extend existing configurations. ESLint comes with this built-in recommended configuration that we're going to extend here, and we'll come back to this in a second. Parser options configures things like support for JSX and our ES version.
02:56 You'll see that we have this React plugin, so this is going to apply some React-specific configuration. Then we have the rules section. When we look at the rules, you're going to see things like indent, line break style, quotes, and semicolons.
03:10 These are all formatting-related, and since this project is already configured with Prettier, we're not going to enforce those rules through ESLint, we're just going to let Prettier automatically format our code. For this configuration, we can actually delete this entire rules section.
03:24 If I get that terminal out of the way, I can come up here, and I can delete the rules key, and the entire object value. We'll save that. If we jump back up, we can go back to this extends. Part of what this recommended ESLint config does is it includes certain rules that are recommended.
03:44 If we look at the ESLint website, there's a long list of rules. They're broken out into categories, things like possible errors, best practices, etc. If we scroll down, any rule that has a checkbox in this column to the left here is part of that recommended set of rules.
04:00 As we can see as we scroll through here, there's a lot of rules that are included out of the box, when we extend that recommended config. Rather than defining a bunch of specific rules, we're going to stick with the recommended ones.
04:13 Let's go back to the code, and in our terminal, let's run that lint command again, now that we have our configuration file in place. I'm going to npm run lint, and we're going to get another failure. Let's expand this, and let's take a look. We'll see that we have a lot of problems.
04:32 We're going to see a lot of errors related to this unnecessary semicolon rule. If we look, we'll see that this is actually coming from our app bundle code in our dist directory. This is generated code. We don't really want to lint this. In the root of our project, I'm going to go in and I'm going to add an ESLint ignore file.
04:51 In that file, I'm going to add the dist directory as an ignore. I'll save that file, and then back in the terminal, let's run this again. We're still going to get errors, but you'll see we went from 45 problems down to 4. This is progress. Let's scroll up, and you'll see that we're getting a parsing error for this unexpected token import.
05:12 To fix this, I'm going to actually install another package. I'm going to npm i -d and I'm going to install babel-eslint. With that installed, I'm going to go into my ESLintRc.json file and right at the top, I'm going to add another key to this file. I'm going to come in here, and I'm going to add a parser key. My parser is going to be babel-eslint.
05:39 I'll go back into the terminal, and I'm going to run npm run lint one more time. Now, we've gone from four problems to eight problems, so it seems to be getting worse, but if we look at the errors, we'll see that it's no longer complaining about our syntax. Now, it's complaining about specific errors related to React and some globals that we're using.
05:59 We can clean these up with some more configuration. I'll get the terminal out of the way, and I'm going to go into this extend setting here. I'm going to make this an array of strings, and my second element in this array here is going to be our React-recommended rules from our plugin.
06:17 We're going to prefix this with plugin, and that plugin is React. From that, we want to use the recommended settings. We can save that, and let's go back into our terminal, npm run lint, again. Now, we're down to three issues. Let's start with this component definition is missing display name issue.
06:41 This is coming from our React plugin, and this is coming from warning.js. Let's get the terminal out of the way. I'm going to go into warning.js, and here, we're exporting a default function component. I'm going to take the exportDefault, cut that. I'm going to define a constant called warning, and I'm going to assign that function component to warning.
07:00 I'm going to drop down, I'm going to export defaultWarning. We still have the same behavior we had before, but now we can access this function by name. I'm going to come in here, I'm going to set warning.displayName, and I'm going to give that a display name of warning.
07:20 I can close that file, and back in my terminal, I can npm run lint one more time. That error has been cleared up, and we're down to two problems. Both of these problems are in our app.spec.js, and ESLint doesn't like the fact that we're using describe init, without having them defined.
07:37 We're not importing them, so if we look at our file here, we'll see that describe init are just globals Those are defined by Jest, and this is a legitimate use for these globals, we just need to let ESLint know. We'll come in here, and in our ESLint.json, we're going to add another environment for Jest.
07:59 We'll just add a Jest key, with the value of true, we'll save that, and then back in the terminal, we can npm run lint, and everything passes. We're not breaking any rules, but we do still have this warning left over. I'd like to clear that up. This is saying that the React version's not specified, and the eslint-plugin-react wants to see that.
08:18 Let's get the terminal out of the way. In our ESLint config, we're going to add a settings key at our top level, and that's going to be an object. That object is going to get a React key, which will also be an object. That's going to get a version, and that's going to get our version number as a string.
08:39 Let's double check in our package.json. We can look at our dependencies, and we'll see that we're using React 16.6.1. I'm just going to copy that and paste it right into that config. I'll save it, come back in the terminal. I'll run npm lint one more time, and now that warning's gone away, and we're not breaking any rules.
Discuss
Discuss | ESSENTIALAI-STEM |
see #1115510: Entity providing modules must call field_attach_delete_bundle() in hook_uninstall()
-> Investigate whether it's possible to implement that generically for all modules relying on the entity API?
Files:
CommentFileSizeAuthor
#5 entity_attach_bundle.patch5.65 KBfago
Comments
fago’s picture
hm, that's problematic. Entity-providing modules can not really invoke that for all their entities as when they are uninstalled, the entity API might be already disabled/uninstalled too, so they miss the underlying API for getting the bundle objects.
Directly querying the DB is not really a solution either, once the entity-providing module want to support pluggable storage controllers.
So I'd go for a work-a-round: Let the entity API module care about it when modules providing entities via it are uninstalled + warn people disabling the entity API module that they should not do so unless all modules relying upon it are already uninstalled.
Thoughts?
catch’s picture
That sounds about right.
You could possibly brute-force that warning by having entity API hook_system_info_alter() itself to required = TRUE if there are disabled but uninstalled modules that specify it as a dependency.
See also #1199946: Disabled modules are broken beyond repair so the "disable" functionality needs to be removed.
fago’s picture
I really like that suggestion, let's go for it.
fago’s picture
ok I had a closer look: It turned out that there is no way of loading bundle entities for an already disabled module. It might use any storage controller, which we cannot use without having entity info in the system...
Thus, the only option to proceed I see is require entity-providing modules to care about that although we usually care about caring bundle attachers for them :(
I've opened #1330472: clean up entity-related data on module uninstall for solving the problem properly in d8.
fago’s picture
Status: Active » Fixed
FileSize
5.65 KB
ok, I've implemented that for the testing module and added a note to this at the 'bundle of' key docs.
Committed patch attached.
Automatically closed -- issue fixed for 2 weeks with no activity. | ESSENTIALAI-STEM |
Contributions
If you like the website and want to contribute to the running costs then please do so below. All contributions are most welcome.
PayPal - The safer, easier way to pay online.
M16, also known as the Eagle Nebula, is a young open cluster of stars embedded within an extremely large cloud of interstellar gas and dust in the constellation of Serpens (Cauda). It's located in the next inner spiral arm of the Milky Way, 7,000 light-years distant. The emission part of the nebula or HII region is catalogued as IC 4703 and is an active star-forming region, which has already created a significant cluster of young stars. The cluster itself lies at the heart of the Eagle Nebula and is known as NGC 6611. M16 was discovered by Philippe Loys de Chéseaux in 1745-6, but Charles Messier was the first to record the associated nebulosity on June 3, 1764.
The constellation of Serpens is faint but unique as its split into two separate sections. One half, named Serpens Caput, lies to the west of Ophiuchus and the other half, Serpens Cauda, lies on the eastern side of Ophiuchus. At the very southern tip of Serpens Cauda close to the Scutum and Sagittarius border is M16. It can be found 2.5 degrees west of γ Sct (mag. +4.7) and a few degrees north of the Omega Nebula (M17), M18 and the Sagittarius Star Cloud (M24). This beautifully rich area of the sky is a delight to scan with binoculars.
The Eagle Nebula was immortalised in 1995 when imaged several times by the Hubble Space Telescope. The resulting iconic photograph, titled the Pillars of Creation, showed three magnificent columns of interstellar gas and dust displayed in sensational detail.
M16 The Eagle Nebula showing the Pillars of Creation star forming region (credit:- NASA, ESA, STScI, J. Hester and P. Scowen (Arizona State University))
Finder Chart for M16 (credit:- freestarcharts)
Finder Chart for M16 - pdf format (credit:- freestarcharts)
M16 has an apparent magnitude of +6.2, which places it at the very edge of naked eye visibility, but easily within the range of binoculars or small telescopes. A pair of 7x50 or 10x50 models show a faint triangular shaped patch of light along with the brightest cluster stars. Through a 100mm (4-inch) scope roughly 20 stars are revealed, but spotting the emission nebula is much more challenging. Under dark skies the nebula hints at visibility, but due to its low surface brightness, medium to large amateur scopes are better suited to the task. Through 10-inch (250-mm) scopes at low powers, the nebula appears wispy with subtle details including dark obscuring matter to the north along with many more stars visible. To spot the famous Pillars of Creation an instrument of at least 300mm (12-inch) aperture is recommended.
In total, the nebula part of M16 covers 65 x 50 arc minutes of apparent sky with the open cluster spanning 7 arc minutes. This corresponds to spatial diameters of 130 x 100 light-years and 15 light-years respectively. The open cluster is about 5.5 million years old and contains at least 450 stars of which the brightest member shines at mag. +8.2.
M16 is best seen during the months of June, July and August.
M16 Data Table
Messier16
NGC6611 (cluster)
IC4703 (nebula)
NameEagle Nebula
Object TypeEmission nebula with open cluster
ConstellationSerpens
Distance (light-years)7,000
Apparent Mag.+6.2
RA (J2000)18h 18m 48s
DEC (J2000)-13d 48m 26s
Apparent Size (arc mins)7.0 x 7.0 (cluster), 65 x 50 (nebula)
Radius (light-years)7.5 (cluster), 65 x 50 (nebula)
Other NamesCollinder 375, Sharpless 49
Notable FeatureSubject of the famous Hubble Telescope Pillars of Creation photograph | ESSENTIALAI-STEM |
Putting everything together
It is time to try to set up a project from scratch and use the different tools that we have covered during the course together! This exercise is very open-ended and you have free hands to try out a bit of what you want. But you should aim to use what you've learned to do the following:
1. Create a new git repository for the project (either on BitBucket or GitHub)
2. Add a README file which should contain the required information on how to run the project
3. Create a Conda environment.yml file with the required dependencies
4. Create a R Markdown or Jupyter notebook to run your code
5. Alternatively, create a Snakefile to run your code as a workflow and use a config.yml file to add settings to the workflow
6. Use git to continuously commit changes to the repository
7. Possibly make a Docker or Singularity image for your project
This is not a small task and may seem overwhelming! Don't worry if you feel lost or if the task seems daunting. To get the most out of the exercise, take one step at a time and go back to the previous tutorials for help and inspiration. The goal is not necessarily for you to finish the whole exercise, but to really think about each step and how it all fits together in practice.
Recommendation
We recommend to start with git, Conda and a notebook, as we would see these as the core tools to make a research project reproducible. We suggest to keep the analysis for this exercise short so that you have time to try out the different tools together while you have the opportunity to ask for help.
Your own project
This is a great opportunity for you to try to implement these methods on one of your current research projects. It is of course up to you which tools to include in making your research project reproducible, but we suggest to aim for at least git and Conda.
Tip
If your analysis project contains computationally intense steps it may be good to scale them down for the sake of the exercise. You might, for example, subset your raw data to only contain a minuscule part of its original size. You can then test your implementation on the subset and only run it on the whole dataset once everything works to your satisfaction.
Alternative: student experience project
If you don't want to use a project you're currently working on we have a suggestion for a small-scale project for you. The idea is to analyze students' experiences at this Reproducible Research course. For this you will use responses from students to the registration form for the course. Below you'll find links to files in *.csv format with answers from 3 course instances:
2018-11
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1yLcJL-rIAO51wWCPrAdSqZvCJswTqTSt4cFFe_eTjlQ/export?format=csv
2019-05
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1mBp857raqQk32xGnQHd6Ys8oZALgf6KaFehfdwqM53s/export?format=csv
2019-11
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1aLGpS9WKvmYRnsdmvvgX_4j9hyjzJdJCkkQdqWq-uvw/export?format=csv
The goal here is to create a Snakemake workflow, which contains the following:
1. Has a rule that downloads the csv files (making use of a config.yml file to pass the URLs and file names)
2. Has a rule that cleans the files (making use of wildcards so that the same rule can be run on each file)
3. The final step is to plot the student experience in some way
Remember to
• Keep everything versioned controlled with git
• Add information to the README file so others know how to re-run the project
• Add required software to the Conda environment.yml file
Inspiration and tips for the student experience workflow
The first two steps should be part of the Snakemake workflow. If you need some help with the cleaning step, see below for a Python script that you can save to a file and run in the second Snakemake rule.
Click to show a script for cleaning column names
The script (e.g. clean_csv.py):
#!/usr/bin/env python
import pandas as pd
from argparse import ArgumentParser
def main(args):
df = pd.read_csv(args.input, header=0)
df.rename(columns=lambda x: x.split("[")[-1].rstrip("]"), inplace=True)
df.rename(columns={'R Markdown': 'RMarkdown'}, inplace=True)
df.to_csv(args.output, index=False)
if __name__ == '__main__':
parser = ArgumentParser()
parser.add_argument("input", type=str,
help="Input csv file")
parser.add_argument("output", type=str,
help="Output csv file cleaned")
args = parser.parse_args()
main(args)
Command to execute the script:
python clean_csv.py input_file.csv output_file.csv
The third step is really up to you how to implement. You could:
• Include the plotting in the workflow using an RMarkdown document that gets rendered into a report
• Have a script that produces separate figures (e.g. png files)
• Create a jupyter notebook that reads the cleaned output from the workflow and generates some plot or does other additional analyses
If you need some help/inspiration with plotting the results, click below to see an example Python script that you can save to file and run with the cleaned files as input.
Click to show a script for plotting the student experience
The script (e.g. plot.py):
#!/usr/bin/env python
import matplotlib as mpl
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
plt.style.use('ggplot')
mpl.use('agg')
import pandas as pd
import seaborn as sns
import numpy as np
from argparse import ArgumentParser
def read_files(files):
"""Reads experience counts and concatenates into one dataframe"""
df = pd.DataFrame()
for i, f in enumerate(files):
# Extract date
d = f.split(".")[0]
_df = pd.read_csv(f, sep=",", header=0)
# Assign date
_df = _df.assign(Date=pd.Series([d]*len(_df), index=_df.index))
if i==0:
df = _df.copy()
else:
df = pd.concat([df,_df], sort=True)
return df.reset_index().drop("index",axis=1).fillna(0)
def count_experience(df, normalize=False):
"""Generates long format dataframe of counts"""
df_l = pd.DataFrame()
for software in df.columns:
if software=="Date":
continue
# Groupby software and count
_df = df.groupby(["Date",software]).count().iloc[:,0].reset_index()
_df.columns = ["Date","Experience","Count"]
_df = _df.assign(Software=pd.Series([software]*len(_df),
index=_df.index))
if normalize:
_df = pd.merge(_df.groupby("Date").sum().rename(columns={'Count':'Tot'}),_df, left_index=True, right_on="Date")
_df.Count = _df.Count.div(_df.Tot)*100
_df.rename(columns={'Count': '%'}, inplace=True)
df_l = pd.concat([df_l, _df], sort=True)
df_l.loc[df_l.Experience==0,"Experience"] = np.nan
return df_l
def plot_catplot(df, outdir, figname, y, palette="Blues"):
"""Plot barplots of user experience per software"""
ax = sns.catplot(data=df, x="Date", col="Software", col_wrap=3, y=y,
hue="Experience", height=2.8,
kind="bar",
hue_order=["Never heard of it",
"Heard of it but haven't used it",
"Tried it once or twice", "Use it"],
col_order=["Conda", "Git", "Snakemake", "Jupyter",
"RMarkdown", "Docker", "Singularity"],
palette=palette)
ax.set_titles("{col_name}")
plt.savefig("{}/{}".format(outdir, figname), bbox_to_inches="tight",
dpi=300)
plt.close()
def plot_barplot(df, outdir, figname, x):
"""Plot a barplot summarizing user experience over all software"""
ax = sns.barplot(data=df, hue="Date", y="Experience", x=x, errwidth=.5,
order=["Never heard of it",
"Heard of it but haven't used it",
"Tried it once or twice", "Use it"])
plt.savefig("{}/{}".format(outdir, figname), bbox_inches="tight",
dpi=300)
plt.close()
def main(args):
# Read all csv files
df = read_files(args.files)
# Count experience
df_l = count_experience(df)
# Count and normalize experience
df_lp = count_experience(df, normalize=True)
# Plot catplot of student experience
plot_catplot(df_l, args.outdir, "exp_counts.png", y="Count")
# Plot catplot of student experience in %
plot_catplot(df_lp, args.outdir, "exp_percent.png", y="%",
palette="Reds")
# Plot barplot of experience
plot_barplot(df_lp, args.outdir, "exp_barplot.png", x="%")
if __name__ == '__main__':
parser = ArgumentParser()
parser.add_argument("files", nargs="+",
help="CSV files with student experience to produce plots for")
parser.add_argument("--outdir", type=str, default=".",
help="Output directory for plots (defaults to current directory)")
args = parser.parse_args()
main(args)
Command to execute the script:
python plot.py file1.csv file2.csv file3.csv --outdir results/ | ESSENTIALAI-STEM |
User:Xylem9/sandbox
(To insert in first paragraph of "Gidgiddoni").
During periods of Nephite righteousness, selection of military leaders possessed of these spiritual gifts was standard practice. [Lachoneus...]
Possible addition after existing main article:
In the account of the prophet-general Gidgiddoni, the Book of Mormon offers meaningful guidance about the possible justifications for waging war. Prohibiting preemptive strikes, even against a seemingly intractable foe, God tells Gidgiddoni to prepare the Nephite people, gather their armies, and wait, instead of hunting the enemy to "destroy them in their own lands." This restraint was typical of other Nephite military chiefs who, like Gidgiddoni, were also prophets.
Wars of Preemption, Wars of Revenge
Author(s): Jeffrey R. Johansen
Source: Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, Vol. 35, No. 3 (Fall 2002), pp. 236-238 Published by: University of Illinois Press
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/45228394
Accessed: 07-11-2020 18:29 UTC
Duane Boyce. (2009). Were the Ammonites Pacifists? Journal of the Book of Mormon and Other Restoration Scripture, 18(1), 32-47. Retrieved November 11, 2020, from https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.5406/jbookmormotheres.18.1.0032
Contrast this with the behavior of Captain Moroni who, on one occasion during wartime, could have slain a number of Lamanites who “were drunken,” and yet refused to do so because “this was not the desire of Moroni; he did not delight in murder or bloodshed, but he delighted in the saving of his people from destruction” and therefore he “would not fall upon the Lamanites and destroy them in their drunkenness” (Alma 55: 18–19). It is not clear whether the same could be said of all the Nephites as a group, but it was clearly characteristic of many of the leaders of Nephite armies through the centuries. Consider that Nephi, king Benjamin, Alma, Gidgiddoni, Mormon, and Moroni all led armies of one size or another and that all were prophets.
Hillam, R. (1975). The Gadianton Robbers and Protracted War. Brigham Young University Studies, 15(2), 215-224. Retrieved November 11, 2020, from http://www.jstor.org/stable/43040558
Robison, L. (1992). Economic Insights from the Book of Mormon. Journal of Book of Mormon Studies (1992-2007),1(1), 35-53. Retrieved November 11, 2020, from http://www.jstor.org/stable/44758620
Lindon J. Robison. (2005). “No Poor Among Them”. Journal of Book of Mormon Studies (1992-2007), 14(1), 86-97. Retrieved November 11, 2020, from https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.5406/jbookmormstud.14.1.0086
Finally, people manifested their at-one-ment by uniting for their own defense. During one difficult period when the Nephites were threatened by Gadianton robbers, they demonstrated their at- one-ment by uniting themselves under their chief military o cer, Gidgiddoni, and their chief judge, Lachoneus, to defeat their enemies. is united effort put a temporary end to divisive and destructive secret combinations and led to renewed investments in public goods that integrated people and reduced inequality. | WIKI |
Generac Reaches 52-Week High - Analyst Blog
Shares of Generac Holdings Inc. ( GNRC ) hit a new 52-week high of $52.32 on Oct 25, and eventually closed at $50.44. Shares of this diversified machinery company have been on a rise since it announced strong results for the third quarter of 2013 together with a strong outlook for 2013 on Oct 24.
Year-to-date, share prices have recorded a healthy return of 63.2%. The company's long-term estimated earnings per share growth rate is 10.3%. Average volume of shares traded over the last three months came in at 876.2K.
In the third quarter of 2013, adjusted earnings per share for the company was $1.06, beating the Zacks Consensus Estimate of 83 cents by 27.7%. Results also surpassed the year-ago earnings by 35.9%. Generac announced 20.9% year-over-year increase in revenues to $363.3 million in the reported quarter. The year-over-year rise was mainly a result of both inorganic and organic revenue growth.
Generac experienced a rise in demand from households for backup power in the quarter. Also, the company's acquisitions of Ottomotores and Tower Light Slr significantly boosted revenues of the Commercial & Industrial segment, recording a year-over-year growth of 61.8% to $151.5 million.
Exiting the third quarter, the company entered into an agreement with Baldor Electric Company to acquire Baldor's generator division. This merger will enable Generac to further explore the North American and the international markets.
Based on the strong results, management revised upwards its guidance for 2013. Net sales growth is now projected in the low-to-mid 20% range, up from the low 20% range expected earlier. Additionally, adjusted EBITDA growth is estimated to improve from a low 20% range to a low 30% range.
The Zacks Consensus Estimate for 2013 has increased 3.7% in the last seven days to $3.91 per share and for 2014 the estimate went up 1.9% to $3.69 per share during the same time frame.
Other Stocks to Consider
Generac currently carries a Zacks Rank #3 (Hold). Other stocks worth a watch in the industry include IDEX Corp. ( IEX ), Nordson Corp. ( NDSN ) and Parker-Hannifin Corp. ( PH ). All of these stocks carry a Zacks Rank #2 (Buy).
GENERAC HOLDING (GNRC): Free Stock Analysis Report
IDEX CORP (IEX): Free Stock Analysis Report
NORDSON CORP (NDSN): Free Stock Analysis Report
PARKER HANNIFIN (PH): Free Stock Analysis Report
To read this article on Zacks.com click here.
Zacks Investment Research
The views and opinions expressed herein are the views and opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Nasdaq, Inc.
The views and opinions expressed herein are the views and opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Nasdaq, Inc. | NEWS-MULTISOURCE |
Page:Folk-lore - A Quarterly Review. Volume 5, 1894.djvu/41
Rh Manual of Madura: "Assigning a woman as wife to 10, 8, 6, or 2 husbands, who are held to be the fathers jointly and severally of any children that may be born of her body. And when such children grow up, they call themselves the children of 8 and 2, or of 6 and 2, or of 4 and 2, not of 10, or 8, or 6 fathers."
A remarkable fact concerning the West-country Kullens is that the boys are circumcised between 7 and 12. It has been said that this practice is a relic of the Mahomedan invasion 230 years ago. With this I do not agree. For what purpose did they acquire it from an alien race, for whom they felt nothing but hatred? The Mahomedan influence here was never strong. Like all the earlier races, the Kullens cling to their own beliefs and customs, and are strongly averse to any outside intervention. Even our strong, steady government affects them but little. Is it conceivable that this uncommon rite, practised by no other non-Islamic community in the country, was seized on and perpetuated by them, while remaining impervious to every other influence of the Mahomedan religion. If, as seems probable, circumcision is a mark of fealty to a god, it may be said they required no such mark, for they have one of their own. Every man's arm, over the deltoid, bears two or three scars made with a sharp stone, in boyhood, for the purpose, so they have told me, of enabling their god to recognise them when they pass behind the veil.
The East-country Kullens do not observe circumcision; nor do the Maravans; nor the Ahambadiyans. The West-country Kullens say, "We have always done it, we don't know why."
Ordinary quarrels, and cases of personal injury, are settled by a little court of the caste-folk; murders, too, are often compromised in this way, without reference to the police-courts. For wounding another, a man is made to pay a few rupees—"for treatment of the wound" which he inflicted. If the injury is so serious that the man may die, it is decided that if he dies within a certain number of | WIKI |
Report: New York Mets Expected To Lose $23 Million This Season « CBS New York
NEW YORK (CBSNewYork) – More great news has come out of Flushing. As if their disappointing second half of the season that saw their playoff hopes go under wasn't bad enough, the New York Post reported on Thursday that the Amazin's are expected to lose $23 million this season. It could be spun to be encouraging news as general manager Sandy Alderson said that the Mets lost $60 million last season but any way you cut, the club appears to be bleeding cash. New York cut its payroll by roughly $50 million from 2011 to 2012, and Alderson recently told WFAN's Mike Francesa that the payroll for the upcoming season will be in the neighborhood of $100 million. The Mets don't have much wiggle room at the moment, as both Jason Bay and Johan Santana one of whom is not producing and one of whom has been shut down for the season are owed a combined $50 million next season. Bay's contract includes a vesting option for a fifth year and the Mets hold a $25 million option for Santana in 2014. If the Mets decide not to pick up that option which there is virtually no chance of them doing they will be required to pay a $5.5 million buyout. Once both players likely come off the books in 2014, New York's front office will have far more to work with. The Mets have also been doomed at the gate yet again, as attendance has continued to take a hit at Citi Field due to the team's struggles. Citi Field is averaging 29,023 fans per game, good enough for 17th in the Major Leagues. That figure is a decrease of 1,085 attendees per game from last season. Attendance is projected to be extremely low for the remainder of September, as New York has fallen out of contention for a Wild Card berth. The Mets chose not to comment on the reported financial losses. The hits just keep on coming, Mets fans. Sound off with your thoughts and comments below… Reblogged this on catherinephung. Comments are closed. Listen Live | NEWS-MULTISOURCE |
The biggest investing mistakes of each generation
Every generation makes investing mistakes that later generations can learn from. Our grandparents, parents and older siblings all have been blindsided at one time or another from something about investing they got wrong. Like millennials scrambling to master the basics today, earlier generations were never formally taught how to invest. They just went with what they thought was best, but that's not always enough. What's more, even the investing strategies that worked out well for previous generations might be disastrous if used today because the world has changed. Instead of the lifelong employment at a company and guaranteed pensions that our parents or grandparents knew, later generations will work for several employers over a lifetime and depend more heavily on their own savings in individual retirement accounts and 401(k)s to ensure a comfortable retirement. While learning from another generation's mistakes is important so is understanding whether what they did right would still work today. The silent generation goes broke slowly. Born during the Great Depression, the silent generation (1925–1945) has always had an aversion to the stock market. This generation trusts banks but not brokerage firms, says Beth Blecker, CEO of Eastern Planning in Nanuet, New York. They put their money into certificates of deposit and left it alone. This strategy may have worked well when CDs paid interest north of 10 percent, but with today's miserly rates, putting your money into CDs alone is a surefire way to go broke slowly. Thanks to pensions and the promise of Social Security, there also wasn't a big impetus for this generation to invest. The stock market was seen as the rich man's playground, says Holly Kylen, a financial advisor with Voya Financial Advisors, based in Lititz, Pennsylvania. The silent generation also "unknowingly takes on risk by forgoing diversification," Blecker says. They tended to invest heavily in an employer's stock, and believed that the most important investment decision anyone could make was which company to work for, Kylen says. That made sense decades ago when whom you worked for came down to which company provided the best pension. Today, however, pensions have gone the way of the dodo, and investing heavily in an employer's company stock runs the risk of a painful double whammy if the business goes bust: You lose your job and a large chunk of your savings at the same time. Members of the silent generation worked hard and retired secure in the knowledge that their company and government would support them. For successive generations, that world is long gone, and baby boomers who follow in their parents' footsteps risk running out of money in retirement. Baby boomers underestimate retirement costs. Many boomers (1946-1964) mistakenly believe they should allocate their portfolios to super conservative investments such as bonds and cash in retirement, but this is a losing strategy, says Kyle Ryan, head of advisory services at Personal Capital in San Francisco. "In reality if you retire at 65, it's very likely you're going to need this money for 30-plus years," he says. Bonds and cash simply cannot provide adequate income for that long a time. If baby boomers don't have sources of growth to outpace inflation, Ryan warns, they may run out of money. "The last thing you want to do is underestimate your longevity." Knowing little about investing hampered this generation. When boomers first started to invest, the mantra was, "buy what you know," says Robert A. Karn, principal of Karn Couzens & Associates, a financial services firm in Farmington, Connecticut. Boomers filled their portfolios with the stock of companies they recognized and admired, but failed to realize that a company that makes good shoes does not necessarily make a good investment. The result was uneducated investors picking companies the way high schoolers pick a class president, before learning the hard way from the dot-com collapse that they did not know enough about investing. Generation X sacrifices retirement for their kids' education.Inflation and the cost of education have increased faster than almost anything else for gen x (1965-1981), Ryan says. As a result, "we see a lot of people in this age range prioritizing their kids' future education ahead of their retirement," which can put them – and their kids – in a difficult position later on. By saving their kids the cost of an education now, gen Xers risk costing their children even more down the line. There are many ways besides your savings to pay for your kid's education, whereas "there's not a lot of ways to replace retirement income other than by working," Ryan says. Gen Xers also have had a turbulent ride in the stock market, from the dot-com boom and bust to the 2008 financial crash, "and it did basically scar them as a generation," says Karn, adding that gen Xers are particularly prone to emotional buying and selling of stocks. The trick to not overreacting to market movements is to consider how what is happening today affects your long-term goals. It's advice millennials may want to heed. Millennials are too short sighted.Members of this generation want it all and they want it now. When gratification isn't instantaneous, millennials (1982-2004) tend to call it quits altogether. But investing is like building the base of a snowman, Kylen says. When you start rolling the snowball around in the snow, it can seem like forever before that base gets big, but given enough time, you'll be amazed by what you have amassed. It's hard to maintain a long-term perspective if you can't see beyond short-term goals. According to Personal Capital's 2016 Retirement Readiness Survey, 40 percent of millennials don't have any retirement savings. "History has proven the earlier you start, the better off you'll be in the long-run," says Yvette Butler, president of Capital One Investing in McLean, Virginia. "You won't miss the money once it's in your investment account, and you'll be glad you did it when you see those numbers increase." One thing millennials are better at than their predecessors is taking an active role in managing their investments, Kylen says. The younger investors who come into her office are increasingly armed with questions. They are asking for the investing education that earlier generations were never given. Some mistakes transcend generations.A general lack of awareness is the fatal flaw of today's investors, no matter their age. More than one-fifth of investors don't know how high the investment fees they are paying are, Ryan says. Another 10 percent don't even know if they are paying any fees at all. Fees of only "one or two percentage points can have a big impact on your bottom line over time," Butler says. "New fiduciary rules are requiring brokers to be more transparent in what they charge, so take advantage of that. Ask questions, demand transparency, and make sure you're keeping costs low (under 1 percent) so you can put that extra money toward your own retirement and not in someone else's pocket." | NEWS-MULTISOURCE |
class BASE64_OUTPUT_STREAM
Summary
Class invariant
Overview
creation features
features
• disconnect
Disconnect from the underlying stream.
• do_detach
Used by the underlying stream to require not to be filtered anymore
• recycle
Do whatever needs to be done to free resources or recycle other objects when recycling this one
To write a number:
Other features:
disconnect
effective procedure
Disconnect from the underlying stream.
local_can_disconnect: BOOLEAN
constant attribute
True if this stream can be safely disconnected (without data loss, etc.)
filtered_put_character (c: CHARACTER)
effective procedure
filtered_flush
effective procedure
state: INTEGER_32
writable attribute
previous_character: CHARACTER
writable attribute
alphabet: STRING
constant attribute
t2b (code: INTEGER_32): CHARACTER
effective function
can_put_character (c: CHARACTER): BOOLEAN
effective function
do_detach
effective procedure
Used by the underlying stream to require not to be filtered anymore
stream: OUTPUT_STREAM
writable attribute
The underlying stream (i.e. the filtered one)
put_character (c: CHARACTER)
effective procedure
flush
effective procedure
Flushes the pipe.
detach
effective procedure
Shake off the filter.
writable attribute
The filter that uses this stream as backend
event_can_write: EVENT_DESCRIPTOR
effective function
writable attribute
is_connected: BOOLEAN
deferred function
True if the stream is connected.
descriptor: INTEGER_32
effective function
Some OS-dependent descriptor.
has_descriptor: BOOLEAN
effective function
True if that stream can be associated to some OS-meaningful descriptor.
can_disconnect: BOOLEAN
deferred function
True if the stream can be safely disconnected (without data loss, etc.)
stream_pointer: POINTER
effective function
Some Back-end-dependent pointer (FILE* in C, InputStream or OutputStream in Java)
has_stream_pointer: BOOLEAN
effective function
True if that stream can be associated to some Back-end-meaningful stream pointer.
filtered_descriptor: INTEGER_32
deferred function
Find the descriptor of the terminal stream...
filtered_has_descriptor: BOOLEAN
deferred function
True if the underlying terminal stream has a descriptor
filtered_stream_pointer: POINTER
deferred function
Find the pointer of the terminal stream...
filtered_has_stream_pointer: BOOLEAN
deferred function
True if the underlying terminal stream has a pointer
recycle
effective procedure
Do whatever needs to be done to free resources or recycle other objects when recycling this one
sequencer_descriptor (file: POINTER): INTEGER_32
is_filtered: BOOLEAN
deferred function
put_string (s: STRING)
effective procedure
Output s to current output device.
put_unicode_string (unicode_string: UNICODE_STRING)
effective procedure
Output the UTF-8 encoding of the unicode_string.
put_line (s: STRING)
effective procedure
Output the string followed by a '%N'.
put_integer (i: INTEGER_64)
frozen
effective procedure
Output i to current output device.
put_integer_format (i: INTEGER_64, s: INTEGER_32)
frozen
effective procedure
Output i to current output device using at most s character.
put_real (r: REAL_64)
effective procedure
Output r to current output device.
put_real_format (r: REAL_64, f: INTEGER_32)
effective procedure
Output r with only f digit for the fractionnal part.
put_real_scientific (r: REAL_64, f: INTEGER_32)
effective procedure
Output r using the scientific notation with only f digit for the fractionnal part.
put_number (number: NUMBER)
effective procedure
Output the number.
put_boolean (b: BOOLEAN)
effective procedure
Output b to current output device according to the Eiffel format.
put_pointer (p: POINTER)
effective procedure
Output a viewable version of p.
put_new_line
effective procedure
Output a newline character.
put_spaces (nb: INTEGER_32)
effective procedure
Output nb spaces character.
append_file (file_name: STRING)
effective procedure
tmp_file_read: TEXT_FILE_READ
once function
tmp_string: STRING
once function
io_putc (byte: CHARACTER, stream: POINTER)
io_fwrite (buf: NATIVE_ARRAY[CHARACTER], size: INTEGER_32, stream: POINTER)
io_flush (stream: POINTER)
set_filter (a_filter: FILTER)
effective procedure
Used by the filter itself to get attached
connect_to (a_stream: FILTERABLE)
effective procedure
Connect the filter to some underlying stream. | ESSENTIALAI-STEM |
"George Washington was born on February 22, 1732, in Westmoreland County, Virginia" (George Washington, 2016). The late president George Washington would 284 years old today if he was here. "A month after leaving the army, Washington married Martha Dandridge Custis, a widow, who was only a few months older than he"(George Washington. ,2016). George Washington married Martha Washington to whom he would be married to most of his life. "Washington marriage also brought Martha 's two young children, John (Jacky) and Martha (Patsy), ages 6 and 4, respectively. Washington lavished great affection on both of them, and was heartbroken when Patsy died just before the Revolution. Jacky died during the Revolution, and George adopted
Mr. Carver was a prominent African-American “Scientist, Inventor, Botanist, and Chemist.” The peanut-including dyes, plastics, and gasoline. He works in plant pathology, however, established his reputation as a brilliant botanist. My childhood dream was to become a scientist with plant also the human body. He held a horticultural position at Tuskegee. All of his work was not done for fortune and fame. Nevertheless, he wanted his scientist to produce a product for poor black people. This is one of the amazing impacts of all things. The accomplishments he made,
Otis Boykin was an African American inventor who lived from 1920 to 1982. He created an improved version of a resistor. The electronic part is now an essential part of radios, televisions, computers, heart pacemakers, and weapons in the military.
Despite the previous achievements, there were many other things he did. He fought in the Civil War, but unfortunately was wounded in action. While he was wounded he
President George Washington knew that a lot of his accomplishments would be viewed as precedents. As being the first President, he set numerous precedents, a significant number of which are still being implemented today. He chose to be called Mr. President as opposed to the title of being called a King, he then created the Presidential Cabinet, established the term limit of two terms for Presidency and was first President to create foreign policy.
accomplishments throughout his life. In conclusion, Carver lived a selfless life in order to better
In the book of His Excellency: George Washington by Joseph J. Ellis, the author introduces Washington, the Father of the United States, in a fresh portrait focused on the characters of Washington. This book is an impressive biography of Washington's remarkable dedication to the United States history. According to the author, George Washington is an omnipresent figure as he was growing up, described as the man in the moon who was aloof and silent. This book focuses on Washington's wartime service which became some of his major contributions to the United States, rather than merely telling the true story of Washington, its main thesis is focusing on analyzing his contributions and how his governorship had affected the American history.
Booker T. Washington was a man with highs standards a great work ethic and he was one of the most respected African Americans of his time. Born to a slave on a plantation in Hale’s Ford, Virginia, Booker T. knew from a young age the importance of a good education. Booker T is mostly known for his part in founding the Tuskegee Institute in 1881 along with George Washington Carver and Lewis Adams. Booker T. Washington was undoubtedly one of the most respected African Americans of his time. His values and beliefs established an imperative relationship with spiritual and political leaders of his time.
Black American History had a major role in the development of the present day United States. Slavery was the foundation of the Confederate states economic growth. This essay will focus on Booker T. Washington a man born in Virginia as a slave and with dedication earned a decent education and processed to do good deeds with it. As a slave he would package salt and work in mines and was allowed to walk to school during his free time. Booker T. Washington's accomplishments were founding Tuskegee University and being the first African American to dine in the White House and publish more than forty books.
Do you want to know why George Washington Carver is the greatest african american ever? He is the greatest african american ever because he found many uses for common crops like peanuts,cowpeas,and sweet potatoes. I have George Washington Carver for my black history month project. George Washington Carver is in the science category. George Washington Carver is in the science category because he did a lot of research with peanuts.
As a slave, he played the key role in fueling the abolitionist movement in the north prior to the civil war. He procures the assistance of others in teaching himself to read despite the laws of prohibiting slaves from learning such skills.
The book “George Washington Carver: From Slave to Scientist” is a brilliant book that describes and analyzes the life and legacy of George Washington Carver. What makes it brilliant is that instead of the author writing the book as a biography, he wrote it as a story. This makes the book more appealing to readers and it makes them more attentive to learn more about human history. George Washington Carver was a baby born unto a nineteen year old named Mary in Missouri during the mid-1800s. George and his sister were kidnapped and sold into slavery in another state. Once slavery had been abolished, George was raised by his slave owners. At a young age he was encouraged to pursue his education and strengthen his intellectual way he viewed the
“Why should not the negroes be exalted and happy?”, a wise man once said. George Washington Buckner plays a very important role in African American history. His life spanned a special period of transition for Indiana’s African American equality. Many people have never heard of George Buckner but that does not make him any less important. George was born into slavery but soon made something of himself. He was the first African American to be appointed by a president to become minister of a country. He was widely known for promoting the equality of African Americans. George Buckner has a very significant personal background.
Have you ever thought about the hard life of a slave? Booker T. Washington had to face slavery during the civil war. Booker had many challenges trying to get an education that impacted his life and decisions.
On September 20, 1941 George and Viola Chihuly gave birth to their second son, Dale Chihuly, in Tacoma, Washington. As a kid, Dale Chihuly quickly took interest in the two things: glass, and light. He was amazed by how light could pass through a small piece of stained glass, and would stretch as far as 300ft. In 1956, his older brother and only sibling, George, died in a Navy Air Force training accident in Pensacola, Florida. A year later in 1957 his Father, George Chihuly who work as a meatpacker and a union organizer died of a heart attack. After the death of his brother and his father Dale lost motivation in school but, even with poor grades his Mother, Viola, encouraged him to go to college. | FINEWEB-EDU |
Denyer
Denyer is a surname. Notable people with the surname include:
* Bertie Denyer (1893–1969), English footballer
* Bertie Denyer (footballer, born 1924) (1924–2015), English footballer
* Carla Denyer (born 1985), English Green Party politician
* Frank Denyer (born 1943), English composer
* Grant Denyer (born 1977), Australian TV presenter and motor racing driver
* Paul Denyer (born 1972), Australian serial killer
* Peter Denyer (1947–2009), English actor
* Peter Denyer (footballer) (born 1957), English footballer
* Peter B. Denyer (1953–2010), British engineer, scientist and inventor
* Terence Denyer (born 1981), Zimbabwean cricketer | WIKI |
User:Daswaggmasta
in 2000 chris downs was born in brookyln,new york through his childhood he had some great experiences. On may 31,2005 downs brother was born his brother was named anthony. On the other side chris had another brother miles crump. Miles was the oldest of them all.Chris's dream was to be a rapper,an NBA player,S.W.A.T Team.His Mother Tarsha Fitzgerald got married in 2003 to a man named anthony miller. Same name as chris's younger brother.Through Chris's Childhood he had a rivarly agaisnt his older brother miles they would fight all the time. | WIKI |
User:מרולית/שחר חן פודיק
Shahar Chen Podik (December 30, 1989) is involved in Internet marketing, among other things, of villas and guesthouses. If you haven't noticed yet, Shahar is half a celebrity thanks to "Podik" - videos he started filming during the Corona with suggestions for his recipes and dishes. | WIKI |
User:Orcuttmp/sandbox
BASIS at Virginia Tech is a student-managed bond fund investing $5 million of the Virginia Tech endowment. BASIS has a dual mandate of providing a unique educational experience for all of the members while generating competitive returns for the Virginia Tech Foundation. By investing real money, the student members merge the education they are receiving in the classroom with real market experience.
History: In October 2004, three pioneering students initiated and completed a research project investigating a fixed-income investment fund operated entirely by students. In February 2005, additional students were recruited to work on what would become known as Bond And Securities Investing by Students (BASIS). A third group of pioneers recruited in December 2005 obtained the approval from the Foundation’s Investment Committee in May 2006 with funding targeted for fall of 2006. Key features of the proposal were the educational benefits, the economic importance of a market many times larger than the publicly-traded equity markets, support of our alumni, and of course, the high quality of the students who would preserve and enhance the Foundation’s ability to support the university.
October 2006 brought the initial funds and the excitement of placing the first $2.6 million into the markets. The following year BASIS achieved a ranking in the top 10 percent of all professional fixed income managers. BASIS achieved strong positive returns even in the stressful years of 2008 and 2009. BASIS’s funds under management are approximately 1% of the VTF’s endowment or over $5 million by January 31, 2012.
October 2016, BASIS celebrated its 10th year anniversary. Since inception, BASIS has returned over $2.5 million dollars to its client, the Virginia Tech Foundation. | WIKI |
Los Angeles Chamber Orchestra
The Los Angeles Chamber Orchestra (LACO) is an American chamber orchestra based in Los Angeles, California. LACO presents its Orchestral Series concerts at two venues, the Alex Theatre in Glendale and UCLA's Royce Hall.
History
James Arkatov, a cellist, established LACO in 1968 as an artistic outlet for musicians from local film and record studios to perform the classical music repertoire at a chamber orchestra-scale of about 40–45 musicians. David Mermelstein wrote in 2005 on Arkatov's guiding principle of LACO:
* "The idea was to create a group that would play works written expressly for chamber orchestra, many of them from the baroque era—music that the [Los Angeles] Philharmonic either wasn't interested in or suited to. The ensemble was never meant to compete with the Philharmonic; there was even a time when LACO's supporters hoped to see it take up permanent residence at the Music Center."
At the beginning of its history, LACO did not have a residency at a single concert hall. The orchestra performed in such venues as the Mark Taper Forum, Occidental College (Thorne Hall), the First Congregational Church of Los Angeles, and the California Institute of Technology (Beckman Auditorium). Currently, in addition to its Orchestral Series concerts at Alex Theatre and Royce Hall, LACO also presents a baroque music series at Zipper Hall at the Colburn School in downtown Los Angeles, and "In Focus" (a chamber music and discussion series) in Santa Monica at the Moss Theatre and San Marino at The Huntington. Its repertoire ranges from the baroque to newly commissioned works, the latter through its patron commissioning club, Sound Investment.
LACO's first music director was Neville Marriner, who used the Academy of St. Martin in the Fields as a guiding model for LACO. Gerard Schwarz was LACO's second music director, and expanded the orchestra's repertoire to include more American works. Iona Brown was named LACO's music advisor for the 1986–1987 season, and became music director the next season, serving through 1992. Christof Perick was the next LACO Music Director, from 1992 to 1995.
Conductor and pianist Jeffrey Kahane, was music director from 1997 to 2017. During Kahane's tenure, LACO made its Carnegie Hall debut in April 2002. In June 2005, LACO received the First place Award for Programming of Contemporary Music, offered by the American Society of Composers, Authors, and Publishers (ASCAP) and the American Symphony Orchestra League. Kahane now holds the title of conductor laureate with LACO.
In September 2017, Jaime Martín first guest-conducted LACO. On the basis of this appearance, in February 2018, LACO named Martín its next music director, effective with the 2019–2020 season, with an initial contract of 3 years. In June 2021, LACO announced an extension of Martín's contract as its music director through 2027.
During the 2020-2021 COVID-19 pandemic, LACO began producing digital content in lieu of live performances. James Darrah was hired as their inaugural Creative Director of Digital Content and Derrick Spiva was appointed as Artistic Advisor. As of January 2021, the orchestra's current composer-in-residence is Ellen Reid. Past LACO composers-in-residence have included Uri Caine and Andrew Norman. | WIKI |
The Plot to Put Conceptual Art on ‘Melrose Place.’ Yes, Really.
Twenty years ago, the conceptual artist Mel Chin cold-called the offices of “Melrose Place,” Aaron Spelling’s wildly popular prime-time soap opera, with a proposition. What if a task force of artists supplied free artworks and props for the show’s apartment-complex set, with coded cultural messages on pressing topics like reproductive rights, American foreign policy, alcoholism and sexual politics? Deborah Siegel, the show’s set decorator, listened to this absurd offer and had an instant reaction. “I thought it sounded really interesting,” she said in a recent interview. “So I met with him.” This was the beginning of a conceptual artist’s dream, an ongoing intervention into the very heart of American mass culture. In late 1995, Mr. Chin and a team of 100 mostly unknown artists, called the Gala Committee, began a two-year experiment, placing objects on the set of “Melrose Place.” They took their cues from scripts provided in advance and in some instances worked with the writers to modify plot lines and develop characters. On Friday, at the Red Bull Studios New York in Chelsea, 100 objects from the committee’s work go on display in the exhibition “Total Proof: The Gala Committee 1995-1997.” The exhibition, through Nov. 20, will be, appropriately enough, a rerun. Viewers of “Melrose Place” saw a version of it in April 1997, in a television episode featuring an actual exhibition at the Museum of Contemporary Art in Los Angeles, “Uncommon Sense,” which included many of the works produced for the set. In it, Heather Locklear, as the hard-charging advertising executive Amanda Woodward, has just taken on the museum as a client and brings her love interest, Kyle McBride (Rob Estes), to the opening for a stimulating evening of art talk. Much of it takes place in front of a Ross Bleckner-like painting that alludes to the American bombing of Baghdad. That work was ordered by Carol Mendelsohn, the show’s head writer. This fictional opening, filmed two weeks before the museum’s opening, was one of the great meta moments in television history. Mr. Chin is by now a well-known figure, a skilled organizer of socially provocative works that can last for years. In a recent project typical of his approach, “The Tie That Binds,” he used native plants to create eight drought-resistant gardens along the Los Angeles River. Visitors were invited to take away a blueprint for one of the gardens and replicate it at home, furthering the cause of water conservation. The “Melrose Place” idea began when Mr. Chin was shuttling back and forth between the University of Georgia, where he held a temporary professorship, and the California Institute of the Arts, where he was conducting a workshop. “We discussed pop culture and Hollywood,” said Valerie Tevere, one of his Cal Arts students, an artist and now a professor of media culture at the College of Staten Island. “How might artists work with TV. What sort of things could happen?” Mr. Chin had never heard of “Melrose Place.” “I was not watching much television at the time,” he said in a recent interview at Red Bull Studios. But if he was not watching, he was thinking, prompted by Julie Lazar, the director of experimental programs at the Museum of Contemporary Art, and Tom Finkelpearl, a guest curator and now New York’s commissioner of cultural affairs, who approached him to take part in “Uncommon Sense.” Mr. Chin recalled that while on a flight from Atlanta to Los Angeles, he looked out the window and thought “Los Angeles is in the air.” The city existed in the trillions of electronic impulses its residents sent through the atmosphere and around the world, transmitting social content and cultural symbols. “Our world is transformed by covert information, political messages,” Mr. Chin said. “How would that work if it was art?” Back home, Mr. Chin watched as his wife, Helen Nagge, flipped the remote and stopped on an arresting image. “I saw this large blond face filling the screen, with blue eyes,” he said. It was Ms. Locklear. “When she moved, there was a painting behind her, and I said, ‘That’s the gallery.’” Mr. Chin began assembling his troops. The name GALA fused the abbreviations for Georgia and Los Angeles, but eventually the committee absorbed dozens of artists around the country. The team included students; professional artists; a media scholar (Constance Penley of the University of California, Santa Barbara); and an actual fan of the show, Mark Flood, an old friend of Mr. Chin’s from his native Houston. Mr. Flood wondered aloud whether the project amounted to a sellout. Mr. Chin told him, “We’re not selling anything, we’re getting in.” Frank South, an executive producer for the show, and Ms. Mendelsohn decided not to mention the project to Mr. Spelling or the network brass. Eventually, word leaked out. In 1997, The New Yorker ran a Talk of the Town article, “Agitprop,” timed to the opening of “Uncommon Sense.” Mr. South said, “I was busted.” Mr. Spelling, tickled at the idea of seeing “Melrose Place” in the museum world, took the news well. “Just don’t do anything to hurt the show,” he told his charges. In early 1996, with the series in its fourth season, the artwork began to arrive, first in a trickle, then in a flood. As a safe-sex message, committee members designed “Safety Sheets” for the manipulative, womanizing Dr. Peter Burns: bedsheets in an all-over pattern of cylindrical shapes that, on close inspection, turned out to be unrolled condoms. When Alison Parker (Courtney Thorne-Smith) became pregnant, the GALA Committee made her a quilt appliquéd with the chemical symbol for the abortion pill RU-486. “One of the things we wanted to do was to respond to the fact that in network TV, no matter how strong you are, you cannot have an abortion,” Ms. Penley said. “You either have the baby, or you fall down the stairs. We wanted to put reproductive choice back on network TV.” One of the sneakier placements — the committee referred to them as “product insertion manifestations” — came from the Cal Arts workshop. When Michael Mancini, a character played by Thomas Calabro, visits a hot-sheet motel, he sees the clerk reading “Libidinal Economy,” a work by the French poststructuralist Jean-François Lyotard. “Total Proof,” organized by Max Wolf with Candice Strongwater, takes its title from an altered photograph of the bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City in April 1995, with the damage reworked by the artists to mimic the shape of an Absolut vodka bottle. The work was initially deemed too disturbing to appear on the show, but somehow it ended up, in plain sight, on a wall at D&D Advertising, Amanda’s company. As the television project gathered steam, the producers turned to the committee to help invent the character of Samantha Reilly, an artist who, after graduating from the Rhode Island School of Design, heads out to Los Angeles and moves into the Melrose Place complex. Ms. Mendelsohn was flown out to Kansas City to brainstorm with 10 women on the committee who became known as the Sisters of Sam. “We thought, she could be a Cindy Sherman, or a Kiki Smith, or a Barbara Kruger,” said Ms. Penley, who envisioned a feminist conceptualist. But the producers demanded paintings in the David Hockney mode, with bright pastels. “They said, “‘Because the camera loves those colors,’” Mr. Chin recalled. Hijacking the concept, the Gala Committee turned out a series of cheery-toned paintings on the theme of violence and death in Los Angeles. The Gala Committee called it a day after the museum episode, but the series continued until May 1999. In a half-serious statement for a sale of many of the artworks at Sotheby’s, Mr. Chin summed up the great intervention as the catalyst for “a profoundly radical transformation of worldwide art, entertainment, communication and government.” The reality was somewhat less dramatic. “We were exhausted, basically,” Mr. Chin said. “It was very stressful, producing on deadline. The potentiality and the pictorial reality had been enlarged, so we decided to stop there. It was time to release it to the world. And think of the reruns.” An article on Thursday about a group of artists led by Mel Chin who provided artworks for the television show “Melrose Place” in the 1990s misidentified the position currently held at the College of Staten Island by Valerie Tevere, who at the time was a student of Mr. Chin at the California Institute of the Arts. She is a professor of media culture, not an associate professor of art. The article also referred incorrectly to the medication known as RU-486, the chemical symbol for which was put on a quilt made for a character in the show who became pregnant. It is an abortion pill, not a morning-after pill. | NEWS-MULTISOURCE |
A Review Of Computer Hardware
ComputerRising pains: Seen recognition is deep studying’s strongest talent. Utility software program may embody a single program, similar to Microsoft’s notepad for writing and modifying a easy text. It could also include a set of applications, typically referred to as a software package deal, which work together to accomplish a task, resembling a spreadsheet package. A motherboard includes many components resembling CPU, RAM, FIRMWARE, INSIDE AND EXTERIOR BUSES. The personal computer , usually known as the COMPUTER, is likely one of many commonest sorts of computer on account of its versatility and comparatively low value. Laptops are generally very comparable, although they may use decrease-vitality or decreased measurement elements, thus lower performance. Adoption of cloud computing, which allows prospects to entry storage, software, and totally different computer suppliers over the Web, is more more likely to dampen the demand for computer network architects.
After you’ve gotten your important computer on line by the router then setup a wi-fi connection. Change the title of the wi-fi network (SSID). Create a model new community title that you’ve got by no means used sooner than. Change the wi-fi security settings. Keep away from WEP safety as a result of that may cut back the wi-fi tempo and also WEP security can be cracked simply. For larger wi-fi connection, try to use WPA or WPA2 security. Change the wi-fi channel to 9 or eleven. Efficiently, if the patron is interacting straight with a bit of software program it is utility software program. As an example, Microsoft Phrase or Excel are software software program program, as are widespread internet browsers akin to Firefox or Google Chrome. When there is a huge availability of knowledge throughout the agency, then there are doable threats from internal and outside sources as properly. Managing information is among the important ways to ascertain protection from threats.
Know the distinction between hardware and software program program. Earlier than you learn one thing, it’s important to first know what hardware is for itself, and how it’s different from software program program. A key distinction between hardware and software program program is that hardware could be touched physically. Proper now, you’re utilizing your mouse or keyboard to scroll the web page, and your monitor is displaying you the knowledge. These are hardware. However, software program is what can’t be physically touched, the programs presently loaded into your memory, your working system, for example. When deciding on a computer networking providers supplier, it’s good to make it attainable for the corporate’s representatives are licensed to handle different facets of your computing needs. The service provider ought to be capable of dealing with and fixing gear. As well as, it will need to cope with your networking needs, firm expansions and the purchase of current gear.
Random-entry memory (RAM), which retailers the code and knowledge which is perhaps being actively accessed by the CPU. For example, when an online browser is opened on the computer it takes up reminiscence; that is saved within the RAM till the online browser is closed. RAM normally comes on DIMMs throughout the sizes 2GB, 4GB, and 8GB, however may be quite a bit bigger. Linux – and nearly truly Google Chrome OS – will proceed to develop into extra well-liked. Providing as they do a stable different to the Dwelling home windows (and Mac) working applications and functions, there are additionally completely no the reason why they need to not. A excessive proportion of web websites (together with this one) are hosted on servers operating Linux, not Windows. Selections to make this happen have been taken on a sound technical, help and industrial basis, and there is no purpose to imagine that the choices governing what software program might be run on particular person and company non-public computers will not be taken in the identical manner.
As another varied to using both typical business or open supply software program, functions applications are now additionally beginning to be made accessible via the world-vast net. The concept proper here is that somewhat than installing software program on every computer, customers will merely go to a web site that provides the software program program functionality they require. The system software is a collection of packages designed to function, administration, and lengthen the processing capabilities of the computer itself. System software program is usually prepared by the computer producers. These software program products comprise of packages written in low-degree languages, which work together with the hardware at a really elementary degree. System software program serves as a result of the interface between the hardware and the highest users. Employment of computer hardware engineers is projected to develop 7 % from 2012 to 2022, slower than the standard for all occupations.
Leave a Reply | ESSENTIALAI-STEM |
Memorial museum
Memorial museums are museums dedicated both to educating the public about and commemorating a specific historic event, usually involving mass suffering. The concept gained traction throughout the 20th century as a response to the numerous and well publicized mass atrocities committed during that century. The events commemorated by memorial museums tend to involve mostly civilian victims who died under "morally problematic circumstances" that cannot easily be interpreted as heroic. There are frequently unresolved issues concerning the identity, culpability, and punishment of the perpetrators of these killings and memorial museums often play an active research role aimed at benefiting both the victims and those prosecuting the perpetrators.
Today there are numerous memorial museums including the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, the Toul Sleng Museum of Genocidal Crimes in Phnom Penh, Cambodia, the District Six Museum in Cape Town, South Africa, and the National September 11 Memorial & Museum in New York City. Although the concept of a memorial museum is largely a product of the 20th century, there are museums of this type that focus on events from other periods, an example being the House of Slaves (Maisons des Esclaves) in Senegal which was declared a UNESCO World Heritage Site in 1978 and acts as a museum and memorial to the Atlantic slave trade.
Memorial museums differ from traditional history museums in several key ways, most notably in their dual mission to incorporate both a moral framework for and contextual explanations of an event. While traditional history museums tend to be in neutral institutional settings, memorial museums are very often situated at the scene of the atrocity they seek to commemorate. Memorial museums also often have close connections with, and advocate for, a specific clientele who have a special relationship to the event or its victims, such as family members or survivors, and regularly hold politically significant special events. Unlike many traditional history museums, memorial museums almost always have a distinct, overt political and moral message with direct ties to contemporary society. The following mission statement of the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum is typical in its focus on commemoration, education and advocacy:
"The museum's primary mission is to advance and disseminate knowledge about this unprecedented tragedy; to preserve the memory of those who suffered; and to encourage its visitors to reflect upon the moral and spiritual questions raised by the events of the Holocaust as well as their own responsibilities as citizens of a democracy." | WIKI |
Nikol Faridani
Nikol Faridani (25 January 1936 – 6 February 2008) was a popular Iranian Armenian photographer. Faridani was born in 1936 in Shiraz. His family moved to Isfahan when he was two and he completed his elementary education at the Shah Abbas School in Jolfa. Then they moved to Tehran and later to Kerman, and ultimately returned to Tehran in 1955. He got a job with the Iranian Oil Company, where he worked as a photographer for four years. He then was transferred to the Oil Consortium, where he worked for 15 years, gaining experience in geological photography, photomicrography, and aerial photography. He logged over 300 hours in the air as an aerial photographer. He quit in 1975 and started his own business.
Faridani was well known for photographing nature, especially deserts. He travelled extensively in India, Pakistan, Nepal and Afghanistan. He published his works in 2003 in Iran titled," Nikol Faridani; Collection of Images from Iran". The collection consists of two volumes, one in black-white (123 images) and one in color (257 images). The images are on 9 X 13 inches, presented in landscape format. On Dedication page, he offers the work to his two daughters, "Jacqueline and Katrin".
Faridani died on 6 February 2008, after suffering from prostate cancer, pneumonia, and Parkinson's disease. He is survived by two daughters from his first marriage. | WIKI |
César Delgado
César Fabián Delgado Godoy (born 18 August 1981) is an Argentine former professional footballer who played as a winger. He also played as a central midfielder, making piercing forward runs through the center of the opposition's defence. His nickname "Chelito" is derived from that of Marcelo Delgado (known as "El Chelo") because of their same last name. Since 2013, he also holds Mexican citizenship.
Club career
Born in Rosario, Argentina, Delgado started his career at Rosario Central. He joined Cruz Azul for the 2003 Apertura, where he finished with 16 appearances and eight goals. Delgado made 21 appearances in the subsequent Apertura, again scoring eight goals. In the 2004 Apertura, Delgado scored another six goals in 15 games.
On 8 January 2008, Delgado moved to French club Lyon who paid a transfer fee of €11 million. He made his Ligue 1 debut on 20 January 2008 against RC Lens. Delgado came on as an 85th-minute substitute Lisandro López on 21 October 2009 against Liverpool in the UEFA Champions League and scored the winning goal in a 2–1 victory. It was Lyon's first win in the UEFA Champions League against English opposition.
On 10 June 2011, Delgado signed with C.F. Monterrey, and participated in the 2011 Mexican League Apertura, CONCACAF Champions League and Club World Cup tournaments.
International career
Delgado played for Argentina in the 2004 Copa América, scoring one goal, and was part of their gold medal-winning team at the 2004 Summer Olympics.
He played several matches for the Argentina national football team during 2006 FIFA World Cup qualification, but due to injury he did not make the 23-man squad for the tournament.
International goals
* Scores and results list Argentina's goal tally first, score column indicates score after each Delgado goal.
Club
'''Cruz Azul
* Copa Panamericana 2007
Lyon
* Ligue 1: 2007–08
* Coupe de France: 2007–08
Monterrey
* CONCACAF Champions League: 2011–12, 2012–13
International
Argentina
* Olympic Games: 2004
* Copa América runner-up: 2004
* FIFA Confederations Cup Runner-up: 2005
Individual
* FIFA Club World Cup top scorer: 2012, 2013 | WIKI |
User:Trulyreally
Pencils sons are green all of them even purple pencils sons are green but the daughters are all blue red and orange! | WIKI |
Christopher C. McConnell
PhD Student, Computer Science
Email: ccm+@cs.cmu.edu
Office: Wean Hall 4207, (412) 268-3728
Fax: (412) 268-5576
Mailing Addresses:
Papers:
Talks:
Software:
Minimal Model Complexity Search
Abstract SURFER is an empirical discovery system that given a set of input data and a modelling vocabulary returns the model that best describes that data. The best model is considered to be the one that minimizes the description length of that model plus the data encoded using that model. The search for models is controlled by the a priori estimate of model likelihoods as encoded in the modelling vocabulary. SURFER includes domain independent mechanisms for identifying redundant models and for finding free parameters. The system is described together with the results of running the system on several different types of problems.
Keywords: Bayesian Learning, discovery, explanation-based learning, minimum description length.
Postscript
B* Probability Based Search
Abstract We describe a search algorithm for two-player games that relies on selectivity rather than brute-force to achieve success. The key ideas behind the algorithm are:
Stopping when one alternative is clearly better than all the others, and Focusing the search on the place where the most progress can likely be made toward stopping.
Critical to this process is identifying uncertainty about the ultimate value of any move. The lower bound on uncertainty is the best estimate of the real value of a move. The upper bound is its optimistic value, based on some measure of unexplored potential. This provides an I-have-optimism-that-needs-to-be-investigated attitude that is an excellent guiding force. Uncertainty is represented by probability distributions. The search develops those parts of the tree where moving existing bounds would be most likely to succeed and would make the most progress toward terminating the search. Termination is achieved when the established real value of the best move is so good that the likelihood of this being achieved by any other alternative is minimal.
The B* probability based search algorithm has been implemented on the chess machine Hitech. En route we have developed effective techniques for:
Producing viable optimistic estimates to guide the search,
Producing cheap probability distribution estimates to measure goodness,
Dealing with independence of alternative moves, and
Dealing with the Graph History Interaction problem.
This report describes the implementation, and the results of tests including games played against brute-force programs. Test data indicate that B* Hitech is better than any searcher that expands its whole tree based on selectivity. Further, analysis of the data indicates that should additional power become available, the B* technique will scale up considerably better than brute-force techniques. Keywords: Probabilistic B*, Computer Chess, Selective Search, Two-Person Games
Postscript
*CART: Parallel CART on the CM-2
Abstract *CART is a parallel implementation of the CART decsion tree algorithm in *LISP on the CM-2 from Thinking Machines. It exhibits significant speed up over a serial version of the same algorithm on a SUN-4. The implementation is described together with some performance comparisons with the serial version.
Keywords: CART, Parallel, CM-2
Postscript
Tuning Evaluation Functions for Search
Abstract This paper examines the problem of applying machine learning techniques to improving the performance of actual game playing programs in complex domains like chess. This is a challenging problem because chess is a domain where a great deal of human effort has been spent and the performance level of programs is already very high.
Keywords: Games, Strategy, Optimization
Postscript
Mailing Addresses
School:
Box E-1
School of Computer Science
Carnegie Mellon University
5000 Forbes Avenue.
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213-3891 USA
Home:
2870 Beechwood Blvd
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15217 USA
(412) 521-5032
ccm+@cs.cmu.edu | ESSENTIALAI-STEM |
North Korea condemns latest U.S. sanctions
SEOUL (Reuters) - North Korea on Saturday condemned the latest U.S. sanctions announced this week aimed at curbing the isolated nation’s development nuclear weapons. The U.S. sanctions are “a manifestation of heinous intention to throw a wet blanket over the inter-Korean exchange and cooperation and to aggravate the situation,” an unnamed North Korean foreign ministry spokesman said in a report by the Korean Central News Agency. It also said the United States should stop such “anachronistic” policy towards North Korea. The United States announced new sanctions on Wednesday aimed at stopping North Korea’s nuclear weapons development and urged China and Russia to expel North Koreans raising funds for the programs. The U.S. Treasury imposed sanctions on nine entities, 16 people and six North Korean ships it accused of helping the weapons programs. It said two China-based trading firms were involved in exporting millions of dollars worth of metals and other goods used in weapons production. Reporting by Cynthia Kim; Editing by Tom Hogue | NEWS-MULTISOURCE |
Create a gist now
Instantly share code, notes, and snippets.
The lifetime of a macro invocation
Pads
Let's talk about pads.
sub counter(Int $start) {
my Int $value = $start;
return { $value++ };
}
my $c1 = counter(5);
say $c1(); # 5
say $c2(); # 6
my $c2 = counter(42);
say $c2(); # 42
say $c1(); # 7
say $c2(); # 43
A pad is not much more than a hash table mapping variable names to values. It's implicitly defined by the variable declarations in a block or module or file. There's a pad inside the counter subroutine, and that's what's holding the $value variable (and its value) for us. The pad gets "attached" to the returned closure (in the sense of the latter referencing the former), and so $value, which is referenced by the pad, never gets GC'd.
But wait! By the example, there seem to be two $value variables in circulation. How did that happen? Aren't pads intimately tied to the block or module or file? Well, yes. Then how can there be two different pads, each containing its own $value, in circulation?
You probably know the answer already. It's not the subroutine as such that has a pad, it's the invocation of the subroutine that does. Put differently, a new pad attaches to the sub at the point of call at runtime, not once-and-for-all at compile time. It's easy to fall into the type/instance homonym trap here. Maybe it's correct to say that "lexical scope" is the type here, and "pad" is the instance.
The idea of incarnating a pad for each routine invocation was once disputed in programming language design. Without it, if we just keep one static pad for each routine, it's much easier to represent the state of the program internally. It takes less memory, less code to make the runtime, etc. Oh, and recursion won't work, because your fibonacci function won't get a fresh pad with each invocation. Historically, this was an argument against recursion, because it required such a wacky model with incarnating pads and keeping stackframes around. In the end, though, recursion (and other useful things, such as closures) won out and many-pads-per-lexical-scope became the predominant model.
But wait! So if a pad isn't created until at routine/block entry, how do you explain... this?
sub foo {
my $value = "HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT";
our sub bar {
say $value;
}
}
our &bar;
bar(); # prints "Any()\n"
So, say $value somehow comes up with the standard undefined value Any, rather than the more obvious "HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT". Well, that's understandable by the pad-at-block-entry hypothesis — here, we managed to call bar without calling foo first, so the assignment hasn't actually run. But... we have to look into some pad to get $value, don't we? And a pad hasn't been created for us yet, so where does the Any come from? Shouldn't the variable lookup for $value just fail to find a pad, fall into outer space, and cause a horrible Null PMC access or something?
That's actually what it used to do in Rakudo, before Rakudo got a sensible pad model without egregious holes in it. The concept that turned out to be missing was that of a static pad, a pad that's added already during compilation. There's exactly one static pad per lexical scope. When an incarnated runtime pad hasn't been added yet for some lexical scope, lookup simply falls back to the static pad. That way, failure is never as bad as a Null PMC access; the worst thing that can happen is that you end up with an Any.
Perl 5 has a slight allergy to this situation, which happens every time you have a named subroutine inside another named subroutine:
$ perl -Mstrict -wE 'sub foo { my $value = "HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT"; sub bar { say $value } }; bar'
Variable "$value" will not stay shared at -e line 1.
Use of uninitialized value $value in say at -e line 1.
"Will not stay shared" is simply warning you that whenever you enter foo, bar will get re-bound to the incarnated pad of that foo invocation. So don't depend on always having the same view of $value.
So in our original counter example, there were actually three pads just for the counter subroutine. There were the two incarnated pads for the $c1 and $c2 invocations, and there was the static pad, which we never saw because there's no way to interact with the insides of counter without calling it.
Ordinary assignments happen at runtime, but if we can make them happen at compile time, we can actually observe the static pad doing work.
Making the assignment happen at BEGIN (parse) time:
sub foo {
BEGIN my $value = "HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT";
our sub bar {
say $value;
}
}
our &bar;
bar(); # prints "HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT\n"
Or, equivalently, using a constant declaration to make the assignment also happen at BEGIN time:
sub foo {
constant $value = "HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT";
our sub bar {
say $value;
}
}
our &bar;
bar(); # also prints "HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT\n"
Macros
Let's talk about macros. (You knew it was only a matter of time.)
macro counter(Perl6::AST $start) {
my Int $value = eval $start; # hand-wavey, unspec'd
return quasi { $value++ };
}
my $c1 = counter(5);
say $c1(); # 5
say $c2(); # 6
my $c2 = counter(42);
say $c2(); # 42
say $c1(); # 7
say $c2(); # 43
This is the same code as the one we started with, with four small modifications:
1. It's a macro and not a sub.
2. Macros take ASTs as arguments, so $start will now contain a Perl6::AST value.
3. Because we're interested in the actual value and not the AST, we have to de-AST the value, which we do using (unspec'd semantics of) eval.
4. Macros return ASTs, so we build one using the quasi keyword and a block.
But the rest is the same. There are still two incarnated pads for counter (and one static pad which we never see). Each pad still gets referenced by the block in the quasi, because it has to have a place to go to store and retrieve $value. In a very real sense, quasi blocks are closures, and we expect them to act accordingly. What's tricky about this is that the quasi blocks spend a disproportionate amount of their time as ASTs.
Since we're about to run across yet another type/instance homonym trap, let's proceed slowly and with caution.
There are three distinct "time points" of interest:
• A: The macro and the quasi are parsed. No code is run.
• B: The macro call site is parsed. Immediately as the macro call has been parsed, we momentarily enter run mode and macro runs and returns a Perl6::AST. Back in parse mode, this AST is stiched into the call site in lieu of the macro call.
• C: The code so inserted is run.
All these are clearly separated in time. C, depending on actual code paths, needn't even happen. (Of course, if you don't call your macro, B needn't happen either.)
The time point A is in compile mode, and thus can only deal only in static pads. Nevertheless, this is where the quasi's AST gets created, and it needs to reference some pad. The situation is quite similar to a closure in a yet un-run block, but with an AST instead of the closure.
B is where the action is. We kick into run mode, and enter the macro block. But pay careful attention to the quasi object. The value sitting there was generated during A, and references the static pad. This is bad, because that means it points to the wrong $value: the static one, which will never be assigned to. What we really want is an AST that references the newly incarnated pad of the current macro.
Conclusion: there's a static quasi object that's generated during A, and the actual Perl6::AST objects returned from a macro are "incarnated" from this static object, having it point to the pad of the macro invocation in the process, so that each macro call gets its very own $value, just like each subroutine invocation did.
Some kind of cloning/fixup must happen at macro block entry. It's almost as if at A we only have a "static" version of the AST, pointing to static pads, but at B we want the incarnated version. One per macro call.
As my previous gist outlines, when we do the stiching, we also have to special-case either lexical lookups that expect to end up in the macro body, or lexical lookups that expect to end up in the mainline code. That's fine. The important part, and the point of this gist, is that "the macro body" is a dynamic/runtime thing, not a static thing. And that's why we need cloning/fixups at B.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment | ESSENTIALAI-STEM |
Primed Steel
Published:
Definition - What does Primed Steel mean?
Primed steel is steel prepared by the application of a primer or undercoat before painting. Priming enhances the coating's adhesion to the steel surface. It provides extra protection for the steel and coating durability. Primed steel helps prevent corrosion and oxidation, and improves the life of the material.
Primed steel is used in many industries, including maritime, highways and bridges, infrastructure development and tank manufacturing.
Corrosionpedia explains Primed Steel
Primed steel refers to steel that is enhanced by the process of painting the steel with a primer consisting of resin, additives and solvents. Primer containing polyethylene (plastic) provides better durability and corrosion protection. When priming a steel, it is necessary to control porosity, tackiness and hygroscopy of the primer to achieve good coating adhesion.
A bare steel part oxidizes to form rust. Consequently, the bare steel surface has poor paint adhesion and as a result, paint will come off in large flakes. In this scenario primed steel provides good adhesion to the paint and helps the coating stick on the metal surface for a longer time. Priming also helps to minimize poor conditions on the metal's surface.
There is a difference between galvanized steel and primed steel. Galvanized steel has been treated with a zinc coating whereas primed steel has been primed with a metal primer before painting. Galvanized steel is rustproof without additional coating while primed steel requires additional coatings to protect against corrosion.
In underground and offshore pipelines, polyethylene tape is used to cover the primed steel pipes' surface so it is protected from chemical electrolytic corrosion.
Share this:
Connect with us | ESSENTIALAI-STEM |
Page:Le Morte d'Arthur - Volume 1.djvu/141
Rh
that came the Damosel of the Lake unto the king, and said, Sir, I must speak with you in private. Say on, said the king, what ye will. Sir, said the damosel, put not on you this mantle till ye have seen more, and in no wise let it not come on you nor on no knight of yours till ye command the bringer thereof to put it upon her. Well, said King Arthur, it shall be done as ye counsel me. And then he said unto the damosel that came from his sister, Damosel, this mantle that ye have brought me, I will see it upon you. Sir, she said, It will not beseem me to wear a king’s garment. By my head, said Arthur, ye shall wear it or it come on my back, or any man’s that here is. And so the king made it to be put upon her, and forth withal she fell down dead, and never more spake word after and burnt to coals. Then was the king wonderly wroth, more than he was toforehand, and said unto King Uriens, My sister, your wife, is alway about to betray me, and well I wot either ye, or my nephew, your son, is of counsel with her to have me destroyed; but as for you, said the king to King Uriens, I deem not greatly that ye be of her counsel, for Accolon confessed to me by his own mouth, that she would have destroyed you as well as me, therefore I hold you excused; but as for your son, Sir Uwaine, I hold him suspect, therefore I charge you put him out of my court. So Sir Uwaine was discharged. And when Sir Gawaine wist that, he made him ready to go with him; and said, Whoso banisheth my cousin-germain shall banish me. So they two departed, and rode into a great forest, and so they came to an abbey of monks, and there were well lodged. But when the king wist that Sir Gawaine was departed from the court, there was made great sorrow among all the estates. Now, said Gaheris, Gawaine’s brother, we have lost two good knights for the love of one. So on the morn they heard their masses in the abbey, and so they rode forth till that they came to a great forest. Then was Sir Gawaine ware in a valley by a turret, twelve fair damosels, and two knights armed on great horses, and the damosels went to and fro by a tree. And then was Sir Gawaine ware | WIKI |
Battery Rock
Battery Rock is a limestone bluff located at Mile 860 of the Ohio River in Hardin County, Illinois, across from Caseyville, Kentucky. The bluff is a prominent navigational landmark along the river.
The site played a role in several conflicts during the Civil War. In 1862, the Union Army based its troops at Battery Rock during a standoff with Confederate troops at Caseyville; the standoff ended when the Union troops moved to Caseyville, found that the Confederates had left the town, and punished the rebellious residents. The bluff also played a role in Confederate general Stovepipe Johnson's attack on riverboats in 1864. During the attack, boats used the landing at Battery Rock as a safe harbor and a place to monitor the situation. In addition, two Union recruiters from Kentucky used the bluff as a recruiting station in 1864, and either a Union garrison or a local defense force placed two cannons at the site; graffiti left by an Indiana regiment has also been found at the site.
The bluff was used as a filming location for the film How the West Was Won in the 1960s.
Battery Rock was added to the National Register of Historic Places on November 5, 1998. | WIKI |
[Nos. 44376, 44377.
En Banc.
January 7, 1977.]
The State of Washington, Respondent, v. Walter Gregory McKinnon, Appellant. The State of Washington, Respondent, v. Larry Raymond Yates, Appellant.
Kenneth H. Davidson (of King, King & Davidson), for appellant McKinnon.
Graham, Cohen & Wampold and R. Joseph Wesley, for appellant Yates.
Christopher T. Bayley, Prosecuting Attorney, and Charles S. Hamilton III, Deputy, for respondent.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." U.S. Const, amend. 4.
Hamilton, J.
In separate trials, defendant (appellant) Yates was convicted of possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver, and defendant (appellant) McKinnon was convicted of two counts of possession of a controlled substance. The cases were consolidated for appeal. Both cases involve the contention that evidence seized by the defendants' high school principal was improperly admitted against them.
On November 4, 1974, the chief of police for Snoqualmie, Washington, received a call from a confidential informant that the defendants, who were high school students, were selling "speed." The informant described the clothes which the defendants were wearing that day, and pinpointed in which pockets the "speed" was located. The police chief immediately contacted the principal of the defendants' high school and related the above information. The principal responded that he would talk to the defendants and get back to the chief of police.
The principal then contacted defendant Yates and brought him to the principal's office. At the same time the vice-principal contacted defendant McKinnon and took him to the vice-principal's office. The principal asked defendant Yates to empty his pockets. Defendant Yates then emptied all of his pockets, except the one in which the informant had said the "speed" would be located. The principal then reached into that pocket and found two packages of white pills. Meanwhile, the vice-principal was having defendant McKinnon empty his pockets. The principal then entered the vice-principal's office and reached into defendant McKinnon's pocket — the pocket in which the informant had said the "speed" was located — and found several packets of white pills. Laboratory analyses later confirmed that the pills found on both defendants' persons were amphetamines.
The principal then telephoned the chief oT police who went to the school and placed both students under arrest. While the police chief was driving the defendants to the police station, he saw defendant McKinnon take a bag out of his pocket and place it under the car seat. When they arrived at the police station, the chief of police told defendant McKinnon to go back out to the car and retrieve the bag he had secreted. Defendant McKinnon did so, and then voluntarily surrendered another bag. Laboratory analysis confirmed that these two bags contained marijuana. Later that same day, both defendants signed written statements regarding the drugs.
Defendants contend that the searches of their persons by the high school principal violated their right to be free from unreasonable searches as guaranteed to them by the fourth amendment to the United States Constitution, and therefore the fruits of these searches should have been excluded under Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643, 6 L. Ed. 2d 1081, 81 S. Ct. 1684, 84 A.L.R.2d 933 (1961), because the principal is a state official. Although there is a split of authority whether school officials are governmental agents within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment, compare In re Donaldson, 269 Cal. App. 2d 509, 75 Cal. Rptr. 220 (1969); Mercer v. State, 450 S.W.2d 715 (Tex. Civ. App. 1970), with State v. Baccino, 282 A.2d 869, 49 A.L.R.3d 973 (Del. Super. Ct. 1971); State v. Mora, 307 So. 2d 317 (La. 1975); and Doe v. State, 88 N.M. 347, 540 P.2d 827 (1975), we need not decide this question for we believe the search conducted by the principal did not violate defendants' Fourth Amendment rights.
The Fourth Amendment does not prohibit all searches, but only unreasonable searches. The question of reasonableness always involves balancing the governmental interests with the individual's right to be free from instrusions. See Camara v. Municipal Court, 387 U.S. 523, 18 L. Ed. 2d 930, 87 S. Ct. 1727 (1967). When law enforcement officers are conducting a search, they are generally required to secure a search warrant issued upon a showing of probable cause, except for a few "jealously and carefully drawn" exceptions. Coolidge v. New Hampshire, 403 U.S. 443, 29 L. Ed. 2d 564, 91 S. Ct. 2022 (1971). However, in some situations, the search and seizure is allowed upon less than the traditional standard of probable cause because the governmental interests outweigh the intrusion. See Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 20 L. Ed. 2d 889, 88 S. Ct. 1868 (1968) (stop and frisk); United States v. Brignoni-Ponce, 422 U.S. 873, 45 L. Ed. 2d 607, 95 S. Ct. 2574 (1975) (stopping of vehicles by roving border patrol); United States v. Martinez-Fuerte, 428 U.S. 543, 49 L. Ed. 2d 1116, 96 S. Ct. 3074 (1976) (stopping vehicles at a routine border checkpoint).
It is well established that students do not lose their constitutional rights when they enter the school grounds. Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School Dist., 393 U.S. 503, 506, 21 L. Ed. 2d 731, 89 S. Ct. 733 (1969). The Washington State Board of Education has recognized the student's right to be secure against unreasonable searches and seizures. See WAC 180-40-095(3). In Tinker, certain students wore black armbands to express their objections to the hostilities in Vietnam. The students were suspended until they would return to the school minus their armbands. The Supreme Court found that the wearing of armbands was closely akin to "pure speech" and did not interfere with school operations or with the right of other students to be secure and to be left alone. It held that the wearing of these armbands was speech protected by the first amendment to the United States Constitution and that students could not be suspended for expressing their nondisruptive objections to the armed conflict in Vietnam:
The principal use to which the schools are dedicated is to accommodate students during prescribed hours for the purpose of certain types of activities. Among those activities is personal intercommunication among the students. This is not only an inevitable part of the process of attending school; it is also an important part of the educational process. A student's rights, therefore, do not embrace merely the classroom hours. When he is in the cafeteria, or on the playing field, or on the campus during the authorized hours, he may express his opinions, even on controversial subjects like the conflict in Vietnam, if he does so without "materially and substantially interfer[ing] with the requirements of appropriate discipline in the operation of the school" and without colliding with the rights of others. Burnside v. Byars, [363 F.2d 744, 749 (5th Cir. 1966)]. But conduct by the student, in class or out of it, which for any reason— whether it stems from time, place, or type of behavior— materially disrupts classwork or involves substantial disorder or invasion of the rights of others is, of course, not immunized by the constitutional guarantee of freedom of speech.
(Footnote omitted. Italics ours.) Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School Dist., supra at 512-13. The protection of schoolroom decorum was also affirmatively recognized in Goss v. Lopez, 419 U.S. 565, 42 L. Ed. 2d 725, 95 S. Ct. 729 (1975).
Although Tinker and Goss did not deal with students' Fourth Amendment rights, we believe this same recognition of schoolroom decorum is appropriate when dealing with Fourth Amendment rights. In Washington, students must attend school through the age of 14 and in most cases through the age of 17. RCW 28A.27.010. Certificated school personnel are given the authority and indeed have the duty to maintain good order and discipline in the schools. RCW 28A.67.100; WAC 180-44-020(1). This duty to maintain order and discipline is not founded upon arbitrary grounds. The school's function is to educate children, both intellectually and socially, to prepare them to properly function in our evermore complex adult world. Because of the number of students brought together during a school day, the educational function can only be accomplished by maintaining order and discipline in the school. Further, certificated school personnel must maintain schoolroom decorum in order to protect other students' rights to be secure and to be left alone.
The high school principal is not a law enforcement officer. His job does not concern the discovery and prevention of crime. His duty as the chief administrator of the high school includes a primary duty of maintaining order and discipline in the school. In carrying out this duty, he should not be held to the same probable cause standard as law enforcement officers. Although a student's right to be free from intrusion is not to be lightly disregarded, for us to hold school officials to the standard of probable cause required of law enforcement officials would create an unreasonable burden upon these school officials. Maintaining discipline in schools oftentimes requires immediate action and cannot await the procurement of a search warrant based on probable cause. We hold that the search of a student's person is reasonable and does not violate his Fourth Amendment rights, if the school official has reasonable grounds to believe the search is necessary in the aid of maintaining school discipline and order. See State v. Baccino, supra; State v. Young, 234 Ga. 488, 216 S.E.2d 586 (1975); In re State in the Interest of G. C., 121 N.J. Super. 108, 296 A.2d 102 (1972); Doe v. State, supra; People v. D., 34 N.Y.2d 483, 358 N.Y.S.2d 403, 315 N.E.2d 466 (1974); People v. Jackson, 65 Misc. 2d 909, 319 N.Y.S.2d 731 (1971), aff'd, 30 N.Y.2d 734, 333 N.Y.S.2d 167, 284 N.E.2d 153 (1972). Contra, State v. Mora, supra. The factors to be judged in determining whether the school official had reasonable grounds are the child's age, history, and school record, the prevalence and seriousness of the problem in the school to which the search was directed, the exigency to make the search without delay, and the probative value and reliability of the information used as a justification for the search. See Doe v. State, supra; People v. D., supra.
Turning to the facts in the instant case, we think it is clear that the principal did have reasonable grounds upon which to base his search. He received a telephone call from the chief of police who relayed the information about possible distribution of drugs in the school. The information included a description of the defendants' clothing and the pockets in which the "speed" was located. Drug use and abuse by secondary students are not unknown, and eyes should not be closed to the practices. There can be no doubt that the selling of drugs in a school is highly disruptive of school discipline and order. When the principal was confronted with information that "speed" would be distributed to other members of the student body, he had no alternative but to conduct the search without delay. Furthermore, delay could greatly enhance the possibility that the drugs might be destroyed or otherwise disposed of.
Defendants further argue that, even if a school official may conduct a search based on reasonable grounds, these particular searches were invalid because they were instigated by the chief of police. Although joint action by a law enforcement officer and a private person may constitute police action, see State v. Birdwell, 6 Wn. App. 284, 288, 492 P.2d 249 (1972), joint action was not present in these cases. Both trial courts found that at no time did the chief of police instruct the principal to search the defendants or detain them. We have independently searched the record and find no evidence that the police chief directed or even suggested to the principal that a search should be conducted. He merely relayed the information he had received to the principal, and the principal then acted independently in contacting defendants McKinnon and Yates. The fact that the principal called the chief of police after conducting the search does not indicate complicity. If the principal had received this information from sources other than the police, he then would be under a duty both to conduct a search and notify the police of his discoveries. We find no difference here where the information was merely relayed to the principal by the chief of police.
Defendants' other assignments of error concern their written statements at the police station. They do not contend that the statements were involuntarily given, but rather hinge their argument on the "fruit of the poison tree” doctrine. Because the searches of their persons did' not violate their Fourth Amendment rights, the statements were not tainted and hence were properly admitted against them.
The respective judgments are affirmed.
Stafford, C.J., and Hunter, Wright, Brachtenbach, and Horowitz, JJ., concur.
Rosellini, J.
(dissenting) — In response to a telephone call from the local chief of police — and with no other basis for his action — the defendants' high school principal called them to his office, searched them, found controlled substances in their possession, and called the police to come and arrest them. All of this occurred within a space of 7 minutes. I cannot conceive of a situation giving rise to a stronger inference that the school official acted in conjunction with and as an agent of the police.
Where the evidence shows that such a relationship existed, the fourth amendment to the United States Constitution requires that, unless the principal had probable cause to make an arrest, evidence obtained in the attendant search should be suppressed. Piazzola v. Watkins, 442 F.2d 284 (5th Cir. 1971). See also Annot., Admissibility, in Criminal Case, of Evidence Obtained by Search Conducted by School Official or Teacher, 49 A.L.R.3d 978, 987-89 (1973), and cases cited therein. The majority admits that such cause did not exist. The search was based upon an anonymous tip, unsupported by other facts then known to the officer or subsequently learned by investigation. Such cause is not sufficient. In re Little v. Rhay, 68 Wn.2d 353, 413 P.2d 15 (1966).
In my view, the question whether school officials, solely for the purpose of maintaining order and a proper educational atmosphere, may make searches of individuals or their property with less than probable cause is not before the court. However, the majority has found it necessary to decide that question, since it does not recognize that this was a search involving active police participation.
In reaching its decision, the majority pays no attention to the fact that the fruits of the search were used for a criminal prosecution and not as the basis for a school disciplinary action, nor does it consider other important factors which are involved in the policy decision made here.
I do not believe that the students of this state should be subjected to a serious erosion of a very valuable and cherished constitutional right without some consideration being given to those matters. In my exploration of this subject, I have found that commentators, both in the legal profession and in the education profession, are not at all convinced that the denial of constitutional rights to students is beneficial to the educational atmosphere or process, or that the gain in discipline outweighs the loss of personal privacy and dignity. This loss, it must be remembered, is felt by the innocent as well as the guilty.
The arguments in favor of preservation of the students' rights are set forth, with scholarship, compassion, and wisdom, in a dissent to the case of State v. Young, 234 Ga. 488, 216 S.E.2d 586 (1975), written by Justice Gunter. That case, like this, involved a prosecution for illegal possession of drugs. There, however, the search was made without the connivance of law enforcement officials. Aside from that difference the cases are very similar, both in the factual situation and the majority's reasoning. My views are so well expressed therein and I am so little capable of improving upon it, that I have taken the liberty of quoting at length from that opinion, omitting those portions not relevant to the case before us. Justice Gunter said:
The Fourth Amendment stands as a bulwark between the government and a citizen. It means that the government, federal or state or local, which can act only through its agents-employees, cannot invade the person of a citizen by conducting an "unreasonable search and seizure." The Fourth Amendment, as well as its equivalent in the Georgia Constitution, reads: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated; ..."
In Camara v. Municipal Court, 387 U. S. 523 (1967), the Supreme Court of the United States held that the Fourth Amendment was applicable to a municipal housing inspector. Mr. Justice White, the author of the Court's opinion in that case, said: "The basic purpose of this Amendment, as recognized in countless decisions of this court, is to safeguard the privacy and security of individuals against arbitrary invasions by governmental officials." P. 528. At p. 534 he said: "In summary, we hold that administrative searches of the kind at issue here are significant intrusions upon the interests protected by the Fourth Amendment, ..." And at p. 539 he said that the approach taken, by the court in that case "best fulfills the historic purpose behind the constitutional right to be free from unreasonable government invasions of privacy."
In See v. City of Seattle, 387 U. S. 541 (1967), the Supreme Court of the United States held the prohibition of the Fourth Amendment applicable to a representative of the City of Seattle Fire Department. The See case and the Camara case were decided on the same date, June 5, 1967.
In a case decided somewhat earlier, West Virginia Bd. of Ed. v. Barnette, 319 U. S. 624 (1943), the Supreme Court of the United States said (p. 637): "The Fourteenth Amendment, as now applied to the States, protects the citizen against the state itself and all of its creatures — boards of education not excepted. These have, of course, important, delicate, and highly discretionary functions, but none that they may not perform within the limits of the Bill of Rights. That they are educating the young for citizenship is reason for scrupulous protection of constitutional freedoms of the individual, if we are not to strangle the free mind at its source and teach youth to discount important principles of our government as mere platitudes."
School administrators are considered government officials for purposes of the First Amendment and procedural due process requirements. See Tinker v. Des Moines &c. School District, 393 U. S. 503 (1969); Goss v. Lopez, 43 USLW 4181 (January 22, 1975). And it is now clearly established that a minor, whether a public school student or not, is a person under our Constitution and entitled to its protections. See Tinker and Goss, supra, and In Re Gault, 387 U. S. 1 (1967).
The majority asserts that searches of students in public schools by school officials "are reasonable under the Fourth Amendment on considerably less than probable cause. We conclude that in the good faith exercise of their public trust teachers and administrators must be allowed to search without hindrance or delay subject only to the most minimal restraints necessary to insure that students are not whimsically stripped of personal privacy and subjected to petty tyranny."
My view, of course, is that there must be "probable cause" for the search of a student in a public school by a school official, and such a search without "probable cause" violates the Fourth Amendment rights of a student as a citizen. A student, in my view, cannot be stripped of his Fourth Amendment rights at the entrance to the public school. Nor do I think that the Fourth Amendment rights of a high school student are a diluted version of the Fourth Amendment rights of an adult.
There can be no doubt that the need for order and discipline in a public school is a valid concern; but it must be conceded that the maintenance of order and discipline in a public school is one thing, and the acknowledgement and enforcement of constitutional rights in a criminal prosecution is an entirely different thing. This case has nothing to do with the maintenance of school discipline; the State is prosecuting a student for having committed an alleged crime; the student is entitled to a "fair prosecution" which is an integral part of a "fair trial"; if an adult had been searched by a government official in the manner that this student was searched, the adult would have, as the majority concedes, a right to suppress any item seized; the adult is entitled to a fair prosecution as an integral part of a fair trial, but a student is not; and all of this adds up to making a public school student a second-class citizen not entitled to a fair prosecution by the State in a fair trial conducted by the State.
In the context of criminal prosecutions where Fourth Amendment rights must be acknowledged and enforced, I would hold that the standard of reasonableness for the search of a public school student is the same standard that must be applied to searches of adults, "probable cause."
I do not think that students have mere "minimal Fourth Amendment rights." And I certainly do not subscribe to the "adequate reason for the searches" enunciated by the majority in this case. As quoted from the majority opinion, the acts of the students in this case involved at most "a furtive gesture and an obvious consciousness of guilt by these students at the approach of the assistant principal." In fact, the record shows only that one of three students jumped up and put his hand down his pants. All three were searched. The record does not show whether the student in the present case was the one who jumped up. The majority's standard, subjectively applied by a school official, will justify the search of the person of any student in a public school. Such a standard is really no standard at all.
The majority has arrived at its standard by a general balancing test.[] The majority has placed upon the scales the age of the student, the status of the student, the status of the administrator, the fact that the search occurred in the schoolhouse, and the "governmental interests of discipline, security, and enablement of the education function." But why each of these considerations is relevant for purposes of the Fourth Amendment and what weight each brings to the scales remain unclear.
For example, the majority stresses the age of the student, citing Ginsburg v. New York for the general proposition that children have lesser constitutional rights than adults. It may be that in some First Amendment contexts the age of a person is relevant to the constitutional balance. Yet nobody has suggested that a high school student standing on the street has less freedom from governmental intrusions upon his privacy than an adult standing beside him. The relevance of age to Fourth Amendment problems is hard to perceive. Similarly, the fact that the search occurred in the schoolhouse cannot bring much weight to the scales if police in the schoolhouse are held to full warrant and probable cause requirements; and the courts addressing this issue here have so held. Piazzola v. Watkins, 442 F2d 284 (5th Cir. 1971); Waters v. United States, 311 A2d 835 (DC App. 1973); People v. Bowers, 72 Misc. 2d 800 (339 NYS2d 783) (NYC Crim Ct. 1973) affd. 77 Misc. 2d 697 (356 NYS2d 432)(App. Div. 1974).
What then are the relevant considerations? As the majority states, it is necessary first to focus upon the governmental interest which allegedly justifies official intrusion upon the constitutionally protected interest of the private citizen. Most searches are made in vindication of the State's interest in enforcing the criminal law, which includes, of course, an interest in protecting law abiding citizens from lawless ones. Ordinarily, a lower standard than probable cause is justified only when some additional interest is involved. Even then, the nature and extent of the governmental intrusion must be considered as well as the necessity for the particular form of intrusion. If the governmental interests can be served by a limited intrusion, then the Fourth Amendment permits only the limited intrusion. Terry v. Ohio, 392 U. S. 1 (1968); Camara v. Municipal Court, supra; United States v. Skipwith, 482 F2d 1272 (5th Cir. 1973).
The reasoning of the majority places no limits on the nature and extent of the search a school official may make, as long as the search is justified in the first instance under the majority's "minimal standard." Furthermore, the facts of the case do not show a limited intrusion of the kind associated with the relaxed standards of reasonableness in Camara and Terry. The search here was personal in nature and aimed at the discovery of evidence of specific misconduct. See Camara, 387 U. S., p. 537. Compare Sibron v. New York, 392 U. S. 40 (1968), where emptying a suspect's pocket was not justified by the same considerations which justified a pat-down search in Terry.
The governmental considerations said to be in issue are not very convincing in the context of this case. The facts give not the slightest hint of any threat to "the enablement of the education function" in the conduct of the students before the search. If we are to restrict a student's privacy in his own person in the name of education, let us do so on a record which provides evidence of potential disruption or disorder. There is none here. Compare Tinker v. Des Moines School District, supra, 393 U. S., p. 511. Furthermore, in the context of the present case, the government's interest in discipline and security is indistinguishable from the general law enforcement interest. See Buss, "The Fourth Amendment and Searches of Students in Public Schools," 59 Iowa L. Rev. 739 (1974).
What of the special status of the school official? Most courts ruling on schoolhouse searches have stressed this factor, noting that at common law school officials are said to stand in' loco parentis. The majority here correctly avoids reliance on common law maxims, although much of the reasoning,has the same familiar ring. It cannot be doubted that a school official occupies a status different from a police officer for many purposes. But the school official also has essentially law enforcement responsibilities. When he acts upon a suspicion of specific misconduct and conducts an investigation he is performing a law enforcement function. "What so many of the courts persist in talking about as a parental relationship between school and the student is really a law enforcement relationship in which the general student society is protected from the harms of anti-social conduct. As such, it should be subjected to law enforcement rules. Besides presenting a false picture of a person acting in a parental fashion, casting the school administrator in the parental role diverts attention from the relevant considerations that might argue for or against permitting the search." Buss, supra, at p. 768.
The schoolhouse search presents a unique situation. The question is whether its unique aspects reduce high school students to second-class citizens under the Fourth Amendment. I have examined what the case law establishes as the primary considerations under the Fourth Amendment and have tried to examine the facts of this particular case in the light of those considerations. I conclude that a school official performing a law enforcement function conducted a search of the person. I find no basis on this record for relieving the official of the probable cause requirement. Furthermore, I conclude that a search of three students after one of them jumps up and puts his hand down his pants is unreasonable.
Underlying the position of the majority in this case is a concern about the potential civil liability of school officials for violations of Fourth Amendment rights. The answer to that problem is not to apply a watered-down Fourth Amendment standard in criminal prosecutions but to recognize a qualified immunity for school officials in civil actions. The Supreme Court has recently done just that. Wood v. Strickland,_U. S._(95 SC_, 43 LE2d 214) (1975). The effect of the present decision is to combine that qualified immunity with a "minimal standard" of reasonableness and an abandonment of the right to suppress evidence. The result is that there is no effective judicial sanction for violations of a high school student's Fourth Amendment rights by a school official.
State v. Young, supra at 500-01, 507-11.
William G. Buss, whose article in 59 Iowa L. Rev. 739 (1974) is mentioned in the above opinion, is the author of a monograph entitled "Legal Aspects of Crime Investigation in the Public Schools" from which that article was excerpted. The monograph was commissioned by the ERIC Clearinghouse on Educational Management and published by the National Organization on Legal Problems of Education. In the excerpt, after reviewing the leading Fourth Amendment cases, and the cases involving school searches, Buss undertakes to balance the interest in law enforcement and school discipline against the right to privacy. His conclusion is that the latter has been unnecessarily and unwisely invaded in searches which the courts have upheld, which involved less than probable cause to believe that the student was engaged in illegal activity.
Buss argues that the exceptions to the warrant requirement* 123 456would seldom beapplicable in the school environment, where students are subject to restraints upon their movements which do not exist in the society outside the school doors. Emergency situations do arise, as in one case where a student had a gun, but in most of the cases which have come before the courts, there was time to get a warrant before the search was made.
This writer argues that because students are compelled to attend school, either by law or by economic and social pressures, the courts should be more diligent in the protection of their constitutional rights, not less so than they are where the adult is in a given place by choice. He also points out the fallacy of the in loco parentis rationale as applied in this setting, stating that it is obvious that the school official displays none of the protective concern for the student which is an expected characteristic of parentage. The school official, he says, acts as a representative of government— not a representative of parents — when he takes a child in hand and turns him over to the police.
The writer concludes that the failure of the courts to weigh the students' right to privacy against the law enforcement interest, or "educational environment" interest, and their assumption that the latter are controlling, sacrifices long-term principle to short-term expediency. Furthermore, he does not subscribe to the view that the denial of students' constitutional rights is conducive to the health and welfare of the educational environment. By the way they are treated more than by what they are told, students learn to respect the constitution or to hold it in contempt.
I find these arguments exceedingly persuasive. They indicate that assumptions which courts have apparently made — to the effect that the minimizing of certain constitutional rights is in the public interest — have very little validity when analyzed and viewed against the background of actual human experience. As guardians of the constitution, I believe it is our duty to make our assumptions in favor of the rights guaranteed therein and to zealously guard against their erosion.
I would reverse the judgment and order a new trial, with directions that the illegally obtained evidence and its fruits should be suppressed.
Utter and Dolliver, JJ., concur with Rosellini, J.
Petition for rehearing denied February 24, 1977.
The majority of this court sets up some criteria for determining "reasonable cause" and then presumes that the facts of the case satisfy the criteria. Like the dissent said in State v. Young, 234 Ga. 488, 216 S.E.2d 586 (1975), it does not explain the relevance or the significance of the criteria.
The circumstances under which the United States Supreme Court has permitted searches to be conducted without probable cause are:
(1) Where the arresting officer has reasonable cause to believe that he is dealing with an armed and dangerous person, he may 'stop and frisk' him for a weapon. Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 21-22, 20 L. Ed. 2d 889, 88 S. Ct. 1868 (1968).
(2) A warrant for the search of a designated area of houses may issue upon a showing that there aré 'reasonable administrative or legislative standards for conducting the inspection with respect to a particular dwelling," for health and safety purposes. For such administrative searches, the strict requirement of personal knowledge of the officer is relaxed. Camara v. Municipal Court, 387 U.S. 523, 18 L. Ed. 2d 930, 87 S. Ct. 1727 (1967).
(3) Warrantless searches at borders for aliens or contraband are held to be reasonable because of the legitimate interest in self-protection, where there is reasonable cause to believe that laws are being violated. Carroll v. United States, 267 U.S. 132, 69 L. Ed. 543, 45 S. Ct. 280, 39 A.L.R. 790 (1925).
(4) Where there is reasonable cause to believe that contraband is being carried, an automobile may be searched, without a warrant. The emergent circumstance that the contraband may be carried away out of the jurisdiction and its contents destroyed was the rationale for this exception. Carroll v. United States, supra.
Lower federal courts have also held that passengers (and their luggage) boarding airplanes may be searched, during a time of a significant number of hijackings. United States v. Skipwith, 482 F.2d 1272 (5th Cir. 1973); United States v. Moreno, 475 F.2d 44 (5th Cir. 1973).
(5) No warrant is necessary where the defendant consents to the search. Bumper v. North Carolina, 391 U.S. 543, 20 L. Ed. 2d 797, 88 S. Ct. 1788 (1968); Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347, 19 L. Ed. 2d 576, 88 S. Ct. 507 (1967).
(6) An object in plain view of the government official can be seized, provided he is rightfully in the position to have that view. Harris v. United States, 390 U.S. 234.19 L. Ed. 2d 1067, 88 S. Ct. 992 (1968); Ker v. California, 374 U.S. 23, 10 L. Ed. 2d 726, 83 S. Ct. 1623 (1963).
It was not contended in this case and the lower court did not find that any of these exceptions was applicable.
| CASELAW |
Infinite Loop Of Switch
28 views (last 30 days)
Tyann Hardyn
Tyann Hardyn on 30 Aug 2021
Answered: Cris LaPierre on 30 Aug 2021
Hi, Matlab Community
Iam just curious about this. Could matlab do an infinite loop by using switch and case, to be exact when the input parameter is not same as the desire input?
Iam typing an example code like this :
%Case 1
a1 = [2, 1; 1, 3];
inverse_a1 = inv(a1);
%Case 2
a2 = [2, -4; -3, 6];
inverse_a2 = inv(a2);
%Case 3
a3 = [2.01, 1.5; 4, 3];
inverse_a3 = inv(a3);
in = input('Enter the number of case (1, 2, or 3) = ');
switch input('Type the case number (1, 2, or 3) = ')
case 1
out1 = sprintf("Matrix inversion from case 1 is");
disp(out1);
disp(inverse_a1)
case 2
out2 = sprintf("Matrix inversion from case 2 is");
disp(out2);
disp(inverse_a2)
case 3
out3 = sprintf("Matrix inversion from case 3 is");
disp(out3);
disp(inverse_a3)
otherwise
disp(in); %I want to create this otherwise statement to be Infinite Loop of asking to the user
%instead of 1 only.
end
By using the above code, if the input is not 1, 2, or 3, it will deliver us directly to the otherwise statement that occurs only 1 times and then make us out from Switch region (end the switch). Could it possible to create an infinite loop so then we will continuously meet the variable of " in " ( input('Enter the number of case (1, 2, or 3) = '); ) again and again?
Thank you very much..... /.\ /.\ /.\
Accepted Answer
Cris LaPierre
Cris LaPierre on 30 Aug 2021
Switch statements do not loop, so no, it is not possible to create an infinite loop using one.
If you want to create a loop, consider incorporating a while loop into your code.
in = 0;
% While loop repeats until in is 1,2 or 3
while ~ismember(in,1:3)
in = input('Enter the number of case (1, 2, or 3) = ');
end
% Only reaches switch statement if in is 1, 2 or 3
switch in
case 1
out1 = sprintf("Matrix inversion from case 1 is");
disp(out1);
disp(inverse_a1)
case 2
out2 = sprintf("Matrix inversion from case 2 is");
disp(out2);
disp(inverse_a2)
case 3
out3 = sprintf("Matrix inversion from case 3 is");
disp(out3);
disp(inverse_a3)
end
More Answers (1)
Image Analyst
Image Analyst on 30 Aug 2021
No, you'll never have an infinite loop with a switch statement because there is no looping at all. It just goes straight through. If you want one, you'll have to put it inside a while statement:
while true
in = input('Enter the number of case (1, 2, or 3) = ');
switch in
case 1 % etc.
otherwise
end
end % of while. Use control-c to break out
Community Treasure Hunt
Find the treasures in MATLAB Central and discover how the community can help you!
Start Hunting! | ESSENTIALAI-STEM |
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive320
User:Rarelibra
Could someone have a word with him? He seems to have appointed himself moderator of Talk:Province of Bolzano-Bozen, and is removing posts and issuing orders, laced with profanity. Who appointed him drill-sergeant, and WP:Signpost missed it? ;-> Septentrionalis PMAnderson 19:24, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* I've left him a note on his talk page. David Fuchs ( talk ) 19:35, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* I indefinitely blocked the user for this edit and the breach of WP:LEGAL therein. ("removing personal comments that border on libel - unless you have proof of this, refrain or we'll look into lawful matters") I welcome your review of this block. --John 20:08, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* I unblocked upon the user's assurance that no legal threat was intended. This might warrant continued scrutiny though. --John 20:15, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* He made those attacks against me. I still have the copy of the e-mail he sent warning me about another Editor. Who cares actually, but I thought I'd let that Editor know. This guy was also selectively removing my posts across Wikipedia, and threating that some "game is going to begin"; i.e., he is going to get me blocked and banned, or he is gonna come over to my home and hit me. :-) Talking about needing a Wiki-break.... jeez. Icsunonove 04:45, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
I think we need a little administrative focus on user Icsunonove here. Can a user continue to harrass another with constant banter, insult, and defamation without warning or punishment, while other users are scrutinized? I thought Wikipedia was a NEUTRAL place where ALL PARTIES involved are supposed to be treated equally. In this case, two wrongs don't make a right - so what about Icsunonove? Is there an admin out there that can see his various postings and sum most of them up as personal attacks and borderline libel? In my case, I have been regularly contributing positive, useful, and informative postings to wiki. With the case of South Tyrol, never again do I wish to be involved - but someone please stop Icsunonove from going to every talk page he can to leave slanderous and defaming comments. Thank you. Rarelibra 05:50, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
* Hah, "don't look at me, look at him!". Reminds me of elementary school. Interesting points you make though, considering that you began on Oct. 31st by messaging a new editor that I'm an "Italo-extremist", which I caught by a chance visit to Wikipedia. Then you go and selectively erase/edit my and others' posts. You must be pretty thick skinned to believe you will not receive return comments when you initiate attacks on other editors. I guess you've at least been consistent in convincing yourself time and time again that you are absolutely always in the right -- so I'm wondering why I am even bothering with this lecture. I think what you seriously need to do is focus a bit on your own behavior. Making legal threats and vandalizing others' edits is an issue you need to deal with. By the way, that is your opinion you regularly contribute positively; I believe others would have issue with that opinion, especially given the regular warnings you receive from Admins. Now, I ask you to please stop harassing editors that you somehow feel compelled to lambast once or twice a month. Also cease vandalizing the Province of Bolzano-Bozen page by placing POV tags, giving no clear explanation, and demanding who and who cannot then comment... i.e., read Lar's comments, and understand them! The bottom line is you sent me an e-mail, one that i still have, defaming Septentrionalis. You can call my action of telling him what you said "libel" until you turn blue. Maybe what you should have done was not sent it in the first place. I DO sincerely hope I no longer have to be involved with your lot any longer.. gosh, one can only wish! I'll let the Admins deal with your yelling, and constant stirring the pot on ethnic debates. Icsunonove 06:16, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
* PS, isn't it funny that Rarelibra states to John that no legal threat was intended, but just above he again makes the same accusations of libel, slander, and defamation. Is this legal-verbage week on Wikipedia?! I think the message left on the talk page was a pretty-darn clear threat of some sort of legal action. o_O Rarelibra, you could at least be brave enough to be truthful in what your intentions were when you made that post. Was there something else you "meant to say" when you stated you are going to look into "lawful matters"? I'm more offended by this dodging of the truth, than the attack made regarding legal action. Icsunonove 06:33, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
User:Icsunonove
How is it that such postings as THIS, THIS (calling me a coward), THIS (questionable behavior), and many other examples can continue to come from this user? One can sum up probably HALF of his edits as personal attacks and questionable behavior slandering and insulting those who disagree with his edits and behavior.
Is there no admin around that can see this and help? Thank you. Rarelibra 05:57, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
* PERHAPS you shouldn't have popped back into the Province of Bolzano-Bozen page and Francesco's page making all these claims again of Italo-centric and Italo-extremists. You complain after you insult people, and they make comments back at you? Interesting. Icsunonove 07:20, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
* You have been removing other people's posts, been incivil and threatening legal action . I would be more concerned about your own behaviour before reporting others. пﮟოьεԻ 5 7 09:12, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
* Indeed. --Checco 11:09, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
* Well, PhJ and Rarelibra might not like me, and maybe a certain subset of users from Germany (Gryfindor, Matthead, etc.), but this is pretty messed up that this behavior of Rarelibra (and PhJ) turns into an indictment on my editing history. Ok, maybe Fut. Perf. sees a war and just wants to end it ASAP without seeing what happened first, but PhJ coming on here and making his comments below. Jeez, how I wish I hadn't visited Wikipedia a few days ago and witnessed the new bashing on the Bolzano-Bozen page... :-) Icsunonove 15:08, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
Topic ban proposed
This is an extremely long-standing conflict that has gone from lame edit war to festering personal hatred. The only solution I can see is that certain people need to be removed from this situation, and for good. I haven't made up my mind yet whether Rarelibra's behaviour is disruptive to a degree that requires sanctions (right now he seems to be simply angry, and understandably so to a certain degree.) The fault for the recent re-escalation I see squarely on Icsunove's side. A topic ban for him is the least we need. He is quite evidently unable or unwilling to work together constructively with the other editors on this matter.
Therefore, proposed community sanction: Icsunonove is banned, indefinitely, from making any edits relating to the question of geographical names in South Tyrol. This includes comments relating to these issues on talk pages and user talk pages, including his own, and comments about other contributors with whom he has been in conflict over them, including (but not limited to) Rarelibra, Gryffindor, and Pmanderson.
Violations of this ban to be met with escalating blocks, as usual. Other editors to be added to this or similar regulations as other admins see necessary. Fut.Perf. ☼ 06:56, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
* "The fault for the recent re-escalation I see squarely on Icsunove's side. A topic ban for him is the least we need. He is quite evidently unable or unwilling to work together constructively with the other editors on this matter." Ok, if that isn't one of the most completely biased statements I've seen made in awhile, I don't know what is. I was one of the editors that helped finally bring a neutral solution to this page after ages of fighting. This was done, together with a group of editors that were German, English, and Italian speakers -- in an extremely civil manner. Then you decide to target a single user -- me? How convenient. I have no conflict with Pmanderson, it is Rarelibra that has a conflict with him as well; so please get that straight at least. I also suggest you should stay neutral in this discussion, since you are a native German speaker, and this has constantly been drawn into a useless debate between users from Germany and Italy. You then accuse me of being at fault in a re-escalation? Then you have not sufficiently investigated what re-instigated this new (and stupid) war. It was and . If you find edits I made earlier to those, please show me -- and then you can accuse me of re-starting this bickering. If not, my research shows it was Rarelibra and PhJ -- again. I have been one of those from day one that has pushed to get these pages at neutral titles, and the fighting on these pages has dropped significantly. There are just a few holdouts who like to come along and lambaste us (i.e., Gryffindor, PhJ, and Rarelibra). You want to topic ban some people for awhile? There ya go. Also, see below the highly threatening e-mail of legal action this user Rarelibra sent me. In the past he e-mailed me that Pmanderson had ulterior motives, so I told Pmanderson. Tough, he shouldn't of e-mailed that sort of language if he didn't want it made public. Regardless, Fut. Perf., that is really offensive what you have accused me of above and it is completely out of line that you are trying to isolate me from this topic, considering you yourself have been involved in this debate. Icsunonove 07:24, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
I'm open to extending the topic ban to Rarelibra (hadn't honestly seen the timing of the "italo-extremists" comments). If the e-mail is confirmed there'll of course have to be an indef block too unless the threat is retracted. For the record, I have never been involved in this dispute that I can remember, except in administrative function, and I'm as neutral as can be. The suggestion I couldn't be neutral because I'm German just goes to show how insane this situation has become. Fut.Perf. ☼ 07:39, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
* You know what Fut. Perf., how about trying something else instead of getting people banned from topics they contribute to? I've worked a lot to get neutral solutions, and the vast majority of editors will agree we have solutions now that are fair to Italian/German sensitivities on the subject, and also reflect proper English usage. At one point the pages were simply dominated from a German point of view, basically a direct translation from German Wikipedia. I have a good idea with regards to this considering my ancestry is German and Italian. The situation is insane, I agree. But I feel it is fair for me, after what I have witnessed on Wikipedia with regards to this topic, to at least ask that you do consider any inherent biases you might have. If you feel absolutely neutral, then I'm proud of you -- seriously. :) I took quite a lot of time off from this subject, just concentrating on clean-up edits. I came back and saw all this hurtful writing again, and of course I have a reaction. I maybe wish I wouldn't of reacted so cynically, but it does get old! If you would like us all to take some time off from the BZ page, fine. But what you are asking for above, and pointing a finger at me (without even thoroughly investigating what happened).. you must know this is hurtful and insulting. I've put a lot of work into this region, a place where my ancestors come from in fact. Icsunonove 08:57, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
* One question I have though: How many times does an Editor get to make such major threats like this, and then magically retract them? Icsunonove 08:19, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
E-mail
I somehow had the feeling this guy would send me an e-mail, and look what I just received in through the hopper:
'If you keep on putting down slanderous lies and defamations about me on Wikipedia, you are going to find yourself rather quickly in a situation that you won't be able to handle, NASA boy. You seem smart - so figure out what the punishment is for libel and defamation of character - and exactly how much it will cost you. I'm not personally attacking you on every page, so you best keep your mouth closed and concentrate on something positive.'
'Keep on pushing me and see what happens. You think I don't know a few people in government, NASA boy? Keep it up and see how far down the rabbit hole really goes.'
You've been warned.
This was sent by Rarelibra (<email redacted>) through Wikipedia e-mail at 11/01/2007 10:43 PM. While I almost spit a mouthful of water at my monitor laughing at this banter, I thought this should be reported. If an Admin needs me to forward the header, IP, and text, please tell me where to send. If this isn't a legal threat involving Wikipedia, I don't what is. I'd love to see this guy actually go to a lawyer and tell him that this dude with the nickname X on Wikipedia told the editor with the nickname Y that "Rarelibra" said something bad about him, etc., etc. That is almost worth paying money to watch. This should go in the hall of shame. :-) Icsunonove 07:00, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
* Is there some way of confirming Rarelibra sent this email? Anyone? Neil ☎ 10:11, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
* Not in a non-adminly way; but if you change your email, it sends you a confirmation, and will not let you send mail until you do. So the person in question, even if they were pranking him, *does* need to have access to that email account (whether it's really rarelibra is to be determined. BTW, if I understand correctly, the IP information will just be Wikipedia's mailserv, and won't actually help (the return path on mail I've received from two users in the past few days is<EMAIL_ADDRESS>I don't know what timestamps are available to admins, but I bet confirmation of this needs to go through the Foundation. --Thespian 10:27, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
* On further thought, on the off chance that the email wasn't from Rarelibra, but was somehow his email, I redacted the address, just in case. As I can't oversight, it will still be in the history if people need to look it up. --Thespian 10:55, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
* Who knows, maybe this time he will actually just admit to it? Kinda doubt it though. Last time he made the excuse to John that his comments about bringing in matters of law obviously just meant Wikipedia Admins. Maybe that is what he means by "Government" this time? :-) Anyway, tell me what I can do to help verify. regards, Icsunonove 15:01, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
* I have also received an abusive e-mail from an account which claims to be Rarelibra; I will forward it to any admin who requests it, and it can be compared to Icsunonove's. I am not in conflict with Icsunonove, whom I would count as one of the few editors on this subject who have hitherto been consistently civil; I say this although I do disagree with him. (My position on the substantive matter is actually closer to Rarelibra's, although I cannot concur with his reasons.) Certainly I would rather discuss the merits of the Italianizing position with Icsunonove than with some of its other advocates. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 19:24, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
* I was just about to say that I agree with you maybe 50% of the time or less :), but at least I feel like I'm getting a rational, thoughtful and open-minded debate. Simply put, it makes me respect Sep as an editor. I completely admit I get overly emotional sometimes when this same group of editors comes in swinging every other month, and I then might make cynical replies that are not completely civil; but at least I apologize here and there. The last time I made such an admission, what did I get? PhJ saying "see! he confesses, so ban him!" Nice!! A lot of these folk have never appeared to be in the least regretful saying what they say, or making threats, etc. Anyway, all we need now is to have Gryffindor show up. He'll have plenty to say how I don't work well with others, drive editors (i.e., him) crazy, etc., etc. Regardless, showing up and seeing the other two bad mouth me as an "italo-extremist" to a new contributor.. it is really getting close to that last straw. I am an native English-speaking American! o_O Anyway, Sep, we can definitely discuss the topic some more on your talk page sometime. I need a bit of a break. later, Icsunonove 22:21, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
* Yes, could you forward me the mail please? "fut" "dot" "perf" "at" "freenet" "dot" "de" . Fut.Perf. ☼ 20:29, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
Icsunonove vs. opponents
I can understand Rarelibra, even if he has really sent that e-mail (though such an e-mail couldn't be tolerated, but it has to be seen in the context). Rarelibra is definitely not the only one who is in trouble with Icsunonove (old username: Taalo), who seems to have a fine feeling for offending other users everywhere on Wikipedia to such an extent that he cannot be punished, but he still reaches his aim effectively hurting the others. It is a matter of fact that Icsunonove extensively writes off-topic comments obviously insulting other users. No wonder they get angry at him. -- PhJ 13:00, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
PhJ, et al. vs. opponents
PhJ, given that you, Rarelibra, and Gryffindor are the three who in particular keep coming back to lambaste/insult us, and disrupt these pages in general, I'd say you would of wanted to at least attempt to stay neutral. If you want to come and attack me, we can just as easily start digging up contributions that you have made in the past. I.e., we can repeat verbatim what you have said above about you three. In the end, it doesn't surprise me that you jump on the bandwagon here. Both you and Rarelibra have often found it necessary to go around and delete other editor's comments on talk pages. Both you guys placed POV tags repeatedly on the Province of Bolzano-Bozen page without giving a clear reason, and even against the advice of Admins such as Lar. Want some sort of revenge now? Go someplace else if that is what you need in life... I'd bet you'd love to get me banned, but this post to ANI was not an indictment on my editing history on Wikipedia. It was about legal threats made on Wikipedia. Also, it was initiated by new fighting instigated by you and Rarelibra with those initial posts you guys made on Francesco's talk page and the articles talk page. Icsunonove 14:57, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
So, where do we go from here?
Okay, so what's going to happen now? I think it has become clear that it is not safe to let Icsunonove and Rarelibra edit together in that area. I take it Rarelibra accepts to stay away from South Tyrol articles. In my view, Icsunonove needs to stay away too. Look at his contributions from 1 November; almost every single one of them contained a personal attack, a long line of taunting and innuendo, on a very personal level, and directed not only against Rarelibra but others too. There is just too much bad blood between these groups of contributors, the situation is so inflamed we need people to get out of it, in their own interest. Just stop editing the same articles and stop talking about each other.
I therefore renew my proposal: topic ban for both Rarelibra and Icsunonove. Can we get this done here on the community level, or do we need to go through Arbcom? Comments from other uninvolved admins would be welcome. Fut.Perf. ☼ 09:40, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
Rarelibra talk page
Wow, and when I was getting that feeling to just forget about this guy, thinking he might just be having a difficult time at the moment in real life, check out what he has put at the top of his talk page. We've gone from Italo-centric and Italo-extremist, to Italo-fascists! Talking with a certain editor over e-mail really seems to have gotten to this editor... wow! I guess someone can put anything they want on their talk page, but jeez, even racial slurs? It is funny we are all Italo-fascists, considering I am an American, Andreas and AldeBaer are Germans, we have various people from the UK who have said they have no Italian roots what-so-ever, and Sep is from somewhere in our Solar System, we think. The Italians who have been on here are Supparluca, Checco and Pcassetti, to name the most active recently, and these I've found to be genuinely good-hearted people. Fascists!?! Icsunonove 22:44, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
No amount of apology I offer - wholeheartedly - will most likely suffice in the light of the past few days. All I can say is, if it is a topic ban - I will fully accept this. Trust me, from hear on out - I will say this in full earnest - if anyone catches me on any of the controversial topics making trouble, ban me until Jesus comes back. As adults, we should be able to sort this out with civility. So I offer up a full apology to Pmanderson (whom I respect fully and sometimes bump elbows with), and I offer up a full apology to Icsunonove - who I ask of this, let us share the olive branch, go our separate ways, and contribute to wiki with positive and constructive vibes. I offer up no insults - it only fans the fire. I ask of you only the same. I was angered, yes. Because here I was all this time contributing to the growth and improvement of various articles in Pakistan, Japan, Romania, the list goes on and on... (working on Vietnam currently) and along comes an editor with what I saw as a perfect solution that would enable a regional article and a provincial article (as exists in many countries). I simply do not like the blog-like off-topic insulting type of banter, and it got to me at a time when, in my personal life, I am at a stress factor of 10 from various school, military, work, and home pressures - all of which culminate next year when I get the degree and retire from the service. I am humble in my approach - and hope you all see this.
I only wish to make maps and continue relying on wiki for accurate information in my quest throughout the various administrative levels of various countries. So once again, please accept my wholehearted apologies, one and all. Rarelibra 23:13, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
* Acknowledged with thanks. (This is the first I've seen this; you may want to write Icsunonove's talk page.) Septentrionalis PMAnderson 15:41, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
Disruption of Wikiquette alerts by Rlevse
User:Rlevse is an administrator who has come barging into Wikiquette alerts like a bull run amok in a china shop, entirely disrupting the process there. This is not a process in which Rlevse has ever before participated in its entire 2½ year history. Clearly he has no expertise in how it is supposed to work.
It is hard to imagine anything than what User:Rlevse did here.
* 1) more likely to sabotage what is intended to be an informal first step in a dispute resolution process
* 2) more likely to exacerbate this dispute
* 3) more likely to fan the flames and to create more hard feelings, and
* 4) more counterproductive to the spirit of cooperative editing
Especially when
* 1) There is absolutely nothing at WQA instructing me to offer a response.
* 2) What is there, in fact, actively discourages such discussion, by saying "Avoid an extensive discussion of the problem or issue on this page" and "Do not continue your discussion in detail here".
* 3) The discussion, including any response from me, actually belongs where the issue arose (in this case, Talk:Kilogram), and User:Rlevse never even looked there.
Rlevse's actions, (and perhaps equally important or more so, the actions he failed to take) fly directly in the face of the spirit of this entire process.
But Rlevse's are not merely contrary to the spirit of this entire process. It is much more than that.
In fact, they are contrary to very black-letter rules of this process, as set out in a big honking box at the top of that page:
* "'This page is an early step in the Wikipedia Dispute Resolution Process. It is a non-binding noticeboard where users can report impolite, uncivil or other difficult communications with editors, to seek perspective, advice, informal mediation, or a referral to a more appropriate forum. ... 'Wikiquette Alerts depends on the help of interested editors to provide neutral viewpoints. Everyone is invited to participate in responding to alerts.'"
a "non-binding noticeboard"; and in the opening paragraph:
* "'Wikiquette alerts are an informal streamlined way to request perspective and help with difficult communications with other editors. This page is not part of the formal dispute resolution process, so it can be a good place to start if you are not sure where else to go. It is hoped that assistance from uninvolved editors can help to resolve conflicts before they escalate.'"
and further down the page:
* "'Responding to alerts is also a good way to learn more about Wikipedia policies and even more, about how to work with other users to calm situations without resorting to formal procedures.'"
and you can't get much clearer than without resorting to formal procedures. In other words, that would be inappropriate at this stage even if their had been any relevant discussion, unless based on new developments during that discussion.
At the very least, formal procedures require reference to some other dispute resolution process, and action in accordance with the rules governing that other process. Not actions contrary to the rules of this process.
If my participation on this page were important, and there is no evidence whatsoever that Rlevse know anything whatsoever about how this is supposed to work, then he should have invited me to come here and comment on it. An out-of-the-blue, totally undiscussed block, for not doing something which I am not in any way obliged to do, is not by any stretch of the imagination an appropriate response. To instead prevent any comment from me is about the most illogical, irresponsible action anyone could possibly imagine.
The ball had already been picked up at Wikiquette alerts by one of the regulars here Bfigura, who had already said that he was going to look into it. Rlevse's actions totally disrupted that, and stepped on territory that had already been claimed, and that was supposedly in the process of being worked out.
I am at a total loss as to why Rlevse might have done this. The only possible explanation that offers itself to me is that it was deliberately designed to give User:Greg L an upper hand in that WQA dispute. Why, I couldn't even guess.
That this process's integrity was in fact the primary target of User:Rlevse's attack is also evident from his posting of his notice about blocking me there (still his only participation there, ever) seven minutes before he even posted a notice to me about it on my talk page, as well as from the fact that he had not done the same at Wikipedia talk:Call a spade a spade, nor had he done so at User talk:ArielGold. It is further evidenced by his placement of your notice on my talk page under the existing User talk:Gene Nygaard header halfway up my page, not in a new notice at the bottom (and he didn't add the subheader, I did that later). There's no disguising of the fact that the additional charges laid were intended as nothing other than a strategem or ploy, likely intended to create an appearance of fairness in an unwarranted 72-hour long block.
The other undiscussed, unproved issues thrown in by Rlevse were, based on all the evidence, clearly a red herring. The fact that a couple of hounds were diverted and chased after the false scent merely shows that such ploys sometimes works. If anyone wants to discuss the side issues separately, that's fine--but they don't belong in this discussion.
Worst of all, Rlevse is a rude, inconsiderate person who never once discussed any of this with me--not before blocking me, not after blocking me, not at any time. But that, too, is a side issue here. Gene Nygaard 14:46, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
* By calling Rlevse rude and inconsiderate you are continuing the incivility that has led to several blocks on your account. I also believe you are misreading one statement that Rlevse made and attempting to use that to lawyer your way out of a completely appropriate block. Your unblock request was denied more than once.
* It should be clear to you that personal attacks and incivility are not acceptable behaviors while editing Wikipedia. Stop it and you won't get blocked. Shell babelfish 15:13, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
* After having a look at the situtation, I fully endorse Rlevse's block. пﮟოьεԻ 5 7 15:17, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
* The block was entirely justified, but ideally would have been longer. Tim Vickers 16:53, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
* I think the tone of this report and the prior block log indicate that Gene Nygaard has completely failed to learn anything from his past travails. His response to being blocked for being rude and aggressive was to come here and be rude and aggressive. Sorry, not good enough. He can have another week off. Guy (Help!) 17:16, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
* A week long block for the post above? That seems excessive to me. Haukur 17:29, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
* Have a look at his block log, this is a long-term problem. Tim Vickers 17:53, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
* I realize he's grumpy (I've been fighting with him for years) - I just don't see a justification in our blocking policy for a week long block at this point. Being apparently in the minority here I won't unblock, though. Haukur 18:09, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
As a side point and please correct me if I'm wrong, the description of Wikiquette alerts as "non-binding" means that any agreements made on that page are voluntary on the part of all concerned. It does not mean that participants are given any kind of "immunity" from repercussions for their conduct. Sheffield Steel talkstalk 19:39, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
For those considering if this block is justified, may I offer the following:
These are all edits asking Gene to be more civil. Almost all just from the last month(!)
To Gene:
* "your needless confrontative comment was quite unneccessary"
* I do not want to continue this discussion as it is clear you want to attack me personally, and I have no interest in that
* I'm afraid you have depleted my patience towards your conflicts, accusations and, above all, your unmannerly language
* Hint: Wikipedia is a cooperative effort, and your language has a flavor of ordering me to change it to make you happy.
* I sincerely hope that your interactions with other editors are more civil. If you're going to go around biting people, damn well make sure you're doing it for the right reasons.
* First off, I suggest you back off for a second and watch your tone
* "I'm going to be honest and say that to come here, dump a huge table like this with criticism of someone whose background you are unfamiliar with, is not only a bit harsh, but is not likely to be reacted to well. I see you've done the similar thing to other editors, using comments like "If you don't know how to use the precision parameter, don't do it. Leave it to someone smarter than you are." And your comment here to me: "someone else is most likely a whole lot more competent at making them than you are. ", which is false, I have to say, I find that kind of comment unhelpful, bordering on rude. While I'm doing my very best to not react to your comments negatively, I'm going to just say that I would have appreciated a helpful note that explained your concerns nicely, and offering assistance, rather than filling my talk page with a table like this."
* "Please Gene, try talking with people without attacking them and without constantly using a snide tone. That would avoid a lot of trouble."
* "Calling people an ass, or dumb, is certainly "inconsistent with a civil, collegial atmosphere", and thus blockable."
* Please do not assume bad faith. I note that your theory about my supposed hidden motives is directly contradicted by (8b), and decline to argue further about what I want or do not want
* No it isn't. That's an absurd and uncivil claim. The fact that someone uses a non-English letter and doesn't know about sort keys is hardly conclusive evidence that they have "no respect for the English language". That's a ridiculous and unhelpful conclusion to jump to.
These from a little further back may also be of interest - from AN/I reports and RFC/U
* "Gene Nygaard is frequently uncivil, and engages in edit wars to impose his own personal style preference on scientific articles."
* "The only relevant question here is, are the actions of this editor disrupting the encyclopedia, and if so, what should be done about it? The answers seem clear to me, they are disruptive, and if he will not agree to stop doing them until consensus is clear, and then agree to abide by consensus whether he agrees or not (these are our norms, after all), he should be blocked." (Lar)
* "Do you need to be blocked to understand who is being disruptive?" - Kusma resulting in article move ban
* - "There have been RfCs in the past about Gene doing his thing on these sorts of cat sorting and formatting, patterning issues before." Blnguyen
* - "Let's get something straight Gene - you have a long history of rudeness, boorish behavior and personal attacking. No admin will need hesitate in blocking you if this pattern of behavior continues unabated." - Rama's arrow
* "Gene, please knock it off. You're skating along the ragged edge of wikilawyering and violation of the probation." - Georgewilliamherbert
* "I would definitely endorse a week-long block over this. Gene Nygaard just refuses to understand anything about civility." Rama's arrow
I don't think much comment is needed, other than to point out the sheer number of different editors quoted here.
Mondegreen 19:48, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
* Gene has strong and self-righteous views on many subjects. So do many Wikipedians. His topics, including the exact meaning of SI, are more arcane than some (and, for what it's worth I often disagree with him). But a week's block is destructive to a useful editor. Please reconsider. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 20:00, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
* Agree with Septentrionalis and Haukur. Gene's manner has never bothered me, even when I was on the receiving end. But the community as a whole has to set these standards of behavior and enforce them. I hope Gene can be a little more polite, and his fellow editors a little more accommodating. As for the seven day block - Gene can make it vanish per Guy's suggestion, if he so chooses. --Duk 23:24, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
* Endorse block. I agree with those above stating that Gene is a prolific contributor, but I'm not sure that's a valid reason to encourage a long pattern of discourteous behavior (WP:CIVIL is a policy, not a suggestion). Hopefully Gene will be back to editing soon as a more civil contributor (as Duk mentions above, Gene can get this lifted early if he wishes). -- B figura (talk) 04:21, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
* About time WP:CIVIL grew teeth. "I contribute article material!" is not an excuse for extreme and repeated incivility, period. Plenty of people manage to do that without attacking and insulting others, so no one should get a free pass on those grounds. Seraphimblade Talk to me 16:16, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
I want to endorse this block as per all of the above. Greg Jones II 16:22, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
Fair use on Astronomy photographs
Would someone who is more up to speed on our image use policies than I am take a look at User talk:Apcgurutech for me. He has uploaded a couple of photographs by an astronomer who is now deceased so we cannot obtain permission. I'm pretty sure we can use them under fair use, the photographs are unique in that they apparently show an unexplained object, and it is discussed in the article but the thw only photographs I ever upload are my own so I'm rubbish at writing rationals. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 15:57, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
* The astronomer being dead complicates our asking for permission, but doesn't make it impossible. Someone still owns the photos - either the astronomer's institution or the beneficiaries of his estate (who could, I guess, be contacted by writing to his institution). -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 16:23, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
* If we are talking about the photos then we don't need to request permission. Just make sure the images are "web-resolution" and the fair-use rationals are all filled out. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 16:27, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
User:<IP_ADDRESS>
This IP has been used repeatedly and (almost) exclusively for vandalism. The user talk page speaks for itself. The IP has been blocked twice this year already... Is there a way to put an IP on a watch list, to check anything they do? I just reverted some vandalism it did right after getting a "last warning" about the same page... Ratfox 19:53, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
* You probably want what is known as a softblock. This forces any user from this IP to login. It helps cut down the spam from school districts. spryde | talk 20:25, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
* Eh, generally speaking, even bothering to warn a school-IP with a history is the equivalent of pissing into a strong wind. Just report 'em here, mention they're a school IP and go on with your life. HalfShadow 21:09, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
* WP:RBI. Caknuck 23:29, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
* Except that then you're liable to get your report ignored or removed because you failed to warn the editor. :( --ElKevbo 00:50, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
* The AIV helperbot tags known school ip's as such, which means that the reviewing admin is fully aware that warnings are unlikely to be seen by the particular vandal. Me? I just take a quick look at the volume to noise ratio of edits and the block log - nothing but vandalism and a recent block and I block to the next level. The most important thing is to template the talkpage to allow pupils wanting to contribute to be able to get an account. LessHeard vanU 13:30, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
Suspected sock puppets/Porcupine
— Rlevse • Talk • 14:26, 3 November 2007 (UTC) Could someone deal with this, please, making sure that you look at the page's history, plus the talkpages of myself + the nominator. Cheers!--Porcupine (see my userpage for details) 09:08, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
* Thank you. I have closed the discussion. Repeated incivility has been withstood and I don't want to take part in the discussion any more. Auroranorth (sign) 09:10, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
But you haven't. I'll do so now.--Porcupine (see my userpage for details) 09:11, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
* Please remove the speedy deletion tag from WP:SSP. Auroranorth (sign) 09:12, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
* I've done so. I'm really quite efficient.--Porcupine (see my userpage for details) 09:14, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
* (removed discussion headers, etc.) Will be archived in due course. Auroranorth (sign) 09:25, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
* Note Rambutan/Porcupine/Circuit Judge closed the SSP on himself. This was reopened as that's a COI issue. The blocking admin, Martinp23, was contacted and will take the issue from here. Rambutan/Porcupine/Circuit Judge asked Martinp23 to block his account and promised not to edit til Jan 20, 2008 or so. Rambutan/Porcupine/Circuit Judge then opened the Circuit Judge account one week later and began heavy editing, which precipitated this thread and the SSP case. Rambutan/Porcupine/Circuit Judge admitted Circuit Judge was his, but there appears to be no socking going on. Martinp23 will handle the trust issue. — Rlevse • Talk • 14:26, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
* Of my 97 edits over 3 days, only 3 have been mainspace; most of the others have been "housekeeping" in setting up the new accoutn, or dealing with the stupid sock-report. Scarcely "heavy editing"!--Porcupine (see my userpage for details) 15:03, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
* I have a serious problem with this continued changing of usernames to avoid the history of past blocks, while continuing the same kind of behaviour. I'd want to see some evidence that the user is no longer going to be an edit warrior before we sit back and let him put the past behind him again. Guy (Help!) 14:52, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
Himayat-Anjuman-i seemingly worthless editing
I am keeping an eye on the contributions of who is making a large number of edits with the edit summary "cleanup using BravoWIki", a client I have never heard of. Most of his/her edits seem completely worthless such as changing the position of stubs in articles. I have left a message on the talk page as have a couple of other editors. I wonder if a block may be in order of the user cannot explain this editing pattern? Tim! 10:16, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
* A block certainly isn't in order but he's more than likely using those summaries to appear "better" than your average editor. Someone else should have a word with him but I wouldn't go as far as blocking him (Even though I can't)--Phoenix-wiki (talk · contribs) 12:11, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
* On second thoughts, it looks like he's running an unauthorised bot from his account. An admin should investigate further--Phoenix-wiki (talk · contribs) 12:14, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
* Indeed. Everything points to an unauthorized bot: about 1,000 (seemingly useless) edits in 7 hours many of them performing different trivial tasks seconds apart, all with an identical edit summary.--Fuhghettaboutit 12:27, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
* I was about to but Maxim already blocked.--Fuhghettaboutit 12:29, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
User:3meandEr and Northern Cyprus
, a new editor and apparent single-purpose account, has repeatedly been edit warring on since creating his account on 4 October. He has sought to replace the existing intro with a new and very POV version (see e.g. ) as well as littering the article with "weasel word" tags. This was reverted several times by different editors. protected the article on 7 October to stop the edit war. However, 3meandEr resumed edit warring within hours of the protection expiring on 21 October, and on 22 October I protected the article again to stop the edit war. I intervened on the talk page in an attempt to explain to 3meandEr what our policy requires. I also warned 3meandEr on his talk page not to resume edit warring or violating policy. After I unprotected the article on 1 November, 3meandEr began edit warring again and Aecis once again protected the article.
As things stand, the article has been editable for only about 1.5 days over the past month, solely because of this one disruptive editor. Aecis, and I have tried working with him to educate him about WP:NPOV, WP:SOAP, WP:CONSENSUS, WP:V, WP:CITE, WP:RS, WP:NPOV and WP:OR. As this exchange indicates, 3meandEr simply doesn't get (or more likely doesn't want to get) Wikipedia's basic policies. This has been going on for a month now and I see no realistic possibility that he is going to start cooperating.
I'd be grateful if an uninvolved admin could review this situation. Wikipedia isn't being run for the benefit of abusive editors and it's unsatisfactory that an important article should be off-limits for a month because of one person who wants to use Wikipedia as a soapbox. I recommend blocking or banning 3meandEr as a disruptive SPA. I can't block him myself, since I've edited the article. -- ChrisO 11:10, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
* I agree wholeheartedly with the above assessment. A quick look at the article's talk page shows several users (of various backgrounds, not just "Turkish POV") trying to reason with this SPA with no success whatsoever. Note that the poorly written, propagandistic additions to the article the user proposes (or makes, as soon as the article is unlocked) have not changed in the slightest. ChrisO has a reputation as a great mediator -- I don't suspect he'd be posting here except as a last resort, and he is only doing so after a lot of fruitless effort to get this SPA to work productively on the article. Pro hib it O ni o ns (T) 11:26, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
* Blocking for a week (for starters, and will re-block immediately if he continues after that). You guys are right, we can't keep the article protected forever just because of him. Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:29, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
* I agree with ChrisO's analysis of 3meandEr's editing behaviour. It is uncooperative and opinionated at best. Basically it's just his editing that has led to the last three or four protections of the article. The other editors, who are on all sides of this issue (pro-Cyprus, pro-Northern Cyprus and uninvolved), appear to be willing to work towards a compromise that meets all of Wikipedia's guidelines and policies. 3meandEr's editing is keeping them from reaching that consensus and compromise. What ChrisO and I disagree about (see User talk:Aecis and User talk:ChrisO) is what stage 3meandEr has reached. ChrisO basically feels that he has crossed the line and should be blocked, while I feel he should receive a stern final warning now and should be blocked the next time. Having said that, I can live with the block FutPerf issued. A ecis Brievenbus 12:22, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
* Two things led me to that conclusion. The first was his willful resumption of edit warring even after I'd explicitly warned him against it, and the second was his exchange with you on your talk page and his. I concluded that he had no intention of following policy and was making it clear that he wouldn't do so in future. There was nothing to be gained by allowing him to continue editing, as he wasn't going to agree to anything that restricted his POV-pushing. -- ChrisO 14:46, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
User is already blocked for a week. When he returns he will have a choice to discontinue his previous behavior, and if he does not, block again in an escalating rate (two weeks, one months, etc.) ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 15:02, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
* I agree with ChrisO's analysis of the situation. Keeping a page protected due to a single disruptive editor is not fair to the other editors who are trying to work productively toward a consensus version. In its current form Northern Cyprus is reasonably balanced, and (until 3meandEr took over) there was a cooperative effort going on to improve the lead and the referencing. EdJohnston 15:11, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
3meandEr really doesn't seem to understand what's wrong with his/her version. Either the editor is being intentionally obtuse, or s/he simply doesn't understand NPOV. 3meandEr seems to have only edited articles related to Cyprus. S/he needs some diversity in his/her editing. I'd say unblock on the condition that s/he stays away from articles related to Turkey and Cyprus (including talk pages). In a few months, if s/he settles down a bit, we should reconsider. Guettarda 15:08, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
Note about impersonator User:Barnecaration, and a request for a protected page edit
An impersonator, User:Barnecaration, inappropriately responded to about 25 unblock requests from 10/31 to 11/1, and signed my name instead of their own. Since several admins replied to those users, and at least a couple of them initially thought it was me, I'd just like to make a quick, general announcement that it wasn't me (see here). Thank you. --barneca (talk) 15:41, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
* Also, Netsnipe reverted most of their responses, but there were a couple remaining where my signature was shown on the talk page. Per Lar's suggestion, I've struck out my signature on all of them but one. User talk:PBCF is protected, so a protracted discussion between the blocked user and the faux-me is still there. Could an admin please strike out my signature, or better yet, just remove the inapplicable unblock requests? I'm an idiot, it's only semi-protected. nevermind.
Abusive, threatening talk page post by User:<IP_ADDRESS>
''Go and die. I hope that you meet with an "accident" involving a rusty knife and a double glazed window salesman.'' Here's the diff. The reason was I posted a vandalism warning to the user's talk page. Lurker (said · done) 16:15, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
* 1 week. Maxim (talk) (contributions) 16:39, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
* Although of course, this is nasty vandalism; I wouldn't get worried, it's just people who think they're funny (obviously they're not). Cheers, Qst 17:31, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
Harassment and attacks
Okay, so now I've had enough of the trolling, harassment and personal attacks towards me diff 1, diff 2, diff 3 and the articles I'm involved in by as a result of the Drake Circus and Drake Circus Shopping Centre debacle. This self professed student (aka a SPA account that is only being used for trolling etc) has taken exception to the work I've done on WP and is now attempting to disrupt to make a WP:POINT. He's constantly trolling on talk pages, making vandalistic edits (c/w non-civil edit summaries) and generally being a nuisance. I have no good faith left, I have no civility left. This Drake Circus nonsense has gone on for 2 days now and I'm pissed off with the constant crap coming in my direction. Could an administrator take charge before I find myself getting blocked for incivility. I've managed to get bugger all of any note done today just trying to sort the crap left behind by these morons. AnonEMouse has been graciously dealing with another anon IP doing the same thing and Jéské caught the admin flak yesterday. Thanks. WebHamste r 20:00, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
* Blocked 24 hours for vandalism and trolling. IrishGuy talk 20:31, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
* You may also want to consider <IP_ADDRESS> as that anon seems to have the same MO as the other IP. spryde | <font color="#000">talk 20:38, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
* I have a checkuser out on Yiwentang and (almost, if not) all the IPs from yesterday. I have not added <IP_ADDRESS> to it, and I can't recall offhand if I added the other one. -Jéské ( Blah v^_^v ) 00:31, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
* There's also a possibility that is either a sockpuppet or one of the SU meatpuppets. IrishGuy has been kind enough to nip him in the bud though. <font color="#000000">WebHamste <font color="#0000ff">r 00:44, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
* We're getting overrun, add to the list. His MO is the same as the others, with the exception that he doesn't seem to vandalise, just troll... yet! <font color="#000000">WebHamste <font color="#0000ff">r 01:27, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
* And another SPA joins the Drake Circus circus. is already handing out attacks and incivility here and based on the edit summaries in his contrib list he seems keen to be blocked. <font color="#000000">WebHamste <font color="#0000ff">r 02:25, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
* Add them to the CU request as they pop up, please. It hasn't been responded to yet, and if we find that these are Yiwentang socks... -Jéské ( Blah v^_^v ) 04:02, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
CU Results
The Checkuser came back Likely that Yiwentang is using the IPs, but I didn't provide evidence for the named accounts. -Jéské ( Blah v^_^v ) 19:37, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
José Galisteo
The subject of this article (which I wrote) has emailed me, demanding that we remove all gay references (even the fact that he performed at Europride and that he has gay fans) and all references to the fact that he served in the military. All contentious material is sourced and the article was vetted by several editors, including an admin. I even found a Spanish speaking editor to read the source material, just to double check my translation. Since I was emailed, I posted this on The LGBT Project talk page, where the consensus was that as it is sourced it should stand. I posted it to the BLP Noticeboard, too, but that page is not well trafficked, alas, so I am posting here to get a wide community consensus on how to proceed. I have emailed Galisteo, explaining Wikipedia policies and saying the article is currently being reviewed to ensure conformity with said policies. He emailed me once again, reiterating that the material should be removed, and saying his fan club site is the best source of information. He has also reverted both the English and Spanish articles. Please review. I will not be editing this article myslef for the foreseeable future, as I feel it would be a conflict of interest as both the article's creator and a fan of Galisteo (though this incident has made me see him in a different light). Jeffpw 09:42, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
* I forgot to add that the email was web based (hotmail) so there is no way to actually verify it is the subject himself or somebody else. I am assuming good faith and going with the presumption that it is actually him. Jeffpw 09:54, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
* Ask him to mail OTRS<EMAIL_ADDRESS>detailing precisely what the problem is, and which text is inaccurate, preferably with some kind of evidence. Guy (Help!) 11:49, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
The way I read the sources, it's tricky; because of the way they're written, it's not clear if the interviews are actually quoting him or if they are quoting what was found on the internet. Can others who speak Spanish please look over what I wrote on the BLP board. It's a question of whether he has self-identified as gay, or whether the magazines are merely repeating blog-fueled rumors, and it's hard to tell. Sandy Georgia (Talk) 02:29, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
the pest of Plymouth
For some time now there has been a tiresome campaign by somebody using a series of UIDs and IP numbers -- or conceivably more than one person, with remarkably similar obsessions and propensities to mock, whinge, vandalize, bluster, threaten, misread and make spelling mistakes -- who's most worked up about (i) what he thinks is the dreadfulness and insignificance (odd combination, yes) of Drake Circus Shopping Centre (Plymouth, SW England; a town of which I know little), (ii) its alleged misappropriation of the name Drake Circus, and (iii) the systemic failures of WP evidenced by its biased coverage of this and other Plymouth-related stuff. (And predictably he also says WP is a mere joke.) On occasion he's been countered by an apparent defender of the shopping centre, though I've wondered if the defender is real or merely a rhetorical device.
Both articles have been sprotected (which seems odd for something so local), but after ranting on the talk pages he's been posting tiresome squib after tiresome squib there, some of them at least appearing to ask a valid question (until one realizes that it merely demonstrates a wilful refusal to read an earlier response). WebHamster, I and others have been doing our best to answer him or (since he's clearly uninterested in answers other than as fuel for more trolling) swatting him away. On occasion, of course, we've got slightly wound up or even fed the troll: if you bother to go through the verbiage, you'll see miscellaneous, er, civility malfunctions of mine.
I'm tempted to be BOLD and announce that I'll delete anything even smelling of trollery; but even if that were permissible, implementing it would probably just encourage him to fan out to other articles: as it is, he's conveniently localized. The troll hasn't managed to irritate me except in the considerable amount of time he has wasted. For this, assistance would be welcome; a new (and "killer"?) countermeasure that I haven't thought of even more welcome. -- Hoary 13:50, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
* Please don't think I'm being incivil, Hoary, but I've been monitoring those discussions, and I can't help thinking that you have fanned the flames of his ire by continually replying to his every remark (not exactly, but you know what I mean). I'm far less experienced here than you, of course, but once a person's credentials are established as "troll", I always thought that the best policy is to simply monitor their input and only respond when necessary (when a valid clearly-stated point is made, or with a standard warning, as appropriate). This is how such people used to be dealt with on Usenet, for instance. Hope this helps, Smalljim 14:26, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
* You may very well be right, Jim. Perhaps one problem has been that there has been more than one person dealing with him: I've thought that if I didn't respond then Hamster or you or someone else would have to, and Hamster may have thought similarly. Meanwhile, please don't worry about being less than civil to me: (i) you weren't at all, and (ii) being pretty thick-skinned, I wouldn't have minded if you had been. -- Hoary 14:43, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
* Thanks for the reply, old man. As you're hinting, when taking part in discussions on any public forum it's important to bear in mind all the other people who will read your contributions. Too many people, I think, focus exclusively on the individual they're immediately replying to.
* It's true that in cases like this one it can be tricky to communicate your desire to other potential participants not to continue the discussion with the troll. I don't think there is any quick and painless solution. Silence won't work. Neither will calls to Please stop!... Strident calls for everyone to send the troll to Coventry will usually be ignored ("who's he to say what I do?") and would probably violate some guideline here. However short replies to the troll along the lines of "I am not going to reply until you phrase your comments in a relatively polite and coherent manner" can be useful because the other potential participants often take the hint, especially if you are seen to be in a position of some authority. The one thing that trolls cannot tolerate is sunlight being ignored.
* You probably know all this already. I'm sure I've read it somewhere; I'm not bright enough to have made it up myself! --Smalljim 16:46, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
* So a quick castration and a soak in a salt bath isn't the way to go then? <font color="#000000">WebHamste <font color="#0000ff">r 19:39, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
I have sent a screenshot copy of your comments to the WP headquarters for review (and before you yet again delete them.) I cannot believe their reputation or credibility should continue to be damaged in this way. —Preceding unsigned comment added by <IP_ADDRESS> (talk) 01:24, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* To quote Sergeant Hulka, "Lighten up, Francis." Rdfox 76 01:30, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
Maybe those should check out all the deletions made to this article by WebHamster and look at the reasons for them. He is consistently blocked anyone from trying to establish the true facts by infesting any reasonable discussion with trolling and insulting remarks. His repeated timing, language and style co-incides with a user 'Hoary' to a degree that any reasonable person would infer they are one in the same user.
Webhamster
I nominated Drake_Circus_Shopping_Centrefor deletion. From the perspective of those in the Drake Circus District remember these are just some of the reasons behind Webhamsters deletion of content, references, discussion and blocking other users:-
'''Please see the horse's mouth for details. WebHamster 13:27, 3 November 2007 (UTC)'''
its out of date - the same URL also states "The centre is on schedule for completion and due to be open for business on 5th October 2006."
'''"So far we only have your word that the website is out of date." WebHamster 21:47, 3 November 2007 (UTC)'''
"I repeat the website reads "The centre is on schedule for completion and due to be open for business on 5th October 2006."
'''Who are you to say that the article isn't informative or educational? You are being far too parochial. Two days ago I'd never heard of the place, now I've been educated on how disruptive some of the locals can be. I've been informed that the official website is a year out of date. Just because you already know the details does not mean that someone else does. You are saying a lot but yet no pointers to verifiable sources. WP does not take peoples' words for it, not yours, not mine. So back up your statements with available sources that meet WP:RS and we'll make the changes. It can't be put any simpler than that. We most certainly aren't experts on DCSC, but we do know how WP works and what is expected. Likewise from the WP standpoint you aren't an expert either, you are just some anonymous IP address, you have no verifiable credentials of your expertise. You may be a local but that's not the same thing. This being the case anything you tell us here comes under the banner of original research which is why we need verifiable sources. WebHamster 13:27, 3 November 2007 (UTC)"'''
"Out of interest why was the link to Plymouth's other shopping mall - the Armada_Centreremoved? If it was because it had nothing to do with drake circus or was outside the area then why has the link to the drakecircus shopping centre also not been removed"
The Armada Centre was removed, based on the edit summary, because it isn't actually in the Drake Circus area WebHamster 13:38, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
"The reason you gave to justify your vandalism was 'WP is not a phone book'. In case you had failed to observe the article did not list any telephone numbers moreover it referred to a university and a musuem which most reasonably intelligent people would assume has more to do within the academic research of an encyclopedia than a promo for selling spuds. —Preceding unsigned comment added by <IP_ADDRESS> (talk) 14:12, 2 November 2007 (UTC)"
'''Stirring stuff -- I think, but I'm not entirely sure. What do you think this person's first language might be, Hamster? -- Hoary 15:26, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
The one practised by Stanley Unwin I'm guessing. It doesn't bode well for the teaching standards of UK educational establishments though. WebHamster 15:41, 2 November 2007 (UTC)'''
'''You're stuck with it. I suggest you learn to live with it. The chances are it'll still be there when you've left Uni and gone on to bigger and better things. meanwhile I suggest you concentrate on things that are far more important, like avoiding being a graduate working at the Spud-U-Like you despise so much. WebHamster 15:42, 31 October 2007 (UTC)'''
'''I have a reference, now where's yours, see WP:VERIFY: "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth"? Put up or shut up. The info in the infobox came from the horse's mouth, I wonder which end of the horse yours is coming from? WebHamster 01:22, 3 November 2007 (UTC)'''
I do not have a clue what else has been said by webhamster on other users discussion pages however i think in any discussion of 'trolling' account should be taken of the above quotes. Since i worked in the Old Drake Circus i thought i could correct some of the claims charged to my old work place however i have been subjected to a tirrade of insulting snipes from the above despite my best attempts at being polite and lucid. I suspect others like me are too intimidated to create user accounts.
* Dreckly, moi 'ansum. LessHeard vanU 01:40, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
Canvassing of user:Ireland101
This user is notifying ethnic Macedonian users about a vote for deletion of a few ethnic Macedonian songs. ForeignerFromTheEast 19:00, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
Possible Image Copyright Issues
Could an administrator have a look at these uploads? I don't think any of them are fair use-able, and in any case, they've all be taken off a website. I include below the post on my talk page which alerted me to the problem, as I think it explains the problem best: "You seem knowledgeable in this area, and I've noticed you've dealt with this before. I am new to the uploading of images issue. However, I've noticed an image that has been uploaded and being used on an article claiming that it is a fair-use image and a screenshot of a television program. In reality, it is not a screenshot, rather an image taken by a photographer placed on website with a policy stating '(Company Name) does not issue licenses for internet use.' Obviously, this detail was not in plain view but was easy to find. How would I go about this? Again, I'm new to the images issues. I hope you can shed some light on this. Thank you." I also think that quite a few of them may be reposted material. Is this allowed? Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry 19:03, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
Sakis Rouvas
I just deleted the whole article as one of the worst WP:BLP violations I seen. The whole article was unsourced fancruft, and there was a section called personal life saying that he was gay with a source of a blog, and a whole bunch of gay speculations. Need more eyes. Thanks This is a Secret account 20:07, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
* Support. The article was a mess, start again form a stub was the only real option IMO. And more watchlists with that article on them would help, too. Guy (Help!) 20:09, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
* Actually, there were decent revisions further back in the history, prior to 16 December 2006. I'll undelete the previous history and revert to that version, if you don't mind. Fut.Perf. ☼ 20:18, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
* Oops, taking this back. The homosexuality allegations were there for much longer. Fut.Perf. ☼ 20:26, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
* Bleh it was there since May of 2005, and before that it was re-written copyvio seems like, no salvagble version This is a Secret account 20:29, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
* Only three 2004 versions had no issue, so those are restored This is a Secret account 20:35, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
Backlog Usernames for administrator attention
The page hasn't been marked as so yet, but nothing has happened at the page for over 20minutes. Thought I would bring it to the administrators attention before it came to be a really big problem. <font color="#666666">Rgoodermote (<font color="#666666">Respond Here ) 20:57, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
* I just blocked three blatant bot-reported vios. There's only one left, but with no consensus to block.Dppowell 21:12, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
Repeated vandalism with WP:BLP issues to Todd Stroger article
The IP keeps reinserting a preposterous nickname with fairly serious WP:BLP implications into the Todd Stroger article. When I ran a whois on the IP, it came back as a privately owned block, licensed from AT&T (I guess?). This is the edit this person keeps inserting. Last one was Nov. 1. I've placed a warning on the talk page. Should probably keep an eye on this person. I'm also wondering, is there an ISP template for a situation like this? A geektools whois came back to a person's name, with an sbcglobal address indicated for abuse issues. Did I put the right ISP template on the talk page? Nobody of consequence 21:24, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
* I semiprotected, and I commend to you WP:RFPP in case of future occurrences. Guy (Help!) 22:44, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
Need Help
See User talk:Jéské Couriano (at the bottom of the page). Could someone give me some guidance? -Jéské ( Blah v^_^v ) 22:53, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
* I've warned User:Turtlescrubber for civility. Mr. Z- man 23:39, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
Allowal to be part of Caisson discussion
For the past two weeks a debate has been occurring on the Caisson (Asian architecture) article. On one side is PalaceGuard008, and on the other, Mattisse. I have attempted to provide solutions for the argument and that is visible on the article's Discussion page. Unfortunately, I have run into conflicts with the admin LessHeardVanU who seems to believe that I am harassing Mattisse, and he subsequently issued a warning and a recent block that were both wrongfully conceived. Perhaps I should have contested the warning before, and this would not have occurred, but my words fell on deaf ears so I did not press it further. Either way, I would like it to be known and stated that I have not committed any wrongful acts on the Caisson page and have only tried to help as a peer and concerned Wikipedian. In the future, I may ask for the warning and block issued by LessHeardVanU be revoked, but for now I wish for a declaration that I can go back to contributing to the Caisson article. - Cyborg Ninja 00:17, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
User:<IP_ADDRESS>
I attempted an Rfc recently to establish some consensus on the solar energy page regarding picture choices. The results of the Rfc were relatively clear but this IP user has disregarded the results and appears to be willfully avoiding the consensus process. This sort of general disruptive behavior has been going on for several months but as a new user I’ve been slow to gain some of the conflict resolution tools required in these situations. I'm posting here after attempting the Rfc process and then asking for futher help on the Editor assistance/Requests page. Thanks for any help or advice. Mrshaba 05:21, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
Repeated harassment
It's a shame that I have to waste your time, but someone, please, have a look at what's happening to my talk page:. It seems two accounts have been created with the single purpose to harass me by false accusations: Special:Contributions/HyperColony. Special:Contributions/QuinellaAlethea. I'm certain, they'd cease their attacks, if some admin or any other long-term user asked. Thanks for your attention. --NotSarenne 20:46, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
* I just consulted with User:Dmcdevit, HyperColony is on tor, and QuinellaAlethea has been blocked indefinitely for being a sock of User:Fnagaton. Fnagaton is currently unblocked. <font face="comic sans ms"> Kwsn (Ni!) 22:00, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
* My greatest thanks to both of you! This is a relieving albeit sad turn of events. Until the last minute, I did not expect him to go this far and assumed it was a third-party trying to make fun of me and him. --NotSarenne 22:12, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
* I'm not connected with User:QuinellaAlethea. Fnagaton 22:16, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
* Is it possible that he used the same dirty trick against Sarenne before and succeeded in getting him blocked? --NotSarenne 22:52, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
* Sarenne was blocked for using multiple sock puppets to do sweeping kib/mib/etc. edits across Wikipedia after consensus swung in a direction he didn't like, and even after when informed to cease and desist by admins. Even proponents of kib/mib/etc. usage during the MOSNUM consensus debates were calling his edits disruptive. Its all archived on the MOSNUM talk page as well as Suspected_sock_puppets/Sarenne. Sarenne's actions got him blocked, not any "dirty tricks" by anyone. Don't confuse this situation with that. --Marty Goldberg 03:45, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* I have read Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style_%28dates_and_numbers%29/Archive_B1 and Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style_%28dates_and_numbers%29/Archive_B6. On the latter, just search for the first occurence of "Strawman". With all due respect (I mean that) User:Fnagaton is hardly ever making any valid arguments and constantly dismissing facts. User:SLi points this out in this thread. Fnagaton is also accusing people of being straw men there. I don't see how I am confusing anything. He has used straw men against me and even worse accused me that those were my straw men. It is exactly the same kind of behaviour, except that this time he made some obvious mistakes and got caught. I cannot read all of the history but I don't see any strong evidence that those anonymous edits can be linked to User:Sarenne. In fact, the report says, it's not possible. Further, I've been accused of writing like User:Sarenne but my style is clearly quite different. So these accusation appear made-up against better knowledge. I absolutely cannot understand how those discussion led to a change of WP:MOSNUM when User:Matt_Britt, User:Seraphimblade, User:Omegatron, User:Aluvus, even User:Sarenne and several others provide logically undeniable arguments. All I can conclude is that supporters got tired of running in circles due to complete ignorance of facts and logic. You always have to reinterprete the past whenever new insights surface. So now that User:Fnagaton has been caught using socket puppets, how can we still accept the voting on this issue? There was at best a 50:50 result after all those discussion which means the status quo has to be preserved. Instead WP:MOSNUM has been modified. It's all very fishy. This requires further investigation. --NotSarenne 12:06, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* No it is you who is not providing any strong argument just like the other users you cite. The change to MOSNUM happened because consensus was reached and that is clearly shown in the archives, basically there were many more editors for the change than the tiny minorty who were against the change. I have also not been using sock puppets, you have been using sock puppets with Tor just like Sarenne did. I demand you stop spreading those lies right now. Fnagaton 12:28, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* Thanks for providing even more evidence of your dubious behaviour. In case you forgot: You have just been convicted of sock puppetry, just scroll up. --NotSarenne 12:47, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* That is a mistake by the admin looking at the case and I'm getting it sorted out. Fnagaton 13:22, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* You seem to have a problem with your personal opinion vs. fact. Your initial writing style and conduct here was indeed the same, enough to bring the concern of a group of people. Even your propensity to argue nonstop on every point and your usage of dismissive circular reasoning ("Well that's not right because I say so, so this is obviously made up") is the same. Your clear attempt to alter your writing style over the past week is simply that, a conscious effort to change how your involvement is perceived. Likewise, Fnagton's claimed recent use of sock puppets has absolutely nothing to do with the results of consensus at WP:MOSNUM, and this page has nothing to do with such happenings. The fact that you agree with one group's arguments over the other also has no bearing on how the results went, as if because you agree with one group suddenly that makes the whole well established and used process on Wikipedia "fishy". Nor does it render the fact that by your own self admission 50% did not agree with that group and did not perceive them as "logically undeniable arguments" (even though the count against kib/mib usage was much higher). Nor does it make them "ignorant of facts and logic", that sort of condescending attitude is exactly again what Sarenne promoted. This is all exactly why you're being viewed as a disruptive editor, and directly linked to him. The so called "logic group" was also originally accused of "arguing until supporters of not using kib/mib/etc. got tired of running in circles" when they initially changed MOSNUM to that kib/mib/etc. format months before that - yes, the last consensus debate was simply one of many. The current version was created by editors from *both camps* after it was decided there was no actual consensus here on one usage over the other, and that the text of the previous version promoted disruptive editing practices. Hence the text of the current guidelines were laid out, via a concerted effort from both camps. Your nonstop and continued attempt to invalidate and discredit the previous WP:MOSNUM happenings by trying to use every perceived and unrelated disagreement against your opinions, is both condescending and disrespectful to all those who participated in the well established consensus process. And you've been doing it on every single talk page you've been writing to. You are *not* going to get an admin here to change WP:MOSNUM based on your personal opinions or perceptions, that is not the scope of the administrators' notice board, nor is it how Wikipedia works. It runs on well established processes and guidelines, not on "NotSarenne's opinions on how things should work". --Marty Goldberg 12:59, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* Oh well, pretty much everything except the sock puppetry that I said about User:Fnagaton could be applied to you as well. As you're acting just like him. You're also not exactly demonstrating good will with reverts such as this one. Just like User:Fnagaton you believe I don't have the right to defend myself and clarify things, so you're just removing my responses. Yes, you are allowed to do this on your own talk page but there's a difference between legally' right and morally'' right. --NotSarenne 13:25, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* A revert of yet another attempt to insert your self in to a discussion on my talk page has nothing to do with any of the proceedings here, the WP:MOSNUM results, nor does it make you a mind reader. I removed it because I didn't care to get in to yet another circular reasoning debate with you on yet another talk page. It was filled with yet more accusations (did I put a 3RR warning on your page? I don't recall doing that), more dismissive directives (its incorrect for me to do many things simply because they go against your viewpoints and opinions apparently), and a claim that the admin's finding of sock puppetry was some how also a finding of false claims against you. You're also claiming for some odd reason that I don't think you have the right to "defend" your self, when your recent monopolization of talk pages to argue your circular reasoning shows anything but the opposite. A simple look at your "contributions" to discussions shows you'd be hard pressed to claim any sort of censorship of your opinions and viewpoints. So once again, don't try use one thing to discredit another. It simply promotes the viewpoint everyone is having on you. --Marty Goldberg 13:42, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* Yes, inserting myself into a discussion about me. You're always twisting my words and are trying to distort what I say. I did not claim you had put a WP:3RR on my page. I wrote that I am convinced you tried to trick me into a 3RR violation. I was smart enough though to not revert it once more and instead rephrased the bogus statement in question. You had to accept that in order to not commit a 3RR violation yourself and you didn't even notice that my version makes it obvious that the whole statement is bogus (and should therefore still be removed). Where do I monopolize talk pages? I never used the term censorship either. Actually, you're removal of my valid responses are not censorship but simply manipulative by making certain discussions single-sided. I'm quite impressed that you know what everyone thinks about me. --NotSarenne 14:10, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* What you say is a matter of record here, no need for me to distort anything. But its ironic you're saying that with the claims and directives you've all addressed at me. Let me make it clear: 3RR never entered my mind and was not a driving force. I'm glad you were smart enough to formulate a plan for that fantasy, and here I thought your were just trying to compromise like a normal editor. Likewise, its your *opinion* that your statement on my talk page clarified things. Its your *opinion* that the responses on my talk page was valid. You claimed I don't want your viewpoint to be heard - that's a claim of censorship. Likewise, a simple look at your "contributions" history shows where your debates have monopolized talk pages, and in fact since you "popped up" on Wikipedia, I have yet to see a conversation where you do not cause and continue to stroke a debate. Even look at this page, where you took a discussion on sock puppets and started drawing it in to a discussion on the validity of WP:MOSNUM consensus. Then from one paragraph to the next you've thrown in to one thing after another after another, further obfuscating things. Regardless of your propensity to argue and debate (and I'm sure you'll want to throw up yet another response), there really is no point in continuing this unless it has anything to do with the sock puppet issue. That's the incident the admins here were addressing, and that's what this section of the Administrator's incident noticeboard is in regards to. But please, drag it further away from that issue and respond again like you have for the last several paragraphs. You'll find your self arguing with your self though, as the sockpuppet issue is the only discussion I'll be participating (and even then only if the admin's respond with the evidence requested). --Marty Goldberg 14:37, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* (un-indent). NotSarenne has been blocked indefinitely for being a sockpuppet of Sarenne. Based off the User name and a recent email I received, I see very little to prove there is not a relationship. NotSarenne's first edit is very suspicious, right off the start saying "I'm not a sock". This shot up a red flag to me. This incident is pretty much resolved, but Fnagaton, please avoid using socks in the future. <font face="comic sans ms"> Kwsn (Ni!) 17:09, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* I can easily commit to not "using socks" in the future since I have not before now, but ho hum water under the bridge and all that. I am glad another sock of Sarenne has been blocked though. Thank you for taking the time to look through the case from Marty, he is much better at the long hard slogging through references than I am and I think it was his diligence that helped resolve this. Fnagaton 17:42, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* PS. The other suspected sock ( User:HyperColony ) in the NotSarenne sock puppet report was using Tor according to the check user. With NotSarenne blocked there is a good chance that user will become active again so it may be wise to keep an eye on it. Fnagaton 17:52, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
Dynamic anon IP stalking 2 users
An anon editor, using a dynamic IP addy has been stalking both User:Benjiboi and myself, apparently in retaliation for edits made to Hot House Entertainment. The article has been a source of contention, and it and two others had to be semi protected. That is when the harassment on our talk pages and the stalking began. Some diffs: This is the Hot House history: A compariosn of the addresses seems to bear out that the anon stalking IP is related to the one who was editing the article. I would appreciate it if some admin could intervene, or provide some suggestions as to how to deal with this. Jeffpw 21:16, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
* The IP resolves to Paterson, New Jersey. That's all the help I can give because dynamic IPs have a tendency to switch. It's a Verizon IP. -Jéské ( Blah v^_^v ) 21:26, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
* Anon apparently had issue with Sister Roma's perceived anti-Catholicism stemming from her inclusion on the Folsom Street Fair poster artwork (parody of the The Last Supper). Roma works at Hot House Entertainment (hence the connection) and Sister Boom-Boom was also semi-protected for repeated vandalism. User_talk:<IP_ADDRESS> (also <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>) mass deleted the vast majority of stub Sister Roma then tagged the article as non-notable as seen here. The same was done to Hot House Entertainment porn company where Sister Roma works (seen here and to a lesser degree Sister Boom-Boom. This anon IP is either a quick learner or, more likely a sock as they seem to have advanced wikipedia editing skills and then left me this note ending the first round of vandalism. Benjiboi 21:36, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
3 weeks of semi-protection for both your user pages and user talk pages sounds right. Semi-protection of user talk pages is something some admins shy from, but it's really the only recourse we have to protect good editors from ongoing harassment from anon vandals. Three weeks is about how long it takes for truly dedicated trolls to lose interest. Some admin should step up to the plate and do it. Go to RFPP if this thread gets archived. 09:49, 4 November 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by <IP_ADDRESS> (talk)
* Contacting the ISP would be a good idea. There may be people at LTA who are willing to help with that. 09:51, 4 November 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by <IP_ADDRESS> (talk)
User:Perspicacite/Frank Gaffney
I have tried to engage User:Perspicacite on a friendly and professional level (see ) and asked why he continues to categorize Frank Gaffney as a Jewish-American politician, when Mr. Gaffney is neither to the best of my knowledge, and also why he deletes other valid categories. Perspicacite blanked all my comments and questions from his talkpage, refused to respond on my talk page, reinserted the category without explanation and accused me in an edit summary of spamming his talk page (see ). This person is behaving entirely withough good faith and appears to be extremely arrogant. Please check this matter out. Thanks. Maplewooddrive 01:17, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* Gaffney worked in the Reagan administration as Assistant Secretary of Defense. Gaffney is Jewish. Therefore, surprise surprise, he is categorized as a Jewish-American politician. Maplewooddrive felt it was necessary to post a lengthy, incoherent complaint about my reversion of another user's vandalism. His only edit to the Frank Gaffney article was this. His... contribution only made the article worse. Perspicacite 01:32, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* Which of the sources cited by the article supports your claim as to the subject's religion? -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 01:52, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* Exactly my point. Where is the evidence that Gaffney, against all probability, is Jewish. Perspicacite refuses to provide a reference for this, meaning possible original research or private knowledge, at best. Also, a politician is someone who is elected to public office, no?
* What is more, Perspicacite has misrepresented my edits, which were meant to improve the article, including the new categories which he himself acknowledged in one of his edit summaries. I really hate to sound shrill, but Perspicacite refusal to respond on my talk page and discuss the matter one on one left me no choice but to come to WP:AN/I. Maplewooddrive 01:59, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* Maplewooddrive, you were reverted because your edits are poor. A user complaining about other editors engaging in "bad-faith" reversions would be wise not to call the user "arrogant" in the complaint. Some would interpret that as a personal attack. Stop wasting my time. Perspicacite 04:04, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
It's not clear to me what you're asking administrators to do, Maplewooddrive. Perhaps you would find some part of dispute resolution more appropriate to your needs? And a pinch of WP:COOL might help you. That said, I'd like to suggest to Perspicacite that you show a little more civility to people trying to work on the same articles as you. All our articles should be sourced, so if somebody asks you for the source to an edit, you should be prepared to give him one. To my eye, your behavior and comments to Maplewooddrive look very BITE-y. William Pietri 04:09, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
It may be that Perspicacite should be asked to enter into a dialogue with fellow editors in a more collegiate manner rather than just expunging (valid) comments and questions he has no legitimate answer to.
(There have been similar problems with Perspicacite at the Tokelau article with US versions of English and dates being introduced to an article on a Commonwealth country and the deletion without consensus of a relevant image and conversion templates.) <font color="#CC2200">Alice.S 04:54, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* I would concur here. The diff shown displays Perspicacite reverting back to a version of the article containing improper grammar and misspellings, which is extremely disruptive. Other diffs show Perspicacite being uncivil and ignoring good faith attempts to reach out by other editors. K. Scott Bailey 05:01, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* That would seem like a step forward to me. Although it can sometimes be reasonable to delete sections that one is done with, I think that works best with notes from good pals who expect no reply. To strangers or those trying to have a conversation, it can seem hostile, which I'm sure is an impression Perspicacite wouldn't want to give. Would you be willing to give it a try, Perspicacite? If it helps, I'll add my request to the others here. Thanks, William Pietri 05:08, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
Your condescension does not contribute to dispute resolution. Alice.S followed me onto the Frank Gaffney page after I cleanedup the mess on Tokelau. If you really want to push this matter forward I have no problem finding diffs to get both of you, Alice.S and Maplewooddrive, blocked. An RFCU is probably in order here. My patience is finite. Perspicacite 05:32, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* Making threats in response to polite requests to discuss issues civilly does not put you in a particularly good light, Perspicacite. When I'm nearing the end of my patience, I turn off the computer and take a long stroll. Perhaps you might benefit from that, too. William Pietri 05:46, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* I would endorse that advice, Perspicacite. Editing here can be stressful, but only if you let it. A nice cup of tea, or whatever you do to relax. I see a minor content dispute (which seems to have been resolved; the minor errors of formatting your edit introduced have been fixed), and a bit of annoyance between people who wish to improve the encyclopedia. Happens all the time. -- John 06:07, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* John, William Pietri, K. Scott Bailey, et al - All I want to know is where is the proof Gaffney is Jewish. Perspicacite cannot and/or will not provide such proof. The matter is not resolved. The only editor to even state that Gaffney is Jewish is an anonymous IP who left a comment on Gaffney's talkpage ("the guy is Jewish").
* I don't get it why Perspicacite is permitted to make unconfirmable edits, threaten others (I have no problem finding diffs to get both of you, Alice.S and Maplewooddrive, blocked. An RFCU is probably in order here. My patience is finite.) and otherwise behave badly towards other editors. An RFCU is fine by me, Alice and I are not the same person, but evidently we both find Perspicacite behaviour intolerable and meriting a 48 hour or so block just for his/her incivility alone. What happens when I delete this contested category again?? Maplewooddrive 11:21, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* I might not be the best person to comment here, seeing that my name is currently on ANI with various people complaining about my edits, however I have encountered Perspicacite before, and he is most certainly not civil with regards to edits, his edit summaries and talk comments are normally rude and/or dismissive. This of course was just in my brief encounter with him, he might be an angel at other times, I really don't know.Sennen goroshi 16:07, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* Regardless of Perspicacite's civility, which occasionally leaves something to be desired, the Jewish-American category certainly should not be re-inserted into the article without reliable sourcing, and I have placed a note on their talk page noting such. E LIMINATOR JR 16:29, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* And I'd add that if going forward any participant in this issue feels that things have not been resolved, opening a request for comment is probably a better step than coming back here, as blocks are preventative, not punitive, and I don't see them as having a place in minor editorial disputes. But I'd encourage everybody to try to make a fresh start. None of us are perfect, and it's generally more productive to focus on improving one own's actions than trying to enumerate all the ways someone else is imperfect. William Pietri 16:44, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
<IP_ADDRESS>'s behavior.
An anon, <IP_ADDRESS> reverted my talk page and the whole comments are distorted with ''font size: 666" by his/her childish prank. The page is MY talk page and according to wiki policy, reverting other's talk page is not acceptable. The 'font size=666' has a pregnant meaning in the Western culture. I want you to take a strong attitude to him, Thanks --Appletrees 11:56, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
I am not defending someone vandalising your talk page, mine was vandalised a few times as well. But it seems as if they changed it, then 2 minutes later removed their changes, so perhaps they saw the error of their ways - if it happens again, you might want to ask an admin to protect your talk page to prevent anon users from editing it.Sennen goroshi 13:09, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* Funny you say like this. Now you ADMIT you were vanalizing my talk page as reverting at this time? yaya. You clearly did vandalism as you admit and do shadowing my almost every edits like that. And no apology from you yet but just getting your mockery. It's so funny. You're pleading for the anon. --Appletrees 13:30, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* oh come on, lets keep this constructive, I was not admitting vandalising anything, I was merely saying that an anon user vandalised my page as well.Sennen goroshi 13:39, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* This situation has evolved since Appletrees posted his/her long and rambling complaints about another user. That user, Sennen goroshi, now appears to be wikistalking Appletrees. It is quite plain to see that Sennen goroshi is following Appletrees from article to article. Judging by the taunting style of edits summaries, Sennen goroshi seems to be trying to disrupt Appletrees. Also, Sennen goroshi appears to have used an Anon. IP to vandalize the user talk page of Appletrees. It is unfortunate that these two users are acting so childishly. Would an administrator please look into this.
* By the way, this problem was originally a content dispute at a controversial article that has seen nationalistic battles between users who outwardly identify with Japan, Chinese, and Korea. These users are all extremely tiresome and are all a drag on the 'pedia. They insist on using this project as a nationalistic battleground and they have scared away or completely turned off a whole bunch of constructive and policy-abiding editors. As long as we continue to ignore this problem at Wikipedia and/or deal with it in a piecemeal fashion (for example, Goodfriend100 should have been indef. banned along with others involved in the dispute!!), we will have more bad press from the mainstream media (i.e. care to edit the Koguryo article, anyone?). But I digress...<IP_ADDRESS> 14:02, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* This situation? this is about an anon user vandalising Appletrees' talk page, nothing more, nothing less - don't try to blow this out of proportion. Also "Sennen goroshi appears to have used an Anon. IP to vandalize the user talk page of Appletrees." what are you talking about, I do not appear to have used an anon IP. to vandalise anything - if you do a quick WHOIS on the IP that vandalised Appletree's talk page, you will see it originated from NYC - I live in Japan - I'm wondering how I managed to post from an American IP address on the same day that I was posting on my normal account, which any admin can confirm has only been used in conjunction with my Japanese IP. I know that appletrees and I have not got on well, however I have tried very hard recently to discuss this with him, and suggest that even when we don't agree, we remain civil. The accusation of using an anon IP seems a little ironic, consider the only anon IP I see at the moment is <IP_ADDRESS> - ie. yours. Before you try to fan the flames, and make something out of nothing, by making accusations against me, perhaps you could try to get some facts and base your comments on facts, not on your imagination.Sennen goroshi 14:33, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* Actually it's quite easy to use an anonymous NYC IP whilst posting from Japan, though I have no intention on giving instruction on how. <font color="#000000">WebHamste <font color="#0000ff">r 15:29, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* I am now annoyed with all of the above, what started as a simple vandalism report, has turned into a 'lets bitch and whine about sennen goroshi' session. I didn't perform the aforementioned act of vandalism, I gave advice regarding how to deal with vandalism, but still people with agendas find the need to find issue with my comments. Feel free to complain about me in an article dedicated to me, or on my talk page.Sennen goroshi 14:51, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* This new advent anon at least clearly points out that Sennen goroshi is stalking me (wikistalking, the new term is interesting). I'm considering adding Sennen goshi's recent disruptive behaviors as shadowing my almost every edits. Thank you for clearing this up. I've been harassed by him. The problem already happened one months ago, not just as I posted the report and the matter is not done yet. As for the anon reverting my talk page, who know who did that until andmins looks into it. With all due respect to <IP_ADDRESS>, I don't agree with your opinion on one point that I did childish behaviors. I feel enough of his personal insults. And the article, Gogoryeo is actually not my concern (History is not my specialty). I only encountered Good friend 100 on Liancourt Rocks. The report explains why Sennen goroshi is so obsessive at me, so I mentioned the participants in the sensitive article in the report. That's all. I think you care about the history article, but you should talk to him directly. Anyway thank you for the comment even though you're not positive for anyone in this report.
* By the way, Sennen goroshi, you've never been close to a civil person just like showing this . Instead of apology to me, you said you're gonna take a relax and drink an Asahi beer as the report was accidently removed? Interesting. Even as the new anon unrelated to me says that you're doing disruptive behaviors on me. Sennen goroshi, you're making so many people annoyed by your abusive edits and slams like against SingoPop (I can't recall his id exactly), Good friend 100, and melonbanmoster, and Ledtim, so forth. Don't lie any more. In addition, as for the your another abusive language like 'bitch', you're representing an English teacher, so "please" do act like that. I don't understand you're supporting the vandal anyway. Do you feel sympathy for him. weird --Appletrees 15:16, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* Webhampster, I am aware of people using anon proxies, however it is not something I would waste my time with, and to be honest if I was going to vandalise a talk page while using an anon proxy, I wouldn't bother changing a font size, I would plaster goatse and tubgirl all over the place.
Goodfriend, I am still trying to be civil, because as I previously stated, even when I don't agree with your opinion, I will remain civil. I don't consider the word bitch to be obscene, if I called someone a bitch, it would be a personal attack, however to saying someone is bitching about me, hardly constitutes a breach of civility.
I don't recall defending the vandal, I said that as they seemed to revert their vandalism withing 2mins, then perhaps they had reconsidered and decided against it - therefore, it is a long drawn out report is a waste of time.
I move that the IP gets blocked if it makes a habit of vandalism, and this report gets moved to the lamest ever, because at the moment, that is what it seems like me. Sennen goroshi 15:49, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* My nickname is not Good friend 100, you're so funny to confuse me with somebody. Yah, the term, 'bitch is like a language used by a bitch, You implied enough that I and the other's comments are "bitching" against you and sounds still inappropriate for anyone and especially an English teacher to use that. I only can see your absurd excuses from you above comment. This report could've finished in a very simple way unless you added on this as "stalking my edits", Quite impressive, indeed. So if an indecent posts was added in my talk page, I could easily recall your name. That's good to know about you. Why don't you care about other things instead of stalking me? Your log on the tower of Babel is another evidence that you frequently visit MY PAGE and follow my every step. --Appletrees 16:44, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
I think the 2 of you need to seperate for a while. Preferably voluntarily. Stop with the revert warring, stop stalking the user contrib listings and feeling the need to answer every post. Stop slinging accusations of incivility. It takes 2 to argue, and from what I've seen, neither one is completely innocent here. Arakunem Talk 16:51, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
It's a shame, I made every effort to come to a diplomatic solution/compromise, but even when I made a request for civility, and made my offer of civility, Appletrees had to find something to get offended by, and then demanded that I make an apology, offence is found in the use of the word "bitch" it's a total fucking waste of my time. I enjoy the debate, I enjoy the differences of opinion, I don't however enjoying people bitching and whining about pointless crap, especially when I have tried to make peace with them, only to have them bitch about something else and make 15 billion reports. This report is a huge waste of my time, maybe others have time on their hands, I don't, I don't enjoy wasting my time in such a pointless manner.Sennen goroshi 17:03, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* You haven't made any effort to be a civil man as others point out. You can't be diplomatic at all, because you previously admit that we each other are incapable of getting along and you're acting very weird as if you were a god. Why don't you leave me alone instead of "stalking me from article to article" (quoted from the anon) and pouring out such the "insolent languages " like "fucking", "crap", "bitching"? Please care less about what I'm doing in wiki. If you do so, there will be an absolute peace. Even though I would have some different thought to Japanese editors, but "WE" have tried to discuss on the matter. Whatever they have in mind, they're acting civil unlike you. You've made me waste my precious time and get stresses. This simple report is just toward the anon reverting my page, why do you care? --17:18, 4 November 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Appletrees (talk • contribs)
User talk:TheJudge310 - violation of policy?
Is the content on this talkpage a violation of policy? I think it is, but wanted clarification, after all Wikipedia is not a webhost. Also concerning the user, should someone warn him over this post he's violated NPA. Thanks, Davnel03 12:50, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* Have you thought about asking him/her yourself why s/he has that page there? Perhaps s/he is using the text for an article. I always think dialogue is the best first step, and WP:AGF. Jeffpw 13:29, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* Also, we aren't that strict about the rules if it helps improve the encyclopedia (ie. leaving it alone will keep him happy, thus making him a better contributer and encouraging im to stay). Of course, if all he ever did was edit his talkpage we'd take some kind of action--Phoenix-wiki (talk · contribs) 14:56, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
Single purpose account madly opposing all Rfas. Jeffpw 15:05, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* It's happened many times. He's a die-hard fan of mine :-) He's been blocked. --<font color="Green">Agüeybaná 15:10, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
Legal threat on the Helpdesk
An IP user has just posted a rant on the helpdesk. Among the text of the rant, which apparently blames Wikipedia for them not being able to access Google on their mobile, is a threat to contact the FCC. Now while I know that the FCC won't be able to do anything about it, I still believe it goes against WP:LEGAL. I would respond, but in these situations, I usually piss them off or make the situation worse in some other way. I believe that a sysop needs to take action. <font color="#FF0000">N <font color="#0000FF">F <font color="#808000">24 (radio me!Editor review) 15:59, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
* Blocked for 6 months. We have no place this kind of crap on Wikipedia. <font face="Arial"><font color="#FF7133">Maxim (talk) (contributions) 16:08, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
* At least we can get a good laugh out of it. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 17:01, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
* I would not bite a newbie. It is not a legal threat. I would have said "I am sorry that you feel that wikipedia is affecting your google access. If you have further information, please let me know. Your help in resolving this matter, even if it involves the FCC, is more productive than a potentially hostile complaint where you don't give us enough information to solve a potential problem." The user did not threaten to sue. That's a legal threat. Making an ordinary complaint is not a legal threat as much as complaining to ArbCom is not a legal threat. I would block only if the response was hostile. I do suspect this is a crank. Miesbu 18:20, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
* A "legal threat" isn't only a threat of a lawsuit. It can also be a threat to call the police, a threat to contact federal authorities (such as the FCC), etc. -Jéské ( Blah v^_^v ) 21:28, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
* Is a six-month block really appropriate for an IP address? --Metropolitan90 (talk) 02:50, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
* It varies by IP address; AOL IPs are blocked for less time because there is too high of a risk for collateral damage; open proxies are indef'd, as are some misbehaving static IPs (I believe we had an LTA page for a vandal who used a static IP?); average dynamic IPs get short blocks depending on the severity of the infraction. I've seen yearlong IP-blocks for school districts (in fact, most of my morning editing last year was done from school, and their IP was anonblocked). -Jéské ( Blah v^_^v ) 04:39, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
This page is not to be left move unprotected
See Wikipedia:Requests for page protection#Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs). Admins should not ever set any protection expiry time for this page, even if they either change their protection level to [edit=autoconfirmed:move=autoconfirmed] or [edit=autoconfirmed:move=sysop]. <IP_ADDRESS> 22:52, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
* Too bad there's no way to protect from edits for a finite amount of time, but move protect indefinitely. Feature request? feature creep? –<font color="#78abea">Crazy tales <font color="#eaab78">talk /<font color="#eaab78">desk 02:18, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* The page can be only manually removed semi-protection by admins after having been protected for a certain amount of time, but should indefinitely remain move protected. Setting an expiry will result the move protection to be automatically removed from the page, once the expiration has ended. <IP_ADDRESS> 03:41, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* Is it possible to hardcode this warning into the page that admins see when changing the protection levels? This sounds like the sort of thing that could easily be forgotten. Carcharoth 12:38, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* I am going to leave a message for an administrator, who most recently move protected the page, on his talk page. <IP_ADDRESS> 22:50, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* It's definitely possible to add a note to the page that admins see, but I'm not sure how necessary it is. I agree that this page should never be unmove-protected, but adding a note doesn't just add it to the screen for this page; admins would see it no matter what page they are protecting. That in itself isn't a bad thing, as Special:Blockip has all kinds of notices and reminders. You'll just have to find the correct Mediawiki page. - <font color="#0000cd">auburn <font color="#EF6521">pilot talk 23:08, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* Admins may see a protection log at the bottom of a MediaWiki interface, when they click a 'protect'/'unprotect' tab at the top of a page. Sometimes, they fail to check it before they set a different protection level with or without an expiry. I do not think an additional note for this kind of protection is necessary to be added to the page, not even the interface. <IP_ADDRESS> 23:21, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
I've added the appropriate note to the interface. Seems un intrusive enough. M er cury 00:46, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
* It's good to note, but it should also be noted that there have only ever been 3 page moves on this page, not exactly a critical situation. — xaosflux <sup style="color:#00FF00;">Talk 05:33, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
Please edit my edit summaries on 3 pages
I accidentally put the wrong edit summary on my edits of these pages:
Grafting Leeds Grammar School Reception
I thought I had " Fixed link(s) to disambig page (you can help!) " in my paste buffer, but instead I had an URL. Can you please fix them that so that the URL is no longer in the edit summaries? Thanks. Auntof6 05:03, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* You could just make a null edit (like adding a space) with a clarifying edit summary if this really bothers you, as admins can't change edit summaries anyway. And although I wouldn't be surprised if oversights could modify them, they generally reserve their superpowers for removing personal identification or contact information. Someguy1221 05:15, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* I was just about to say the same thing as Someguy1221. I don't think the edit summary leaks more information than a nosy person could guess, so I personally wouldn't worry about it. But if you're concerned, I think Requests for oversight is the place to start. Regardless, thanks for being diligent about edit summaries. Thanks, William Pietri 05:24, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* I saw this in some obscure policy somewhere, and what you should do is make a really trivial edit with an edit summary explaining your previous edit. Honestly, if it's a non-controversial edit I don't think anybody would care, and if it is you should be discussing it on the talk page. Cheers, <small style="background:#fff;border:#ff8c00 1px solid;color:#000;padding:0px 3px 1px 4px;white-space:nowrap">east<big style="color:#090">. 718 at 05:31, 11/4/2007
* I spoke too soon. Actually, if it's a mild privacy concern, any admin can delete the whole page and restore all but the edits in question. That would require you to re-do your edit, and admins would still be able to see the bad edit summary if they looked, though. Either way, just let us know. Thanks, William Pietri 05:35, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* The edits have been removed, per user's request. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 02:50, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
Recently administrator Isotope23 unblocked EverybodyHatesChris with the summary "Per discussion with editor and blocking admin". EverybodyHatesChris has originally blocked on 5 June for harrassment of editors, and indef blocked on 11 June with block summary "Trolling, plain and simple". Since his indefinite block, EverybodyHatesChris has used over a dozen sockpuppets to continue his campaign of trolling, harassment, sub-par editing and other bad behavior, right up until his unblock by Isotope23.
Checkuser Jpgordon has previously confirmed the sockpuppetry, and the checkusers declined to run another check on those grounds. Still, the connection between the accounts is clear. The accounts all edit the same small subset of television articles in the same manner. Eagle 101 linked to an impressive list of overlap on the WP:RFCU case page, but that link seems to be broken at the moment.
I inquired about this unblock at Isotope's talk page, along with another user, and was told that "It happened because I spoke to the original blocking admin and the editor in question. The blocking admin had no objection, so I unblocked. The editor created multiple accounts because they were blocked; no block = no reason to edit through other accounts. Blocking is a preventative measure, not a punishment. As long as the user behaves themselves, there is no reason for them to be blocked." (diff) He suggested that I appeal to ANI with any further concerns.
This troll has been causing trouble non-stop since his original block. I am bewildered by the unblock. Why are we to condone this sort of behavior? (diff diff diff diff) It goes on an on. There's no reason to think that it won't continue. Can I get a reasonable explanation as to why this editor was unblocked to begin with, and why they shouldn't be reblocked along with the rest of their socks? Thanks, ➪ Hi DrNick ! 05:57, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* Hi. I don't have time right now to look into this in the detail it deserves, but I have one question that will probably occur to others: how has his behavior been since the unblock? Thanks, William Pietri 06:09, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* I am the original blocking administrator, and for the past couple of months I had no idea why people kept coming to me about EverybodyHatesChris. When I blocked him, the past 200 edits he had were complaining about LessHeard than U (or however the name is spelled), and his activity during his block may have been deplorable, but Isotope23 believes that EverbodyHatesChris can edit constructively and act with some maturity other than why I had originally blocked him and how he acted during his block. If the community thinks he should be banned, then let that be decided. In this case, Isotope23 has lifted the administrators' ban, and my block and unblock cover that I agree with him.— Ryūlóng ( 竜龍 ) 07:53, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* Might it be more convenient to refer to me as LHvU, and... he did, did he? Ho hum. LessHeard vanU 10:16, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* Those edits while blocked are particularly concerning, and are remarkably uncivil. However if Ryulong and Isotope are prepared to put that down to frustration at being blocked, then I'll accept that, because I trust their judgment. I would think that EverybodyHatesChris will be given little leeway from now on, however. --bainer (talk) 07:58, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* Those edits are not proven to be him, yet, as far as I can tell from the checkuser request. If he can act civil now that he is not actively being blocked at every turn, then let him edit. If he does act out of line, then he gets blocked, again.— Ryūlóng ( 竜龍 ) 08:04, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* I'm comfortable with accepting your take on the situation, Ryulong (especially since I trust you to nail him to the wall if he steps out of line again). EVula // talk // ☯ // 08:07, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* I'm not sure why we should pay out more rope in this case, but there is always the chance, I suppose, that this user won't make the noose right away, and if people are prepared to watch him for repeats of the original problem then I guess little harm is done. Guy (Help!) 08:40, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* I have Judge Judy on my watchlist, which EverybodyHatesChris frequently edits, and they've generally all been good, well-considered work. Looking at his history reveals similar edits to articles related to the show Everybody Hates Chris. He seems to have cleaned up his act. JuJube 10:08, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
I just want to stress that I absolutely, positively can not possibly be more sure that every one of the above listed accounts belong to the same person. I understand that the unblocking admin(s) were not aware of this when they unblocked (or at least not aware of the full extent of the problem), and I know that not every unblock warrants a full-blown investigation into socking since the block and other misbehavior. If any of you have any doubt of the fact that these socks all belong to the same editor, I ask you to comment on the request for checkuser that I filed; I was unsuccessful in convincing the checkusers to run a check, apparently on the grounds that a previous check had already been done a couple months ago, and revealed a lot of abuse before. I'm not very good at the whole checkuser thing apparently, and maybe someone can help me out there.
While I agree that EverybodyHatesChris's edits since his unblock have been constructive, he practices some serious article ownership. Mark my words, as soon as an editor attempts to correct one of his bad habits (gratuitous unfair use of fair-use images, for example), they will be reverted and subsequently harrased with EverybodyHatesChris's particular brand of immature vitriol. This editor was spouting obscenities and other nonsense at other editors just last week. ➪ Hi DrNick ! 14:28, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* The checkuser just came back ✅, along with a couple of socks I had missed. Here are a few diffs from the ones I had missed: (diff diff diff diff diff diff diff diff diff). Why should we condone this sort of behavior? ➪ Hi DrNick ! 14:46, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* I ran another check for you, the CU page has been updated. Yes, those accounts are all connected.
* What some of the CUs are telling you is that you don't have to always ask for checks in every case. If the behaviour pattern is a close match, the CU is redundant, tag the suspected socks as just that and move on. If the behaviour pattern of a suspected sock is abusive, block that ID on behaviour. If this person does not straighten up and fly right, and if the pattern of behaviour continues to new IDs only then would it warrant blocking the IP or IPs where the socks originate from. That's all my view but I think it's fairly widely held... CU is not magic pixie dust, and it is to be used sparingly, when there are few or no other ways to determine what is going on. This seems pretty obvious to me (which means I don't agree with Ryulong on this one when he said he wasn't convinced it was the same underlying user).
* As for the ownership and not taking criticism well issues... if you see new ownership, raise the matter with the underlying user, politely, respectfully, and in a neutral way, overlooking the past. If the user then reacts badly, let's address that at that point. Hope that helps. ++Lar: t/c 14:51, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* I agree with your sentiment about checkuser, for sure. I didn't need a checkuser to know that they were all the same editor, it's obvious. I just needed something to answer the people who don't take the time to look into the situation and then say "Those edits are not proven to be him, yet, as far as I can tell from the checkuser request." Some people do act like checkuser is the only answer. ➪ Hi DrNick ! 15:04, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* Just to be clear, I was aware of the block evading accounts when I unblocked EverybodyHatesChris. I had a talk with the editor and Ryulong and after these conversations I felt that giving EverybodyHatesChris a second chance might not be a bad thing; indefinite != infinite. The block evasion accounts were not the correct way to deal with a block the editor felt was unfair, but we don't need to scarlet letter them over it. I've spoken to the editor about WP:OWN, WP:OR, and most importantly, containing their temper and staying civil, which is why they got blocked in the first place. I've made it clear that EverybodyHatesChris needs to follow policy and there won't be a third chance if they squander this one.--Isotope23 talk 15:45, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* As long as someone's prepared to watch EHC's edits, I see no pressing problem - a new block can be placed if there is a repeat. Guy (Help!) 21:11, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* Works for me too. Isotope23 knows where his towel is so if he's willing to mentor/monitor, awesome. ++Lar: t/c 21:28, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* Thanks. I am keeping an eye on the editor.--Isotope23 talk 23:20, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
User:Eyrian
There doesn't seem to be a current discussion about this administrator as the last one seems to have been archived however a decision still has to be reached as to what to do with him. For those who haven't been following: During the Alkivar arbitration case it was noticed a new user named had appeared in support of editors and, nearly exactly following the MO of banned vandal. As such JohnEMcClure was blocked as a sock of JB196 and that seemed to be the end of it. JohnEMcClure (as is the case of most socks) posted an unblock request consisting of:
* "I'm nobody's sockpuppet; is it impossible to agree with someone else? I haven't violated any actual policies. I notice Durova didn't even bother to leave me a note; I find this highly inappropriate and would like to file a complaint on behalf of any other people who've been damaged by this. If you decline, then please add a link to the welcome message telling new users that they should be careful about agreeing with anyone, or coming to their defense if they're being unjustifiably attacked."
The request was declined by on that even if the account was not a sockpuppet it had been incivil and disruptive.
This is when things got weird; admin appeared on ANI posting Block review - JohnEMcClure in which he stated that JohnEMcClure was his disruptive sockpuppet much to the confusion of everyone. During the discussion Eyrian stated "I'm not really concerned whether the account was blocked or not; if I wanted to do so, I could do it myself." implying he was ready to use his admin tools to unblock his own indefblocked puppet. When called on this he stated "Indeed, I may not have been clear. The account was designed to be entirely disposable, I have no investment in it whatsoever. Its block status is immaterial." making things even more confusing considering the accounts hard attempt at being unblocked and loud proclamation it was not a sockpuppet. Soon after Eyrian disappeared deleting his userpages and some of JohnE's too.
Considering that JohnE was first considered a sockpuppet of a banned vandal, professing to not be a puppet of anyone, having an admin claim it's puppet, and still after that having some users thinking it may be someone else's sock the incident never was fully resolved to as to what to do with Eyrian even assuming he is not the puppet master.
Eyrian still possesses his admin and user status which is my main reason for posting this. Considering Eyrian's behaviour and discussion in Alkivar arbitration as to what relationship Eyrian has to Alkivar and Burntsauce, even if he has left wikipedia again, I feel that his admin status should be revoked post-haste as he implied during the block review his willingness to abuse admin tools as well as contravene and ignore policy and his account blocked for disruption (although that can wait for my current attempts to have JohnEMcClure checkusered). –– Lid(Talk) 11:28, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* I think we've already added all relevant evidence to the Alkivar RFAR evidence page. You might join the discussion on the Workshop page if you feel that the ArbComm needs to address this, or open a new RFAR case if they say they want to consider it as a separate case. (They are the only communally approved group that can decide to remove an admin's sysop rights without a resignation by the admin.) GRBerry 11:57, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* The problem I say with the workshop is that the desysopping of Eyrian would need to be tacked on very later in the arbitration in a very very confusing circumstance. Chances are there is going to need to be a second ArbCom for Eyrian but the evidence list will pretty much only consist of what I just posted and I wanted to see if there was a uniform support for it. –– Lid(Talk) 12:01, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* My advice: Tack it on and hope for the best. I believe this issue has awareness among ArbCom already. ++Lar: t/c 14:53, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* It was already tacked on however users have responded stating it is only related by chance and not be the arbitration so chances are the actions of Eyrian won't be judged in this case. –– Lid(Talk) 21:40, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* During the discussion Eyrian stated "I'm not really concerned whether the account was blocked or not; if I wanted to do so, I could do it myself." implying he was ready to use his admin tools to unblock his own indefblocked puppet. No, that's not what he meant - don't twist his words. User:Veesicle 16:54, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* It sure reads like that, to me. Corvus cornix 20:17, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
Vandalism on A Perfect Circle
An anon, <IP_ADDRESS>, is repeatedly vandalizing A Perfect Circle. This guy continues to change "was" to "is" on that article (they're not active right now) and is fond of claiming that their singer Maynard James Keenan said A Perfect Circle is actually coming back; as far as I know, there's no confirmed reunion on any news presses, their official website or by any member of the band besides Maynard. If this edit war continues, please block him. I'm getting tired of reverting what he's doing. Alex 18:39, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* Down the hall, on the left: WP:AN3. There doesn't seem to have been enough revert-warring to zap anyone yet, but you should exercise caution on that front too. You would reach 3RR before s/he did if this continues. Based on that anon's (rather rude) Talk page contrib, this is a content dispute that should be resolved without resorting to revert-warring, blocking, or anything else use-of-forceish. Have you requested a cite for the anon's claims yet? <font color="#285991">--Dynaflow <font color="#285991">babble 19:19, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* i cited my "claims" the first time i edited the page to reflect REALITY. EDIT: define rude. and yes if "intransigence" means defending the truth, than i'm intransigent. <IP_ADDRESS> 20:16, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* That was in reference to your calling Alex101's view "retarded." Because things tend to "sound" much harsher in text over the Internet than they would, say, face to face, it's best to keep one's verbiage as civil as possible here. <font color="#285991">--Dynaflow <font color="#285991">babble 20:31, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* to be perfectly frank, insisting that a band will not get back together when their lead singer has stated that they will is quite retarded. but like i said earlier, i simply don't give a sh*t anymore (look i censored myself so that i'd give the illusion of trying to appear civil). it's just wikipedia, no one is dying over words on "teh intrawebs". i'm gunna go laugh @ darfur now k? cyalaterbuhbye.<IP_ADDRESS> 20:47, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* The more I look at this, the more it seems like a run of the mill content dispute, augmented by a good dosage of intransigence on both sides. I've given you both warnings for edit warring. Please stop. As the presumably more experienced Wikipedian of the disputants, I would suggest that you take the initiative and ask for a third opinion at WP:ROCK. Also, it's hard for me to see how the anon's (cited) information can't easily be integrated into the article. Aside from that, you're arguing over the tense of one verb, and is it really worth getting 3RR bocked over that? <font color="#285991">--Dynaflow <font color="#285991">babble 19:49, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
Progressive vs Reform Judaism
In discussion at WP:JUDAISM and Progressive Judaism, there's been a dispute over "Progressive" vs "Reform" terminology and related articles. Specifically, there is a disagreement about whether the editing of Progressive Judaism has been covering the same ground as Reform Judaism and, as a result, turning into a POV fork on the same Jewish branch/movement.
Meanwhile, advocates for the "Progressive" POV created German Reform movement (Judaism) by removing content from Reform Judaism and prefacing the content in terms of the "progressive movement." I've filed an AfD on the article and a Wikiquette alert on the dispute. Now I realize that they've created another fork/spin-off Reform Judaism (United States). I don't want to chase after these folks all day! Instead of filing another AfD, I'm appealling here for help.
Would an uninvolved admin please step in and look at this situation? Is there a way to ensure that the "Progressive" folks work through consensus-building Discussion, at WP:JUDAISM or wherever, before making further massive changes to a core Judaism article like Reform Judaism? Thanks very much! HG | Talk 20:39, 4 November 2007 (UTC) Some evidence you may wish to review, showing the POV intent of the fork, at least as far as I can tell. Again, eyes from an uninvolved party would help. thanks! HG | Talk 20:42, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* There is no POV fork. The new articles created are just a straightforward start at moving to "summary style" for article Reform Judaism. There are some very valid reasons for "summary style" there:
* The article was considerably over-length, so summary style is recommended.
* Summary style allows the Reform Judaism article to move much more quickly to where things are at today, as WP articles on religious movements should do, rather than many many screens of history first.
* Having a separate article on German Reform movement (Judaism) is a good idea in its own right, as there are a lot of articles on e.g. German reformers which can now link to the appropriate subject matter directly.
* This is entirely orthogonal to any question of whether to call anything "Progressive" or "Reform". Creating German Reform movement (Judaism) makes sense in its own right. Jheald —Preceding comment was added at 20:38, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* And this needs an admin because?.... Guy (Help!) 21:05, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* ... because if it's the creation of multiple POV forks, then admin can play a constructive role to minimize the disruptive editing. On the other hand, if there's no need for admin intervention, then an admin could help inform the parties about how to proceed. Thanks! HG | Talk 21:15, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* I think that any level-headed editor can help out. I'm not sure if I'd use the term POV fork, but there is certainly significant overlap. It's not something easily fixed, though, or anything where an obvious block or deletion will make progress. Guy (Help!) 21:45, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* This might be a case where WP:dispute resolution is appropriate. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 22:01, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* Yes, I did raise it to a Wikiquette alert. But when I noticed the second spinoff/fork, it seemed like my efforts to discuss & resolve were inadequate. Thanks. HG | Talk 23:05, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
The creation of these articles is legitimate at this time when there are active editors who wish to expand and research the articles. There is no need to raise the decibels here. Let everyone get on with editing and writing. Thanks, 02:34, 5 November 2007 (UTC)IZAK
User talk:Rbkl
This user was blocked for making legal threats. In my unblock decline I indicated that users with outstanding threats will be blocked. The user has since indicated that they are withdrawing the threat. I don't think I've ever seen a user blocked for legal threats actually claim to withdraw the threat, so I'm not entirely sure of the action to take here. There were other reasons for the block, so I'm leaning toward shortening the block but not unblocking outright, but at the same time I question whether or not we need more potentially problem user. Could another admin or 2 take a look at this situation? I don't have the time to look at the situation in-depth right now. Mr. Z- man 02:36, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
* I'm not an admin, but I looked at User_talk:Rbkl and did not perceive a hint of remorse, or any idea that it was unwise to threaten legal action. The administrators who (thus far) have declined to lift the block seem to be following common sense. If you have any doubts, a short conversation with him about the doings on Scottish clan might well convince you. Looks to me that he had already been courteously informed on his own Talk page that his edits to Scottish clan didn't make sense. For example here and in the five following comments. The Scottish clan page is supposed to have a pre-existing article for every clan entry, which his new additions definitely didn't have. He got all steamed up when his edits were reverted, eventually as vandalism, and this led to his legal threat. EdJohnston 03:13, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
His legal threat has not been rescinded. I've protected the page due to abuse of the unblock template. ⇒ <font face="Euclid Fraktur"> SWAT Jester Son of the Defender 03:31, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
* Another view after looking through the edit history, I agree with the block and page protection. Gnangarra 03:36, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
* As the initial blocking admin, I'd also like to point out that "Prince Richard I" had been phenomenally incivil to RepublicanJacobite and had also been revert-warring. - A<font color= "#FF7C0A">l<font color= "#FFB550">is o n ❤ 03:38, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
Bullying on the Preity Zinta nomination by
I have to say that this vote appears invalid by Sarvagnya on Featured article candidates/Preity Zintaand is done out of spite within an hour following a confronation on the article -please see Shahrukh Khan history. It looks very suspicious to me that the above user came across this page after checking the contributions of User:Shhhhh following the edit war on that page and visisted the page specifically to give the "strongest oppose possible" -I find this utterly unacceptable that somebody would delibrately not give a genuine review of an article and attempt to jeopardise it because of a previous confrontation elsewhere. User:Shhhhh was blocked following the incident on that page but I don't think admin were getting both sides to the story. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Talk"? 12:44, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
* Sarvagnya is entitled to his opinion (in fact, it's perfectly legitimate). Please assume good faith. Everything you claim is based on personal speculation. To make matters worst, it's disgusting to see how a number of editors suddenly attacked and criticized Sarvagnya for his vote on the page. Nishkid64 (talk) 07:20, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* who was pretty OTT in their response to the objections to Sarvagnya yesterday was subsequently blocked for 24hours for a violation of the 3RR. He appears to have been block evading using his sister's PC and I have lengthened his block this morning for this. Recorded because there may well be some history in all this that is relevant to this complaint - I haven't looked into this at all. Spartaz Humbug! 07:43, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* It seems funny that a user serving to make the page more legitimate is demonized on ANI like this. Sarvagnya has merely been upholding WP:RS. Baka man 17:33, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
User:Irpen
I would appreciate admin input on the following issue. Recently, I had something of a short conflict with an admin regarding his/her recent bout of single-rationale RfA !votes. Me and another user contacted the admin on their talk page, which led another user, Irpen, to react by removing a comment from the admin's talk, as well as comment there. This comment was about myself and confused me more than the afterwards removal of my message by the admin him/herself with the edit summary "rv person who knows they are unvelcome but persists trolling around my edits" (Needless to say, I don't think I was trolling. That comment was not even related to the conflict we had, it was just a regular notification like I send out on a regular basis when e.g. properly indenting someone's struck RfA comments etc. But nevermind.) In his comment, Irpen suggested bookmarking Requests for adminship/Dorftrottel and told Mikkalai that "it seems to me that you are dealing with the "admin material" editor". Since I had (and still have) no idea what s/he might be talking about, I posted on their talk, asking for more info and providing some regarding myself. Just now, I realised that this thread has been removed with the edit summary "rm obnoxious rant". I don't want to make a big deal out of it, but I would welcome any input. — Dorftrottel 12:55, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* What administrative action do you wish to see applied? El_C 12:57, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* Not sure. I was going to notify Irpen of this thread right away, hoping s/he would respond here since asking myself is apparently not an option. — Dorftrottel 13:03, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* This isn't the venue for dispute resolution; we're trying to keep this board limited to incidents which require administrative attention. El_C 13:06, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* Well, this is not about a content dispute. As of yet, I'm not at all sure what it really is about. If "asking with some added weight" counts as an admin action, that's what I'd appreciate. I'm not much interested in any other measures yet, but that may become relevant. For now, I'm willing to ignore the highly uncivil gesture of roundly removing my question calling it an "obnoxious rant" etc. But I don't think DR is the right venue, or is it? — Dorftrottel 13:12, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* Irpen does have a history of personal attacks and incivility. Will (talk) 13:14, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* I don't know anything about the present incident, but no, Will, Irpen really doesn't have such a history. I appeal to you and others to click on the diffs which supposedly exemplify those "personal attacks and incivility", in the RFAR finding you link to. Just click on them. Please. Bishonen | talk 13:29, 4 November 2007 (UTC).
* If he didn't, the Arbitration Comittee wouldn't pass the finding of fact. If it's good enough for the AC, it's good enough for me. Will (talk) 13:32, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* Or, of course, stick your head in the sand and let the arbcom do your thinking for you, Sceptre. That's good, too. Bishonen | talk 14:52, 4 November 2007 (UTC).
* If ArbCom pass a decision in a case, then that decision is official. I'm pretty sure Jimbo made that clear. Will (talk) 15:27, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* Oh, Jimbo Shmimbo. You should try empirical science sometime, Sceptre, it was invented more than 300 years ago. Before then, like in the Middle Ages, if they wanted to know about something in nature, they didn't look at it, they quoted what Aristotle had said about it and declared "It's official! The Man said it!" Just like you're doing now. It's almost enough to make me run for arbcom after all. If I do, and get in, you'll promise to believe everything I say, won't you ? Bishonen | talk 15:57, 4 November 2007 (UTC).
* The weight attributed to ArbCom statements is well-known to largely depend on the convenience it affords for the quoting user. Remember the whole BADSITES quagmire? People received blocking warnings based on one specific ArbCom finding, quoted as if it were undisputable policy. It really depends. — Dorftrottel 16:12, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* Dispute resolution is about solving conflicts between users, so it very much applies. El_C 13:15, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* Ok, thanks. I'll try there then. — Dorftrottel 13:19, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* It seems to me that a civility warning should be issued, at the very least. I have seen editors blocked for rude edit summaries in the past. However, one aspect of the initial post in this thread has me confused: Does Dorftrottel think Mikkalai is an admin? I can't see any evidence of that from his/her contribution log or user page. Jeffpw 13:22, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* Yes, Mikkalai is an admin: List_of_administrators/G-O, — Dorftrottel 13:28, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* Thanks, Dorftrottel. Well then, sorry El C, but I do see an incident here. Shouldn't admins here, who are supposed to enforce policy about incivility, uphold the standard which they enforce? Those edit summaries, and the way Dorftrottel was rebuffed, are not what I expect to see in an admin here. Jeffpw 13:35, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* What administrative action do you wish to see applied? El_C 13:37, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* Obviously, El C, I think both users should be warned about civility. Yes, I could do it myself, but this thread has shown neither is amenable to the criticism of "average" users. That's why there is a board for admin help. Jeffpw 13:44, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* I think you would benefit from leaving these editors alone. It seems that this started when you described Mikkalai's opposes to several RfAs as disrupting Wikipedia to make a point, even though the rationale given (contribution to content) is, last time I checked, broadly considered to be an important factor in selecting admins. Mikkalai and Irpen seemed a bit snarky in their replies, but can you see how they were rubbed up the wrong way in the first place? Disrupting Wikipedia to make a point is a fairly significant allegation to make, especially when you make it in eight places at once without discussing your concern with the user first. --bainer (talk) 13:34, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* Irpen does have a history of removing messages he deems "unsuitable" from the talk pages of other users. I've asked him not to do that or give an explanation - when he removed message from Bishonen's talk page - but instead of reply, my question was removed as "rm trolling, rudeness and nosnense". He habitually does remove messages from talk pages of the others and apparently sees nothing wrong with it. -- Sander Säde 13:39, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* Sander Sade, are you saying that the diff above was not removing of "trolling. rudeness and nonsense"? I welcome everyone to actually check what it actually was . The authors of both entries are now banned for multiple abuse. Just that gives a good clue of what their entries were. --Irpen 17:27, 4 November 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Irpen (talk • contribs)
* So, what of those was my question - trolling. rudeness or nonsense? You have still not explained why do you think you are allowed to delete discussions from talk pages other then yourself. -- Sander Säde 19:07, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* Those were all three: trolling, rudeness and nonsense. And the authors of these trollings, rudenesses and nonsenses are not with us anymore precisely for this activity. As for removing offensive comments from other people pages, I do it only in exceptional circumstances that warrant such action. Mainly, when those comments, if left untouched, would only escalate the situation further down. I was thanked for that by the affected users. Makes me think I have done the right thing. --Irpen 23:58, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* That particular remark on Bishonen's talk page Irpen removed was by Digwuren, now banned, who was not only trolling, but also stalking Irpen. . By the way, talking about stalking, could you explain ( this strange event?) Are you 100% sure that Finland does not qualify as Eastern Europe? --Paul Pieniezny 14:47, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* Digwuren has not been stalking Irpen and you really shouldn't accuse someone stalking and trolling without any evidence - especially since the opposite seems to be true. Digwuren's message was a good faith attempt to start a dialog, I presume Irpen removed it as a constructive dialog would have been harmful to his cause to get Digwuren banned - so easier to censor and pretend nothing happened. As for your page, it was an accidental click on rollback button, I immediately reverted myself, see . Sorry about that. -- Sander Säde 16:12, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* All right, then. Let's see. Sander Sade, could you explain how you got to the page in Paul's userspace "[(to accidentally click the rollback button" in the first place? --Irpen 17:30, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* Yes, easily. For whatever reason I have Paul's talk on my watchlist - and there was a comment from Ezhiki about Paul's edit. As I wanted to see what the edit was, I looked at Paul's edit list - and saw that he had blanked a page about Finland. Being Finland's neighbor, I was naturally interested and went to look. I wonder what is your explanation for showing up everywhere immediately after edits by Martintg, Vecrumba and others? -- Sander Säde 19:07, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* The explanation is not what you imply. I do not check the contributions of these and several other editors to save myself some stress. However, if their edits show up in my watchlist, or links to these pages are added to the pages that are on my watchlist, I may read what they say and comment. --Irpen 23:58, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* Your explanation now raises a second question: how much time did you spend reading that Finland page before you restored it? It was a page I held in reserve in case the anonymous editor on the Continuation War who claimed Finland had delivered Belgian, Swiss and French volunteers from the Winter War into the hands of the Gestapo, restore that edit. I had found info contradicting this. Based on YOUR contribution list you had 99 seconds to check your watch list (and Ezhiki writing on my talk page cannot have been at the top, since he wrote it hours before and you had been putting Estonia templates on articles for some time, averaging as fast as one every 15 seconds), to read Ezhiki's comment (entitled Putin - yes right, a clear connection with Finland there, no one would ever think that referred to something that happened at Vladimir Putin) and then switch to my contribution list (luckily for you, Finland was on top) and that blanked page. Realistically, you cannot have read what I blanked before you restored it. Could the reason why you were so trigger happy with the restore after reading Ezhiki have been Digwuren? --Paul Pieniezny 13:55, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
* Sigh. Stop acting paranoid and remember you are on Wikipedia. The whole page is available until an administrator deletes it (see here), there is no need to restore it for reading. I have said that repeatedly before - if you want to make edits that others cannot see, your place is not on Wikipedia. I have no problems whatsoever with others looking at my watchlist - in depth if they want to. Why? Because I do not make edits I should be ashamed of. In fact, my contributions have been thoroughly combed by quite several editors, most of them acting in bad faith - and one was uninvolved administrator I asked to look at my edits. And still no "bad" edits were found.
* Oh, and your last sentence does not make any sense whatsoever. "after reading Ezhiki have been Digwuren"??! English, please.
* -- [[User:Sander_S%C3%A4de|<span style="font-family:Palatino Linotype;
color:gray;font-size:15px">Sander Säde ]] 16:40, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
* So, you were not mentioned in The Digwuren Saga, but Irpen was? (linking to Ghirla preceding you, because your umlaut does not work well on my computer). Of course, you had every right to read that "article". I just question your explanation for reading and reverting it. The sentence is good English, by the way, but a bit casual. Replace "Ezhiki" with "Ezhiki's words" and put commas or parentheses around "after reading Ezhiki's words" and it should be clear what I meant.--Paul Pieniezny 16:59, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
* Once more - very slowly this time. Estonia is a neighbor of Finland. Finnish language is very close to Estonian language. I live 80 km away from Helsinki, the capital of Finland. I used to speak fairly fluent Finnish - a bit rusty now because lack of use - but since the company I work for is expanding to Finland, I am fairly sure I will have to speak more of it soon. Several of my favourite books are written by Finnish authors. I know several Finns personally. I know Finnish history and culture. Now, can you guess why I just might be interested in Finland? You are making a saga out of simple wrong click. -- Sander Säde 17:21, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
* Bainer: Agreed. I know I could've went more elegantly about it, which is why I completely disengaged. However, you may be interested in my rationale for tagging rather than reacting those comments here. — Dorftrottel 13:44, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* I--and other editors--have had the same issues with both Irpen and Mikka. Mikka blankets every RfA with opposes (I've yet to notice a support), using the same "police" rationale (or some variant thereof, now that s/he's been called on it) on every RfA. When the RfA discussion veered a bit off course, several editors tried to engage on Mikka's talk page. We had our comments summarily deleted, both by Mikka and Irpen, and were referred to as "bullies", "trolls", and "stalkers." That this was done by an admin, I think qualifies it for the AN/I. K. Scott Bailey 13:50, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* Well, I posted here with regard to Irpen's comment he made wrt to myself rather than Mikka's recent RfA participation which provides only the backdrop and seems to be resolved by now. Mikka has every right to provide input at RfA. (But yes, s/he should be prepared for comments regarding his/her own comments in turn and not instantly label those as wikistalking etc.) — Dorftrottel 13:59, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* Well, I've seen Mikkalai support two RfA candidates. See [] and []. --Iamunknown 19:46, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
For the record: Follwing El_C's suggestion, I went to WP:DR and skipping the (already unsuccessfully attempted) steps 1 and 2, posted a request for editor assistance here. I'm not entirely sure that the issue is a matter that calls for dispute resolution. As I said above, I'm not even sure what the issue is, as of yet. — Dorftrottel 14:02, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* Well, I had a good look at Dorftrottel's links and saw that all this started when Mikka supported a candidate: --Paul Pieniezny 14:30, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* Exactly. S/he had apparently signed with five tildes, so I simply added Mikkalai's username and notified him/her (as I would have done in any other case, I might add). Irpen then commented to that thread, and finally Mikka removed it altogether. Then followed my unsuccessful attempt at asking Irpen about that comment of his/hers., — Dorftrottel 14:48, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* Right, Paul. That's ALL it was. One vote. Mikka was canvassing all RfA's with the same "police" reasoning, assuming bad faith on the part of the candidates. Several editors attempted to engage on this issue, and were treated extremely rudely, both by Mikka and Irpen. Stop creating a strawman of the issue. K. Scott Bailey 15:04, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
Eh? Who did I treat "extremely rudely" here? There were plenty of thoughtful remarks above and I don't think anything is needed from my end at this point. I wish Dorftrottel and everyone good luck in turning this web-site into an even better reference full of good and encyclopedic content. --Irpen 17:16, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* I'd appreciate it if you would reply to my initial question what this comment of yours was all about. That's all I'd like to know, and my according posting to your talk page was certainly not an "obnoxious rant". How hard can it be to answer a simple question? — Dorftrottel 17:33, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
Ok, here's my request for admin intervention. I would appreciate it if an admin would issue a civility warning towards Irpen regarding this repeated civility offence. Calling my good-faithed notification "obnoxious stuff" borders on a personal attack. He shows no signs whatsoever to deescalate the situation by answering my simple and justified question what his comment was about, and that does IMHO weigh against his entire behaviour. — Dorftrottel 17:37, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* You, however, show repeated signs of trying to escalate the situation by going from page to page with your grievances and asking for other contributors to get whipped. There are some good advises above and you are by far better off to heed to them. --Irpen 17:50, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* Just answer my question, please. I'm just not eager to let this go unresolved. You appear to hold a big grudge against me for as yet undisclosed reasons I would like to learn about and understand for the precise purpose of improving my behaviour. So, please answer my question. What is so hard about that? — Dorftrottel 17:54, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
Some people are Polish and wishing to see our articles reflect the glories of Poland. Some are Estonian and wish our articles to reflect the glories of Estonia. Some are Russian and want our articles to show the glories of Russia. In addition, some of these people wish us to not show the ignominies of said nations. Since these nations have tangled with each other repeatedly in the 20th century and are only now not entangled in one another's affairs, some of the "glories of Estonia" to some of the people mean "the horrors of Russia/Germany/Poland," etc. Now add to this potent mix a group of people who have always learned history reflecting excerpted or partisan accounts of the past, or dark rumors about excerpting, and you have a sure recipe for uncooperative editing in every possible respect. Then we have appeals to the audience of editors to take sides. Nothing could be a worse idea than to take sides. The "experts" are possibly tainted, the amateurs are possibly tainted, and the by-standers are blind, but the one thing that is sure, the one thing you can count on, is that anyone accusing anyone else of being impolite is hiding either the weakness of an argument or trying to pull a fast one on you. ArbCom's finding of fact on Irpen was not what it is reported, above. The diffs showing "incivility" didn't show incivility on his part. The polite people aren't virtuous for their politeness, and anyone who wants to take sides is, by virtue of ignorance, as culpable as the participants. If you want to act properly, look for neutral points of view (those that use "may have been" and "is a contentious name"), those that cite to sources that themselves generate multiple references, those that are willing to put in multiple "sides" of an event, if there is an impasse, those that do not come to AN/I to report, of all things, that a word is being uttered that should not be uttered. Geogre 19:19, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* "...the one thing you can count on, is that anyone accusing anyone else of being impolite is hiding either the weakness of an argument or trying to pull a fast one on you." That is not always the case, and reasonable people who believe this unreasonable thing are precisely why decent editors don't go near the cesspools of incivility that are these articles, and those that do run away because of the constant rudeness. As long as people think like that and don't hand out civility-related blocks to all involved, ignoring edit counts and sysop bits, those are still going to be the filthy stains on WP's reputation that they are. Relata refero 12:14, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
* I agree with every fucking word you said as far as I understood it. However, as far as I'm fucking concerned, the issue is fucking resolved. Irpen gave me a satisfactory answer, it's all I ever was interested in. He's right I should contribute more fucking encylopedic content. I shall try to. Everything else is just a matter of sexual frustration on everyone's part. And don't bullshit me on that one. I'm hung like a fucking seahorse and I know what the fuck I'm talking about. Beautiful fucking view now, isn't it. — Dorftrottel 19:41, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* Best. AN/I. Reply. Ever. So I don't get roused on for just saying that, I shall inject my opinion - copy-pasting opposes to various RfAs looks like bad form, sounds like bad form... so I think the people against Mikkalai doing this had the best of intentions, whether their point was valid or not. <font face="Book Antiqua" color="black">DEVS EX MACINA pray 23:17, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
POV pushing and personal attacks by single-purpose account
I've been working on improving the Steve Dahl article for some time and have made a lot of headway. However, I keep encountering problems with a single-purpose account. This person has never edited anything but the Dahl article, and continually inserts hyperbole, POV, weasel words, uncited claims (or claims that are cited but misleadingly stated), and deletes perfectly legitimate cited facts. For example, these edits, , , ,. Finally, after I've tried to be reasonable and fair, and explain that we can't use words like "shockingly" and "ill-fated" and other hyperbole in Wikipedia articles, and called attention to his insistence on inserting misleading information about "ratings dives", he made this totally absurd personal attack on me. I've done nothing but try to make this article objective, while this other person has done nothing but insert POV, claims based on fuzzy math, etc. I've attempted to discuss, but I reallysuspect this is a single-purpose account, here to POV push on this one article and nothing more. Nobody of consequence 17:41, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* Now he is blanking text with no explanation from the same article. Nobody of consequence 22:36, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* The editor does seem to use a somewhat more ... vigorous ... way of saying things than would be appropriate for an encyclopedia, and so a reminder about the style manual might need to be made (I'll take care of that in a minute). However, s/he seems to have retracted the personal attack you referenced, although you have since restored it. <font color="#285991">--Dynaflow <font color="#285991">babble 22:51, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* Actually, since the most badly out-of-MOS edits date back to early March, I'll leave that be. I'm not sure exactly why this is being posted to ANI, as this seems to be mostly a contentious content dispute. This could be much more productively handled with the help of the editors at WP:RADIO, and possibly through initiating a more thorough review of the subject matter at Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard. <font color="#285991">--Dynaflow <font color="#285991">babble 23:13, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* Now there is an obvious sockpuppet blanking the same text Chicago 1919 was blanking. This is more than a content dispute, this is about one person who keeps pushing POV into an article, won't listen to reason (from other editors as well, not just me), and now seems to have created a sock. I'd like to request a Checkuser, but that page instructs me to post this here. Nobody of consequence 15:57, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
Dorftrottel blocked
I've blocked for 31 hours for gross incivility and a blatant personal attack. Picaroon (t) 19:57, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* You beat me to it by about a minute. Mr. Z- man 20:12, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* I have blocked as evasion. I won't mess with the block myself on the main account. But if someone else sees fit, I would have no objection. M er cury 20:13, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* I'm tempted to extend the block after this. Thoughts? Mr. Z- man 20:18, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* As a completely uninvolved editor (that reads this age for a laugh), I'm a little concerned that Dorftrottel gets a block for incivility (deserved), when it was probably the incivility shown to him by Irpen (section a few above this one) that didn't have anything happen that set him off.
* Honestly, having watched this and a few other Wiki policy pages recently, there does seem to be one rule for admins, and one rule for "normal" editors. Something that gets a editor blocked seems to get pushed under the carpet for (some) admins.
* Just a view from a uninvolved editor. Darkson (Yabba Dabba Doo!) 20:23, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* As another uninvolved editor, I endorse Darkson's opinion here. Why is Irpen getting off scott free? Corvus cornix 20:25, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* Extended to a week. I'll look into Irpen as well. <font face="comic sans ms"> Kwsn (Ni!) 20:26, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* This block-shopping is getting tiresome. What is that Corvus cornix want from me? --Irpen 20:35, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* Asking that you and Mikka be held accountable for calling good faith attempts at dialogue "trolling", "stalking", and "bullying" (I've lost track of which of the two of you used each specific insult in your edit summaries) is not "block-shopping." Dorf was WAY out of line in that last bit, and richly deserves his block, but that in no way excuses the two of you for your behavior previous. K. Scott Bailey 20:41, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* I would like an explanation as to what makes this an "obnoxious rant". Corvus cornix 00:49, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
* So you don't remember which user it was, but you're sure that one or both needs to be blocked? Man! It's still up there, you know, and it seemed moderately accurate to me, but it required that a person read all the words and not hunt for magic terms. The "accusation" was that the user had trolled Irpen and the answer was that the user is not trolling Irpen. Those verb tenses are important. Innumerable "I am an uninvolved person and I think someone should be blocked" posts always leave me cold. Blocking is not mediation, and mediation is necessary if one thinks that the situation is users with a beef against one another. Blocks are for toddlers to play with. Geogre 20:47, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* It doesn't matter what leaves you cold. It matters what is or is not blockable. Is it acceptable to refer to good faith attempts to dialog as "trolling", "bullying", and "stalking" in edit summaries blanking these attempts? The diffs have been posted and reposted ad nauseum. As both editors were being abusive in their edit summaries, it is sometimes difficult to keep track of which was which. To my recollection, the editors who tried to make constructive contact with Mikka, regarding his opposes at RfA (at which point Irpen jumped in, blanking comments at Mikka's page), were Evula, myself, Dorf, and perhaps a couple of others. All were treated incredibly rudely, being called bullies, trolls, and stalkers. K. Scott Bailey 21:03, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* What "incivility" warrants incivility? Once we start on the "he was mean" path, we never get off it until all are silent. Supposing, though, that there were such a thing as a "personal attack," and supposing again that it needed blocks to prevent (and both of those suppositions are incorrect), then we would never license one with another. The referee calls the penalty on the one who throws the punch, not the one who antagonized him. Finally, though, the issue, if there is one, is not "personal attacks" or "incivility," but being unable to engage in cooperative editing. That can call for a temporary block, if the people throwing the blocks also want to help defuse the situation.
* Better yet, let's not block people for "personal attacks" and "incivility," and that way we don't have to put rudeness and politeness in a scale and try to see into the hearts of users. Instead, let's look at whether users can and will edit cooperatively, or if they are taking things personally and getting huffy about it. That is at least confined to behaviors, not feelings. Geogre 20:32, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* (e/c x3)Number 1, Irpen isn't an admin. How does this show 2 separate rules? If you could provide some diffs, I'd review them. Number 2, being drunk or having uncivil comments made toward you does not excuse incivility. Mr. Z- man 20:33, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* Lets not forget, the bad faithed troll edit was off the mark. M er cury 20:35, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
Z-man, please stay close to a point. Where did I make any remarks whose incivility warrants the ANI discussion. Right one thread above you tell me to "calm down" with no reason. That is incivil. As for Dorftrottel, he was pestering me with strange questions and going 'round from board to board with his frivolous complaints. I am still not sure what he wanted from me. I do not endorse his block but I request editors to avoid conflating issue and not buy into this "Oh, let's block him too" nonsense. Let's just write articles instead. --Irpen 20:46, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* Things like this. You jump on the slightest things. I made a comment that only served to correct where to report the page move issues, it had nothing to do really with the specific issue at hand and then you reply to it with: The WP:RM is ongoing! Don't you see? - I wasn't commenting on the specific issue, so no, I did not see. You seemed very agitated, so I asked you to calm down. Now here you tell me to stay close to a point, I have no idea what you are talking about. I was replying to the comments above (Darkson's) about why Dorftrottel was blocked and you weren't, about Dorftrottel's incivility being related to incivil comments that you might have made, and about there being 2 rules for admins and other users. I don't know why you are focusing on me all of a sudden. I simply asked for diffs that showed where you might be incivil, how is that anything but assuming good faith? I didn't say to block you at all. Mr. Z- man 21:14, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* "You seem very agitated", "Calm down", etc. is civil by your book, Z-man. All right, I will remember that. Now, to the issue. Your pointing towards WP:RM just showed lack of thoroughness in investigating the complaints. The user moved the article and scorched the redirect. This is bad conduct, plain and simple. Abusive too. And this needs to be dealt with precisely at this board where the complaint was brought. I suggest you quit teaching editors how to behave. Such recommendations are needed much less than some are keen to give them. --Irpen 21:53, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* Yes, that is quite civil, I'm sure other users would agree as well. I told you I was not investigating the specific complaints, but rather explaining that WP:SPLICE was the wrong place to report such issues. "I suggest you quit teaching editors how to behave." I would suggest the same to you. (If anything I have said today is uncivil, it would be that, but I'm getting rather tired of trying to argue). Mr. Z- man 21:59, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* Well, we then disagree on what constitutes civility, Z-man. Unwarranted insulting remarks to calm down are uncivil. Inserting the opinions unrelated to the matter into the charged thread is unhelpful and persisting on nothing being with that is further unhelpful. I posted a specific complaint and all there was there was a dirty trick in a page move and it was reported to the right place. It would be best if threads were narrowly concentrated at the issues they are devoted to. --Irpen 23:47, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* I would concur with your assessment that your comments have been quite civil and restrained. I also fully understand how difficult it can be to remain so when dealing with persistent accusations of bad faith and other things. K. Scott Bailey 22:18, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* 31 hours for "drunk in charge of an edit button" seems reasonable to me :o) Guy (Help!) 21:08, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* Someone want to explain this? <font face="comic sans ms"> Kwsn (Ni!) 21:27, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* Yes, I can explain that., , , and are all (by their own admission I think) the same user. Maybe we've had enough of this game? Guy (Help!) 21:31, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* ... and can we have some proof that that? <font face="comic sans ms"> Kwsn (Ni!) 21:34, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* Actually it looks like Aldebaer and Kncyu38 both seem to redirect to Dorf's page. <font face="comic sans ms"> Kwsn (Ni!) 21:40, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* And establishes another link. It's all one individual. Guy (Help!) 21:47, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* Without commenting on Tit for Tat and Subversive Element, Kncyu38 was renamed Aldebaer who was renamed Dorftrottel. Mr. Z- man 21:51, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* Guy, that link only works for admins. Does it establish a link between TfT+SE on the one hand and Knc+AB+Dorf on the other? I rather feel sorry for the guy. His last post on my talk page was very civil, I guess the alcohol was not fully working yet... --Paul Pieniezny 14:00, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
Apologys for confusing Irpen with another editor (who's an admin). I honestly thought I recognized Irpen's name from an admin action somewhere, but I was obviously mistaken. Still doesn't explain to me why one set on incivility get's off scot-free, and another get's a block (deserved or not), but there you go. Darkson (Yabba Dabba Doo!) 22:00, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* What's with all the reanmings? I, for one, would have appreciated knowing I was speaking to Aldebaer. El_C 22:03, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* You would have known had you ever bothered to actually look at the diffs I presented above instead of only reverting my good-faithed (if alcohol-tuned) edits from user talk pages. See here. But you're doing just great as an admin.
* Oh, and JzG: Ah, well, nevermind. <IP_ADDRESS> 00:34, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
* At that point, I had figured it out. Irpen asked you not to edit his talk page any further, and yet you kept doing it. You are doing so right now, even though you are supposed to be blocked. Again, please stop block evading. El_C 01:34, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
Hm. The funny thing is, I knew beforehand that nothing was going to come off me posting here. Irpen doesn't get as much as a warning. Because it is clear that I never contributed anything. And JzG is not a cabal-member. He's just your friendly next-door admin. Yes. Exactly. Sort of. On the other hand, I do agree with the block and it's extension to a week. May I suggest extending it to a month? That would be perfect. <IP_ADDRESS> 00:43, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
* With all of your socking, a month may actually be appropriate. You need to stop evading your block please. —Wknight94 (talk) 00:49, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
* Deal. <IP_ADDRESS> 01:16, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
* Heard it before. M er cury 01:39, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
* *sigh* - Mr. Z- man 02:20, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
Accusations of copyright violations and legal threats on Talk:Catiline
has repeatedly removed material from this page, replacing it with "Do not revert. Don't play tyrant with license to publish this has been revoked." This user also alleges that someone is harassing him/her online and has threatened to contact the FBI (here). Several editors (including myself) have undone this user's edits to this page but another, anonymous user reverts those changes, calling them vandalism. I'm not sure exactly what's going on here but I figured it would be best to draw attention to it. ~ Enviroboy TalkContribs - 23:31, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* I've added warnings about legal threats to the users talkpage and the article talkpage. There seems to be a revert war going on the Talk page of this article which I'm loath to get involved in - suggest an admin has a look. Exxolon 23:52, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
I'm being harrassed there. My writings are copyrighted. Everyone concerned has had the opportunity to follow the argument, but you may not publish my writings any longer than I say you can. I've deleted some material which is going to be used after the argument has been refined and edited in another document.
In addition to that someone you are calling an editor is an internet stalker. That individual is the one starting an undo/revert war.Inopibus 00:02, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
* Can you clarify please? If you're referring to text you've contributed to Wikipedia under the GFDL then you can't revoke your permission to publish it. If someone is copying text you've written elsewhere then we can and will delete it for you. Exxolon 00:06, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
BTW: This individual started this by publishing personal information about me as well.Inopibus 00:05, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
* If that's correct it's a violation of Privacy and can be dealt with as well. Exxolon 00:09, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
* Any admin willing to look at this lot? I'm really not sure exactly what the problems are here. Exxolon 00:13, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
* The text that you removed from the talk page appears to be from a 2006/07 article by E.H. Campbell. The full text is available online but is copyrighted, meaning that it should not have been published in Wikipedia. ~ Enviroboy TalkContribs - 00:15, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
* Ye gods what a mess this appears to be. Legal threats, copyright violations, stalking and privacy violation accusations, anonymous Ips and a new user and possible language barriers too. We could really use some admin oversight here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Exxolon (talk • contribs) 00:22, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
* Morven and I are trying to sort it out. Good times... --Haemo 01:37, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
* I've looked at it and frankly User:Inopibus seems incapable of comporting himself appropriately on Wikipedia. I have placed him under an indefinite block for disruption, legal threats and sockpuppeting. Please inform me if you disagree with this block. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 07:31, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
* Morven, if the blocked user is still having issues with the copyright matters, send him to Contact us/Article problem/Copyright so we can sort it out at WP:OTRS. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 07:42, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
* Good block, and Zscout, there's nothing we can do. ⇒ <font face="Euclid Fraktur"> SWAT Jester Son of the Defender 07:49, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
* Indeed, although I feel that the content he posted himself on the talk page and then withdrew could be deleted, since we don't really need it and there's no point in antagonizing him further. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 08:47, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
Sock alert
Judging from how it's signing its comments, User:Thatsafactjack appears to be a sock of User:Daddy Kindsoul, who's been causing a fair amount of annoyance lately. Might be a good idea to shut it down quickly. Tony Fox (arf!) 06:16, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
* Passes WP:DUCK with flying colors. Blocked, and notified Yamla. <small style="background:#fff;border:#8b0000 1px solid;color:#000;padding:0px 3px 1px 4px;white-space:nowrap">east<big style="color:#090">. 718 at 07:26, 11/5/2007
* Thanks, everyone. --Yamla 15:24, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
Australian federal election, 2007
Per http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Australian_federal_election%2C_2007#Images_of_Leaders Brendan is reverting good faith image additions, and in the process is achieving imbalance with an two leader images for one party, and one leader image for the other. Per archive talk, he refuses to allow consensus to form in the community before engaging in a revert war. This time I will not break 3RR, I am at 2RR, I would appreciate some intervention this time. Thankyou. Timeshift 08:14, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
I reject any allegation that I have obstructed consensus. Far from it. All editors are encouraged to join the talkpage discussion so that consensus can be allowed to unfold. "Good faith" is not a criterion for content inclusion and consensus is formed by discussion, not by inserting content and guarding it against all comers. --Brendan [ contribs ] 08:40, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
* There has been very little discussion so I suggest just continuing discussion on the talk page. I don't see any reason for a post here--Phoenix-wiki (talk · contribs) 17:44, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
User:EasyTarget
The whole situation started a few days ago, when an IP Complication caused a picture of Jean Charles De Menezes with the word "Own3d" to be uploaded under my name, and a peice of text edited to say "Jean Charles De Menezes was A brazilian National Living in britain who was OWNED by police" under my name. Following this, I received two messages - one from User:<IP_ADDRESS> and another from user:EasyTarget- |See here. In one of the messages left by EasyTarget, I was called a "troll", and "Hard of thinking", when I responded to this, I was likened to a "Criminal", and easyTarget wen't so far as to state that I personally shot him. I don't know where to go from here. This is Zanusi 10:38, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
* I have no opinion on the upload (it looks bad that it is on your account, but cookie reassigning is close to impossible because of Wikipedia hashes on cookies, even if IPs are reassigned - but it may be possible to check if an account is compromised via checkuser), but I do think that EasyTarget's comments were inappropriate. (Non-admin) x42bn6 Talk Mess 11:17, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
* Could you post any explination/proof/evidence over this "IP Complication". Are you not responsible for the security of your own account? Its what you are suggesting happened is completely impossible.--<IP_ADDRESS> 11:31, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
* User:Zanusi uploads an image of Jean Charles De Menezes, with the word "OWN3D" written across his face. Zanusi then gets upset when accused of being a troll. The actions were trolling, and accusing Zanusi of being "hard of thinking" is quite reasonable, as it really was a stupid thing to do. I've indef blocked Zanusi. I'll tell him on his talk page that I'll consider reducing the block if he apologises and promises not to troll again. I don't think anyone would believe the account had been compromised (but if it had been, that's as good a reason for it to be blocked). Neil ☎ 12:25, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
* Apparently I am "blackmailing him into apologising", so he is refusing to admit he uploaded the image, despite the upload logs showing he in fact did. He can stay blocked, as far as I am concerned. Neil ☎ 12:53, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
* I've explained to the user regarding cookies and IPs. The user has made some good faith edits in the past (amongst other not-so-good ones, but we are never fully innocent), and I think that even though this is a fairly serious BLP offence, it suggests an account that hasn't been logged out in all public places. I hope that if he apologises, he can have a reduced block. x42bn6 Talk Mess 13:48, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
* Unfortunately, it isn't a BLP problem. The Metropolitan Police saw to that. Relata refero 14:01, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
* I've unblocked Zanusi, following an apology and a promise to be more careful when editing from public computers. Any further naughtyness from this account and the block may be reapplied. Neil ☎ 17:48, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
User:Tmoney2677
New account used only for vandalism. Gwen Gale 14:25, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
* I've issued them a uw-vandalism4. In the future, you can report this kind of simple vandalism to Administrator intervention against vandalism. Thanks, Satori Son 14:31, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
* Ok, thanks for telling me about it. Gwen Gale 14:37, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
Need A User Banned, More
User:Russellmba has had a long history of vandalism which I don't feel like rehashing again, but actions were recently taken against him for repeated vandalism of one particular article. I'm back now asking for a full user ban based on his newest escalation of vandalism. This user has been nothing but disruptive. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fife Club (talk • contribs)
* 1) He is now editing what other editors have written to him on his user talk page, including tampering with the warning messages he's been given. He changed what I wrote and signed, which makes it look like I wrote that message, which is clearly more vandalism.
* 2) He is making (juvenile) personal attacks against other editors..
* He has already been indefblocked (as of 2 November). Are you asking for his talk page to be protected too? пﮟოьεԻ 5 7 16:43, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
✅ - talk page protected. Neil ☎ 16:48, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
User:Privatemusings
I have blocked. I have given a lengthy explanation on the talk page. Basically, having registered an alternate account in order to contribute to a heated and contentious debate (acceptable) he has stepped outside those bounds to edit-war over links to a blog whihc contains the usual bullshit allegation about SlimVirgin. Whether or not the blog is acceptable in the article, it is not acceptable in my view for this editor to operate what would appear to be good hand / bad hand accounts in content disputes. Several people have expressed acute discomfort about Privatemusings' editing patterns, including this:
* http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Robert_Black_%28professor%29&diff=167542856&oldid=167537969
* http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Robert_Black_%28professor%29&diff=167547955&oldid=167545420
* http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Robert_Black_%28professor%29&diff=167724429&oldid=167701098
* http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Robert_Black_%28professor%29&diff=167763380&oldid=167759942
* http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Robert_Black_%28professor%29&diff=167978680&oldid=167967496
and here supporting an earlier revert by a Jon Awbrey sock:
* http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Robert_Black_%28professor%29&diff=167515431&oldid=167507361
Enough is enough, I think. Guy (Help!) 23:00, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
* Agree that the account was no longer being used to contribute to a contentious debate, instead to edit war, and deserved to be be blocked. I note you blocked with autoblocks on. I suggest you unblock and reblock with the autoblock disengaged. Neil ☎ 23:12, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
* Maybe tomorrow. The main account holder could possibly use an enforced reminder about acceptable behavior. As long as he doesn't post unblock, he won't give away who he is/was. Thatcher131 23:21, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
* That was an oversight on my part, so yes I will fix it. I've no desire to give even the slightest appearance of being punitive here. I think that the user got carried away and forgot himself, nothing more. Guy (Help!) 23:36, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
* OK, fixed. Guy (Help!) 23:37, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
* Thanks Guy. Do we really have to spatter the user page with a "haha we got you" indef blocked template? Neil ☎ 23:44, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
* Endorse block, using an "alternative account" just to edit war, sorry but no. Jbeach sup 23:50, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
* Using an alternative account for hot topics is explicitly allowed. "If you want to edit a "hot" or controversial subject you may use a sock puppet so long as you do not use any other account to edit the same subject or make it appear that multiple people support the same action". No one's claiming PM's being blocked for abusing sock puppets. --Alecmconroy 09:53, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
Definitely a positive application of Jimbo's new 'take no less hassle from trolls' attitude. good block. ThuranX 00:09, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
I have been forced to protect PM's user talk page. See the edit history there, and the reasoning will be self-evident. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 01:22, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
I have no desire to evade a ban, so suffice to say I consider the behaviour of involved editors to be questionable at best. I entreat other uninvolved admins to evaluate the situation, and hope this comment can remain. I won't post again until at least my talkpage is unprotected. Many Thanks, Privatemusings 02:22, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
So I'm reading through this again, and while I agree with the greater substance of this block, in that PM has gone from contentious high end Arbcom/admin stuff to editing regular, contentious articles. That said, the edits in the list above reflect the core of the difficulties involved in the EL debates. Is that site being discussed in any particular location? It does certainly seem to have credibility overall for the topic, but due to that singular section, becomes objectionable. I'd like to see the discussion in action, as might others interested in both topics. Anyone got a link? ThuranX 04:03, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* I don't understand. Where in WP:SOCK does it state that participation in discussion is legitimate, but the moment that contentious editing is involved, its illegitimate? Failing that statement in policy, I don't see how this block can stand. Does JzG wish to confirm that PM's "good hand" account is also participating in the same content dispute simultaneously? Because that is abusive, and the only justification for the block. Relata refero 09:35, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
OUTRAGEOUS
UTTERLY UNACCEPTABLE. Completely unbelievable. Private Musings has been a polite and kind contributor to the situation, and his anonymous mediation was extremely helpful in reaching the solution that was reached at WP:NPA. PM has always been upfront about being a sockpuppet, and as this block shows, he has good reason to fear that his connecting his view on BADSITES to his main account would make his wiki-life a living hell. WP:SOCK is quite clear that socks are legitimate in cases like this.
The so-called "edit warring" isn't much of a war at all-- it's a content dispute, and one that is largely resolved. Growing consensus on multiple pages has come down in support of links of this sort in general, and the article's talk page shows substantial support for this links in particular. PM's edits were supported by consensus.
And if his edits look repetitive, it's merely because he was combating seven edits worth of vandalism by an indefinitely blocked user, Throwawayarb, who was using the sockpuppet MOASPN to evade a block. Reverting vandalism by an indefblocked user is NOT edit warring, and you can't with a straight face say that this is a case of ban-worthy edit warring. The fact that the blocking user is someone who has vocally disagrees with blockee about the content dispute only makes the block look even more indefensible.
This is a travesty. We all know PM is not being blocked for "edit warring"-- his edits just don't meet the standard. at is that links of this We all know PM isn't being blocked for being a sock-- WP:SOCK explicitly endorses PM's actions. PM is being blocked for advocating a position that the blocking admin disagrees with.
This is the sort of thing someone should be desysopped over. --Alecmconroy 09:09, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* I think a less shrill objection with more diffs would be more convincing. I support the block. - Jehochman Talk 09:57, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* I apologize for the shrillness, this action just sorta confirms my worst fears. All through the Attack-Site Arbcom case, shrill lunatics tried to say BADSITES was just about a clique of bullies trying to use wikipedia as a platform to bully others. I always told those people they were crazy-- that everyone on all sides was acting in good faith and the pro-BADSITES people were just trying to protect the rights of all to contribute to Wikipedia using a pseudonym. This block, however, demonstrates to me that in at least for one admin doesn't give a damn about the right to edit pseudonymously if you have a disagreement with him.
* I just really didn't want this to be true of Guy, or anyone else, ya know? I wanted us all to be bigger than that. I'm pretty devastated to see him act this badly. --Alecmconroy 10:13, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* Then try talking with Guy civilly. Maybe there is more information that Guy can share with you. - Jehochman Talk 10:18, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* My ears are open, and I have contacted Guy about this. But the more important discussion now is going to be how we handle Guy's behavior. --Alecmconroy 10:58, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* The WP:SOCK policy says:
* Use of sock puppets is discouraged in most cases.
* The reason for discouraging sock puppets is to prevent abuses such as a person voting more than once in a poll, or using multiple accounts to circumvent Wikipedia policies or cause disruption.
* If someone uses multiple accounts, it is recommended that he or she provide links between the accounts, so it is easy to determine that they are shared by one individual.
* Until a week ago the policy also said: Multiple accounts should not be used as a way of avoiding the scrutiny of your fellow editors by ensuring you leave no audit trail.
* While I vocally opposed Privatemusings' use of a sock account to write policy, I did not seek to have the account blocked. But using the sock account in a content dispute is different. The account is now being used in disruptive dramas that don't further WP's goals. No wonder the user doesn't want his main account tarred by his activities. I've mentioned it before but I think that using a pseudonym to defend the outing of another user is hypocritical. He did so hypothetically on a policy page, but actually on a main space page. While I don't suggest outing him or identifying his main account, I do suggest that there is no good reason for him to hide behind a double veil while pulling away the veils of others. He can still edit under his main account, and comment on any issue. This isn't an editor ban, only an account block. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 10:15, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* We should also compare the block of Privatemusings to the recent block of User:MOASPN and related accounts. The two cases appear to share similar behaviors: linking to an outing site and using a sock to make contentious proposals. I'd ask those who oppose this block if they also oppose the block of MOASPN. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 10:28, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* The PM account has not be used in disrupting dramas. The account has been used in valid policy and content disputes, and in EVERY case where there's been a dispute, arbcom & community consensus has ultimately sided AGAINST GUY and WITH PM. I work very very hard to WP:AGF, but it's very hard to see this as anything more than retribution. That he didn't even take the time to get an uninvolved admin to do the block makes it almost impossible to see this as anything but retribution. --Alecmconroy 10:34, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* Balls. The account was being used to edit war over a (much discussed) blog link on the Robert Black (professor) article - not what the original intent was. Having a seperate unconnected sock account to discuss and contribute towards potentially contentious policy is one thing, and what the account was originally being used for. Using it to edit war over knowingly contentious content is another - as soon as that happens, you don't have the right to use a single purpose sock account to edit war. Neil ☎ 11:17, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* WP:SOCKS disagrees with you. "If you want to edit a "hot" or controversial subject you may use a sock puppet so long as you do not use any other account to edit the same subject or make it appear that multiple people support the same action."
* And even if it were true that PM had somehow accidentally violated WP:SOCKS, the solution is to start a discussion about whether his actions were consistent with WP:SOCKS-- a policy he has worked hard to comply with. If it emerged that he had accidentally misread a minor detail of WP:SOCKS, I'm sure he'd apologize and refrain from such action in the future.
* The solution is NOT to jump straight to an indefinite ban. PM, both as PM and as his true identity, is a very respected editor who's done a lot to help us find consensus over at NPA. He's made many many valuable contributions. An indefinitely ban, if it stands, is just a transparent attempt to silence him--- or at least to silence him from speaking pseudonymously . --Alecmconroy 11:27, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* Pedantry first - a ban is not a block is not a ban. The account, Privatemusings, is blocked. The user behind the PM account is not banned You block accounts, you ban the person behind the account. If you really want to wikilawyer, though, you need to read the part of WP:SOCK about "good hand, bad hand" accounts. The PM account had become a bad hand account being used to edit war. An edit war is, by its nature, disruptive. The PM account was being disruptive. Neil ☎ 11:37, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* a "Bad hand" is an account you use to violate policy. Do you really believe PM's four measely edits, over three days, to revert a vandal who was using a SOCK to circumvent a ban, constitute a "disruptive edit war" which merits an indefinite block, rather than a warning? PM's edits reverted a vandal, are supported by consensus, his version is STILL the current version, and were examples of "Defending the Encyclopedia", not "disruptive edit warring".
* It's a trumped up charge, and Guy should be ASHAMED. It's like that joke about racism in the US South, where a totally drunken white driver crashes into an african-american pedestrian, and when the cops arrive, the wounded pedestrian is sent to jail for jaywalking. PM has been an icon of good editing behavior--- his only real "crime" is that when Guy and PM were participants in the BADSITES arbcom case, PM's side "won". ---Alecmconroy 11:48, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* Alec, I know the identity of PM's other account(s). I have checked very carefully the histories of both, and this is not, in my considered opinion, a valid use of an alternate account. Meta debate would have been OK, but not the content edits and link advocacy in respect of content. That crosses the line into good hand / bad hand. The route for appeals is ArbCom, by email. The very small number of individuals with whom I have shared the information does include at least three arbitrators, and one arbitrator has expressed privately that he also sees this as lying outside the bounds of permissible use of an alternate account. So, ArbCom is the place for appeals. Oh, wait, CBD has unblocked despite not knowing PM's other account. Way to go. Score one for the troll enablers. Guy (Help!) 11:51, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* Guy - I specifically told you in very strict confidence that I would feel upset and violated at you sharing personal information with any other wiki editors. Did you in fact do just that? I trusted you. I really think it's best I stop now, lest i say something i regret. I am very glad you will escalate this. It is a new low. Privatemusings 12:16, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* That's the really sad part about all this. Until today, I truly believed Guy just really believed in the total sanctity of users privacy. When he objected to PM being able to edit using a pseudonym, it was very disheartening. If it turns out to be true that Guy has started engaged in limited "outings", violating private trust, I'm totally speechless. Not even angry, just.... sad. --Alecmconroy 12:33, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* JzG-- regardless of your personal opinion, I think you know that you are not an uninvolved admin. If PM really is an inappropriate use of a sock account, there's a whole encyclopedia full of people who can make that call. For you to use your admin tools here was a clear instance of using admin tools to gain the upperhand in a dispute.
* Now, you say you have secret evidence the PM account is inappropriate-- all well and good. Send it to arbcom. But if you failed to recognize something as simple as "do not indefinitely block someone you are in a dispute with", you're clearly far too close to this issue for us to trust your judgment about more complex issues like whether PM account is inappropriate. --Alecmconroy 12:09, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* No, it's not secret, it's just private, and it will stay that way. I have no prior dispute with this user of which I'm aware, it's nothing to do with his opinion on a particular issue and everything to do with controversial actions (rather than opinions), which places the actions of this account outside of what is permissible. If this user had not admitted to being a sock, we'd have blocked it as a disruptive [{WP:SPA]] a long time ago. I know the main account's identity because PM told me by email. That does not suggest that PM considers we had a prior problem. What happened here is that a self-confessed alternate account registered for the purpose of contributing to a contentious policy debate, stepped outside of that carefully defined arena and began edit-warring over links to a blog repeating part of the same harassment as was addressed in the Attack Sites arbitration. The way to handle such matters is to contact the blog owner and point out that there is no evidence to support the assertion, not to edit-war over links to a damaging, hurtful and false accusation. I have shared the details of PM's main account with only a handful of individuals, mainly arbitrators and Jimbo. I will not be posting the name of the main account here or anywhere else.
* There is no dispute for me to gain an upper hand in. This is 100% about the limits placed on use of alternate accounts, and stepping outside those limits to link to an ongoing and unacceptable campaign of harassment perpetuated by a number of justly banned users.
* Nothing in the main accounts edits actually mitigates that. You have once before found that your speculations were inaccurate, and you gracefully apologised. Your speculations are again inaccurate. Guy (Help!) 13:03, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* Please consider engaging here I sincerely wish you would spend as much effort talking to me as you have about me. I remain upset, and uncomprehending as to the support you think your rationale has in policy. Privatemusings 13:20, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* Guy, IF what you say about this being about "the limits placed on use of alternate accounts" is so then why would the proper course of action NOT be to tell Privatemusings that he was exceeding those limits, get consensus agreement that this was the case, and then place a short block followed by successively longer ones if he violated those limits? Why was the proper course of action to yourself unilaterally decide that he had 'exceeded the limits' and immediately place an indefinite block. No warning. No public discussion. No possibility of the user agreeing not to exceed these limits. He must be blocked immediately and have no possibility even of discussing the matter. That's the right way to go about things? Then, after he has AGREED to not continue the action you were objecting to he STILL has to remain blocked? This is about users not exceeding the limits of alternate accounts, but he has to be blocked even after he has agreed to do so pending discussion of the limits? Seriously, in what way is this NOT a punitive block? --CBD 13:42, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
Talkpage unprotected
The reasoning behind Jeffrey Gustafson being "forced" to protect PM's talkpage isn't self-evident to me. JG, have you thought through the coercive choice that you're actually forcing on the user by that protection? PM does have another account to use, yes, but he obviously can't use his main account to discuss this issue without outing that main account. It's precisely the requests to out his main account that he wants to discuss, and we have now created a situation where such discussion by him would become pointless the moment it began. Not good. Supposing he has pertinent things to say? (Full disclosure: I know who he is, and he's not a troll by any definiton of the term.) As for his "going on and on", what about it? It's not necessary for people who don't want to read his arguments to go to his talkpage in order to be offended. Full protection of the talkpage of a banned account is a very serious business, since it's a complete gag. It shouldn't be undertaken unless we're really forced to. I've unprotected the page. Bishonen | talk 10:55, 1 November 2007 (UTC).
* I don't see why the talk page had to be protected. And you've halved the possible people PM could be by saying it's a "he"! Neil ☎ 11:17, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* Uh, that only works if half of Wikipedia users were female, which they're not. Assuming malenesss is still a very logical action here. Natalie 13:39, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
My take
So, the Robert Black (professor) article had a link to his blog on it for a long time and all was well with the world. The page hadn't even been edited in over a month. Then on 10/26 the Professor made a blog post referring to allegations made on another site about one of our users here. The next day User:Privacyisall, to all appearances a sockpuppet created for the sole purpose of edit warring on this issue, removes the blog link from the article because it has now magically become an 'attack site'. Great contention erupts and suddenly there are all sorts of reasons why this blog link, which was perfectly acceptable and not at all controversial before, is now completely anathema to Wikipedia policies (all of them). Others disagree, edit warring ensues, Privatemusings restores the link a few times, he is indefinitely blocked.
That's the background. So far as I can see, no one warned Privatemusings that edit warring on this issue could lead to an indefinite block. Nor does anything in policy say that sockpuppets who engage in edit warring are immediately blocked for all time. Nor was the 'Privacyisall' account blocked for doing precisely the same thing in precisely the same edit war without any of Privatemusings' prior history of good contributions. The admin making the block (along with several of those supporting it) has a clear 'side' and emotional investment in the issue... and finally, Privatemusings has already stated that he would stay away from the page, thus removing any 'preventative' nature to this block.
I'm going to unblock. IF there is a consensus, rather than a thin excuse for suppression newly invented by a handful of people, that sockpuppets editing on contentious issues are not allowed to edit war at all then we can certainly see whether Privatemusings' is willing to abide by that and block him if he is not. However, there needs to actually BE such a consensus... and it'd be good to TELL the person about it... rather than blocking first and making up a reason afterwords. Only blocking the side that disagrees with you is, along with the lack of consensus or warning, also a fairly poor indicator for this having been a fully dispassionate and impartial action. --CBD 11:47, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* CBDunkerson...did you discuss the matter with the blocking administrator? As it states in policy: Administrators should not unblock users blocked by other administrators without first attempting to contact the blocking administrator and discuss the matter with them. It may not necessarily be obvious what the problem necessitating blocking was, and it is a matter of courtesy and common sense to consult the blocking administrator.--MONGO 12:23, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* I support the unblocked, on the caveat that he doesnt use that account to eidt war. The editing was in the same vein as what the account was previously being used for (Attack sites) so still a legitimate use for that purpose, ie keep contentious issues away from the main account. Apart from one spate of edit warring, he has been very productive with that account and has been intelligently conducting himself on the policy pages. He wasn't given a chance to stop the misuse, its quite clear he isnt using the other account to hide from the rules, so I support the unblock. Viridae Talk 11:56, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* The consensus above seems to have been a block was reasonable, and an unblock would be against consensus. If we're going to unblock, I would say that if the Privatemusings account returns to its original purpose - that of working with contentious policy and suchlike - then fine. If it reverts back to edit warring, someone can always reblock. Neil ☎ 11:59, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* From my experiences with him, I don't think he will return to warring. Viridae Talk 12:02, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* Not that that is the point. Nothing at WP:SOCK enjoins editors to not make contentious edits in the areas in which they have chosen to set up alternate accounts. JzG's stated rationale above "Meta debate would have been OK, but not the content edits and link advocacy in respect of content. That crosses the line into good hand / bad hand" carefully does not respond to my specific question as to whether PM used his main account to abusively manipulate consensus or disrupt WP, which is what we are concerned about. Relata refero 12:07, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* PM's main account was also active in this contentious area. Guy (Help!) 12:50, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* That is not true, and a dirty trick because of course I can't defend that point. Low. Privatemusings 13:43, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* CBD, this is an unacceptable reversion of a solid, consensus supported, block. Did you discuss this matter with the blocking administrator, Guy, first, per our blocking policy? Why have you unblocked against consensus? Privatemusings is a clear goodhand/badhand account (and the "goodhand" side isn't actually all that "good" if you ask me, I know who it is but won't reveal it publicly at this time) and needs to stay blocked. Please stop this troll enabling behaviour, CBD. ++Lar: t/c 12:50, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* JzG did not make the case that Privatemusings was a "troll". He did not make the case that Privatemusings was abusing multiple accounts. Indeed, even when repeatedly asked whether Privatemusings was using more than one account in this matter no one said that he had been. None of that was given as any part of the reason for blocking. The block was placed for edit warring on this issue. The edit war was over. The user had agreed not to continue it. It is frequent practice to remove blocks in such circumstance. It is frequent practice to remove blocks placed by admins involved in dispute with the target. It is frequent practice to remove blocks of excessive duration - such as indefinite for a 3RR violation. Et cetera. If a case can be made for Privatemusings abusing multiple accounts and being a troll, as has been claimed subsequent to my unblock, then that case should be made. However, those aren't the things he was blocked for and the extensive discussion above included repeated requests for clarification if there WERE any such situation. There was plenty of discussion. People asked for a VALID reason to this block. None was given. An indefinite block, without discussion, without warning, for 3RR violation is NOT valid and thus I reversed it. If you have cause for the accusations which you and others have subsequently made against Privatemusings, that he is a troll and sock-abuser, you might want to make THAT case. --CBD 13:28, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* You need to state "I'm thinking of unblocking, because of X Y and Zed" and then see what is said, instead of unilaterally unblocking in defiance of policy, which says seek consensus before the unblock, which you do not have. You seem to do this regularly and you need to stop, in my view. As for the rest, this user is an acknowledged sock, but it is a sock of a user who is making unhelpful edits in the same contentious area that this essentially SPA account is. The user should use their main account instead of obfuscating matters, because they are using this sock in a way unsupported by sock policy. Didn't we just go through this "seek consensus first" with Zscout? ++Lar: t/c 13:41, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* It is not at all true that my other account is active in the same area - that's hurtful, insulting, and a lie. Privatemusings 13:46, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* CBD: PS.. it is not acceptable in my view for this editor to operate what would appear to be good hand / bad hand accounts in content disputes. That's from the original notice, the very first post to this thread. So your allegation that JzG claimed this was only a revert related block appears to be unfounded, that he did not make the case for multiple account abouse. You need to act a bit less in a way that gives the appearance of rashness going forward, I think. If you had posted "I have qualms and am thinking of unblocking" I am sure several people would have made that point for you. I've seen the edits and I am satisfied this is an abusive account. It's borderline by current lax standards but those standards are changing, for the better.
* PM: Incorrect. I so assert. Anyone who knows the identity of both accounts can verify it. ++Lar: t/c 13:49, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* I shall email CBD, if I may, and should he have the time to take a look, I would welcome his views. Privatemusings 13:52, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* CBD has used sysop tools in a controversial way with respect to this case, so he has strong incentives to justify his own actions. I don't think he can be impartial. Can you perhaps ask somebody who is uninvolved for an opinion? I think that would work better for you. - Jehochman Talk 13:57, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* I'd be happy to - it would be particularly good to find a highly respected admin who's around at the moment - could someone put their hand up? Sincere thanks, Privatemusings 13:59, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* Lar, 'good hand / bad hand' does not equate to 'using multiple accounts in a discussion'. The fact that people repeatedly asked whether Privatemusings was using multiple accounts in the discussion clearly shows that this was NOT established in the 'original notice' as you are claiming. The only apparent 'bad hand' action stated by JzG was the edit warring on the link. He has subsequently re-affirmed that it was this posting of the link which 'exceeded the limits allowed' for sock accounts. So no, I cannot agree with your revisionist casting of the discussion. If Guy had been making the case of multiple accounts being used in this debate from the beginning he would not have been repeatedly asked whether there was any evidence of such. He also presumably would have responded to those requests with verification of the multi-account involvement... which he didn't.
* As you now claim that there IS such abuse... I'm curious why you have not blocked both accounts? I overturned an indefinite block for 3RR violation. I stand by that action. I took it because repeated requests for any valid support for the block were not met... all that was claimed was 3RR violation with a link to a disputed site. Clearly insufficient for indef block without warning. You have now made accusations of much more serious violations. If you stand by these then block for them. I don't have evidence one way or the other and thus would direct the matter to people with the access to look into it. --CBD 14:04, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* What matters is not how many times you asked a question, what matters is whether the question had already been answered, and whether there was consensus for an overturn prior to your acting, and whether you consulted with the original admin. I decline to overturn your overturn. I think I am much less likely to undo administrative actions taken by other administrators than you are, so I personally decline to overturn your unblock at this time. That should not be construed as support for your action in contravention of our custom, practice, and policy, nor should it be construed as not standing by the fact that we have apparent "bad hand" and "worse hand" accounts active in this overall matter. The primary account, which HAS participated in discussions about specific outing users and the policy ramifications of it, is not, at this time blocked, to the best of my knowledge, so can participate if it wishes to. ++Lar: t/c 20:48, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* And even 3rr wasn't violated. The four reverts took place over three different days, and they just reverted vandalism by a banned user. --Alecmconroy 14:49, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* 3RR is a bright line, not an entitlement. ++Lar: t/c 20:48, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
The Horse's Mouth
I wholly reject any notion that any edit warring I participated in was block worthy. Hey, I also reject the notion that I edit warred at all (see my talk page). I sincerely appreciate being unblocked - this has been a horrible experience. I shan't edit at all on the Prof Black article, but stick to the talk page, and will try and avoid Guy, who seems to be firmly of the same opinion. As a consistent advocate of less drama, I'd like to ask all folks to move along, so the bot can do his work in 24hrs, and this can be behind us. Privatemusings 12:02, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* You weren't blocked for edit warring. You were blocked for stepping outside the bounds of what is acceptable for an alternate account. At least one arbitrator said this was unacceptable behaviour even before knowing the identity of the main account. This block was based on a review of the contributions of both your main and your alternate accounts. I am escalating this. Guy (Help!) 12:14, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* Guy-- why are you escalating? You've had your fun-- PM got blocked, and then his talk page blocked, and everyone got all upset, and we've had all this drama, and now finally we've accomplished what a simple discussion could have accomplished to begin with-- PM agrees not to edit the Prof Black article. And there is a strong consensus at the Prof Black article that the link is okay, so PM doesn't even have any reason to come back there anyway. Can't you just let it go now? --Alecmconroy
* Fun? Fun? What the bloody hell do you mean by that? You think I blocked Privatemusings for fun? That is an absolutely outrageous suggestion and you should retract it immediately. In case you hadn't realised by now, there is a serious ongoing problem with offsite harassment and abuse of multiple accounts, and editign by proxy, to promote that harassment. I reject in the strongest possible terms any suggestion that this is anything other than deadly serious. Guy (Help!) 12:48, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* For that I will sincerely apologize. I'm an American, and it seems to be our national vice to assume everyone is familiar with American English idioms. To "have fun" or "to have fun and games" does not literally mean you actually had "fun". I apologize you thought I meant otherwise. --Alecmconroy 13:00, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* I am going to disengage - essentially out of blind fury (see above). This can certainly wait a few hours before being discussed further. Privatemusings 12:20, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* PM, if there's nothing wrong with what you've been doing then why are you using a secondary account? You said you wanted to "protect myself from any anger or hot feeling". You expected a passionate reaction to your editing and you got it. Why act shocked? The fireworks and hot feelings are are over now. Let's move on. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 12:55, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* the attack sites lot is a very contentious subject, which gets a lot of feeling going - I can understand wanting to use an alternitive account. Viridae Talk 12:57, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* Yes, so can I. But that does not give carte blanche to then use that alternate account to edit-war over links to Brandt and Bagley's pet assertion about a Wikipedia user and administrator. It was that extension form advocacy of a controversial opinion to performance of controversial actions in respect of content, that was and is the problem. Guy (Help!) 13:17, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* I'm confused--- In your eyes, was PM blocked for sockpuppet abuse, for edit-warring, or for being part of a campaign of harassment? If he had made the Prof Black edits with his main account, would you have indef blocked him still, or would that have not merited an indef block? --Alecmconroy 13:27, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* I deal with five contentious issues every day. Do I use a fresh account for each? No, not hardly. The editor has not been banned. One of his secondary acounts has been blocked. It isn't a big deal. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 13:50, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* The big deal is the implication for everybody else. Relata refero 16:10, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
Outing?
There's been a serious allegation made upwards in the thread, and I just want to get to the bottom of it, and instead of making allusions which might not be true, just address it up front with straight talk.
JzG, PM claims here that he confided in you, by email, and revealed his real name and other accounts to you. According to PM, he trusted you as an administrator of Wikipedia not to reveal his identity to others. This is a serious trust, and as an admin of the project, it's important people be able to trust you to keep their confidences.
Now, there are two cases where I feel you would be justified in breaking that confidence.
* 1) According to the text of the email he's posted claims here, PM told you he trusted Admin X and Admin Y, and you could tell them if you wanted.
* 2) If you have a legitimate concern that PM has a conflict of interest, it might be appropriate to reveal his identity to the board or the arbitration committee.
Now, your posts on this thread suggest that you've had widespread conversations about PM's identity with a number of people, so I'm just gonna ask you point blank:
Aside from the groups listed above, have you revealed PM's identity to anyone at all?
I sincerely hope the answer is no and we can drop that part of things. --Alecmconroy 13:19, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
I really think PM and the community deserve an answer to this question.--Alecmconroy 14:59, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
discussion of outing question
* For the record, I independently determined this user's other account via CU, since this account was acting abusively. JzG did not need to reveal it to me. The primary account is editing in the same pages so really, as JzG said in the initial posting it is not acceptable in my view for this editor to operate what would appear to be good hand / bad hand accounts in content disputes. ++Lar: t/c 13:43, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* NOTE: "pages" does not mean the particular page in question that was being revert warred over, it means in the same general area, in particular the outing of editors and the drama surrounding efforts to deal with that unacceptable behaviour. ++Lar: t/c 19:03, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* Also for the record, discussing the abusive behavior pattern of multiple accounts used by the same editor on Wikipedia, as was done in this case, is not 'outing'. Outing would be when we engage in exposing the real life identity of someone who prefers to remain anonymous. Crum375 13:49, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* Well, if you prefer to call it "Deep and extreme violation of personal trust" instead of "outing", whichever. The point is, if I say to you "You're an admin of an important project, I want to confide in you", and you prove yourself to be unworthy of that trust, it's something that shouldn't happen. If a priest violates your trust, he shouldn't be a priest. If a psychologist breaks confidence, he shouldn't be a psychologist. Whether it's an "outing" or a "gossipping" or a "violation"-- it's definitely wrong.
* Mind you, I don't know that it did happen yet, but I thought I owed it to JzG to ask him straight out, rather than letting PM just make the allegations and letting them float. --Alecmconroy 14:06, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* Yes, there really is no point in complaining about "outing" PM to ArbCom when most of ArbCom are checkusers and the rest will be privvy to the ArbCom mailing list where such things are discussed. Thatcher131 13:51, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* I'm not worried about "outing" to arbcom. I encourage consultation with Arbcom. If he had a real concern, the responsible thing for Guy to do would be to ask the arbcom to rule whether or not to block PM. What I am WORRIED about, however, is the allegation that Guy basically told any other editors/admins that he felt like telling-- i.e. that Guy is inherently untrustworthy with private information. Again, I'm not saying this is true, that's why I'm asking straight out. --Alecmconroy 14:10, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* I would consider it highly unethical and a most serious breach of trust if Guy had shared this information with anyone who didn't already have it. I trusted Guy, in a bid to facilitate a dialog which he manifestly rejected. I might add that I believe checkuser data to only remain active for 30 days. I would like to demand a straight answer to Alec's reasonable question above. Privatemusings 14:05, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* The people who know are: the arbitrators, Jimbo, and a *very* small number of people I trust implicitly (wioth far more sensitive data about myself) whose opinion I sought in a completely private forum as a sanity check rather than simply relying on gut feel. The risk to privacy is negligible, I'd say. And if not, well, then I'm sorry, but a checkuser would have turned up the same and I was actually trying to avoid outing the main account. I would note that the main reason was to eliminate a number of suspicions which people have raised here and elsewhere. I will confirm that the main account is not a prolific or high profile editor, not a sysop, and almost certainly not who you think it is. And that's all that need be said. This account is traceable at two removes to the user's RWI, and I'm certainly not going to go about publishing that kind of information. If you trust me, then you also have to trust my judgement on who I can talk to in confidence. If you don't trust me, don't send me email. Frankly the amount of drama here is out of all proportion to the mainspace contributions of all the accounts this user has used. Or at least those he's told me about. Guy (Help!) 17:15, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* Why would a checkuser have been run in the first place? As I said before, we are only concerned if this editor was gaming consensus or disrupting wikipedia; in which case a checkuser could - and almost certainly would - have been submitted by someone who was not in possession of privileged information. Instead, a block was carried out by an involved admin on someone who was editing in support of what appears to be the consensus version of a difficult page. If the presence of privileged information indicated to you that WP was being disrupted on that page or on related pages, it would be appropriate for you to indicate to the individual who provided you with that information - as privately as you were told in the first place. Instead you have claimed that, in effect, a single editor who chooses to use two accounts to edit in different articles, at different times, and about different specific issues, can be blocked by an admin as long as the editor in question espouses the same principles in both accounts, and the admin disagrees with those principles - even if the principles themselves were not blockworthy. That is not policy as written. I would find it deeply disturbing if it were. That is why all the drama. Relata refero 17:32, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* Because this is an alternate account used for the single purpose of advocating contentious policy, which has stepped outside the bounds of that in order to edit-war over contentious content. I am wondering how many times I need to explain this. Guy (Help!) 18:10, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* Am I to understand alternate accounts cannot add contentious content any more?
* Just because it was created in order to advocate certain changes does not mean that it violates policy to make contentious edits in line with those changes, unless those edits themselves violate policy. Relata refero 18:16, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* Well that would depend. If the alternate account is being used to add and advocate contentious content in an area in which the main account previously expressed an interest, as here, then it's pretty clearly an abuse of the alternate account. Rather like people who register a new account, make enough edits to get the "next 50" link to go blue, and then pile into heated debates on the admin noticeboard despite not being an admin and in fact only having had an account for three weeks. We get very suspicious of such behaviour. Wikipedia is not a social network or a drama club, we're here to build an encyclopaedia, and the existence of a pool of troll enablers, egged on by banned users on an external site, is actively impeding the process of building a neutral encyclopaedia. Which is, of course, exactly what they want. The longer the likes of Privatemusings and Dan Tobias can keep the BADSITES drama going, and draw attention away form what those links are really about, the more people get sucked into thinking that linking to external harassment is a point of principle and removal of such links must be resisted, the harder it gets to remove links to banned editors trying to push their POV and mad theories into Wikipedia, and the more time we all waste on sterile debate while they continue to nudge the ocntent their way through sockpuppets, meatpuppets and even the occasional long-time user acting as a proxy. Of course, they have mutually conflicting desires: to use Wikipedia to promote their agenda, but simultaneously to wreck Wikipedia. I'd rather they failed in both aims, myself. The stakes are high for these kooks: they are on a holy crusade to bring The Truth™ to the world and correct the lies and conspiracies promoted by those pesky reliable sources we are so keen on. Guy (Help!) 18:25, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* "To add and advocate contentious content in an area in which the main account previously expressed an interest." Right, that's what I thought. In other words, account X exists, it makes a statement about a policy debate, realises that this is going to create too much drama, so it creates account Y to further engage with that policy debate, and ceases to use account X (or at least, largely ceases using X in that area). Is this what you imply is blockworthy? If so, I damn well think a bit more drama is required.
* ("Rather like people who register a new account, make enough edits to get the "next 50" link to go blue, and then pile into heated debates on the admin noticeboard despite not being an admin and in fact only having had an account for three weeks. We get very suspicious of such behaviour." Nice going! About as subtle as a ton of bricks. Don't get distracted, please. I'm not here to waste my time talking to you, but to continue to edit. Indeed, if you stop and think for a moment, it will be stunningly obvious why your actions recklessly imperil even the most innocent successor account. Which is why I am "piling into" this debate. But still, much easier to throw around remarks about suspicions, eh?)
* Finally: any attempt to claim that links to harassment websites are the main problem at WP is in itself problematic. The problem is not those links, which as far as I am concerned can stay or go. The problem is the behaviour of the guardians of our freedom to edit, which, as evidenced by you just now, steps over the line into chilling our ability to edit. Relata refero 18:36, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
The main problem at WP right now is not harassment websites. It is simply that there is too much drama, and our response to it is ineffective. That is caused and exacerbated, in my view, by two major factions... those that are here specifically to cause drama rather than being here to write an encyclopedia, and those well meaning but misguided folk that play into their hands by overturning sound blocks, or by defending even the worst trollish behaviour on process grounds, on "give them another chance" grounds and what have you. ++Lar: t/c 19:03, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* Regarding the outing question, if I understand position that Privatemusings has taken in the debates over policies, it would be OK if someone outed a RL or main account identity on a blog and if we linked to that blog in the course of normal encyclopedia writing. If it's OK to link to outing then maybe outing isn't such a big deal. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 20:48, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* In what universe will blocking people you disagree with over policy with the flimsiest of pretexts not increase drama? That universe is one in which WP will be pretty poorly written. Relata refero 04:55, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
The Last Straw
(uindent) Guy says: ''the existence of a pool of troll enablers, egged on by banned users on an external site, is actively impeding the process of building a neutral encyclopaedia. Which is, of course, exactly what they want. The longer the likes of Privatemusings and Dan Tobias can keep the BADSITES drama going, and draw attention away form what those links are really about, the more people get sucked into thinking that linking to external harassment is a point of principle''
Guy, you have just made a personal attack. You have called Private MUsings and Dan Tobias troll-enablers, implied they are affiliated with an external site, and suggested that they are part of a campaign to distract and deceive.
RETRACT your statement and apologize, CLARIFY that you didn't mean to say anything bad about PM or DanT, or PRESENT evidence to me that they really are involved in such a campaign. These sort of bullying tactics have gone on long enough. Either DanT and PM are good faith editors acting on principle and worthy of your respect, or they're bad faith editors just here to pull your leg. If you are going to make these wild allegations in public, I want you to at least email whatever evidence you have to suggest the PM and DanT are acting in bad faith. I'm sure PM and DanT will consent to letting me know whatever it is that you know.
After all that you've done today, that you would start namecalling, it appears you have learned absoultely nothing. If your secret evidence holds up, then I'll apologize, I'll apologize with bells on. If, however, you're full of crap, I think it's time for a user conduct RFC or another arbcom case. NPA applies to EVERYONE-- even you. --Alecmconroy 18:41, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* Nope. I will not retract it, because it's what I honestly believe. Sincere people are being cynically manipulated by individuals whose principal interest is not aligned in any way with Wikipedia's aims. The fact that they are sincere people does not in any way reduce the impact of what they do. Guy (Help!) 19:24, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* Do you consider Dan and PM to be the sincere people? or the cynical manipulators? --Alecmconroy 19:33, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* User Guy may be perceived as Wikipedian cowboy, but he has never (in my view) exploited WP in any way. He also deserves the benefit of the doubt. On the other hand User Alecmconroy states on his user page: "I don't care how wonderful Jimbo is, no one person deserves special authority over the will of the people" and he ends with "If we were going have an election for Jimbo the position, Jimbo the person would get my vote." Someone with beliefs like these is either a confused individual or have a problem with authority. I think he is both, and since he is not an admin and obviously too close to the subjects being discussed ( see his userpage and his "an essay on Badsites"). I think it would be best to remove or scratch from this discussion all his comments off the record. Jrod2 19:46, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* Jrod, have you READ WP:NPA? Way to go--- i complain about personal attacks, and you personally attack me. Beautiful. --Alecmconroy 20:44, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* You apparently do not understand the comments. His position nor his closeness to the issue have any bearing regarding the content of the statements. Either the content is valid or it is not. Bringing it up does not assume good faith. We are all here to build a better encyclopedia. Spryde 20:16, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* Unfortunately, I fear that is not correct. Not all of us are here for that purpose. And of those that think they are here for that, (I count myself among that grouping) I am not sure that all of us are actually effective at it, so that makes at least three groupings, as I said elsewhere in this thread. If you do not recognise that, then I think that is an issue. ++Lar: t/c 20:38, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* Hey user Spryde, maybe I don't understand user Alecmconroy's comments, but please don't give me the AGF shenanigan. Either you know Guy and respect and appreciate him for what he contributes to WP, or you don't. Jrod2 20:50, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* For the record, I support some of what Guy has done. I object to other things. Overall I say he has done wonderful things but this is not one of them. People aren't perfect nor should we expect them to be. And please do not call AGF shenanigans. I could have attacked your contribution much worse than I did but I AGF'ed and hoped that you did not understand the comments. That is all. Spryde 00:01, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
* Hello Spryde, should I thank you for your benign comment too? Please, get off your high horse. First, you stated that I was not assuming good faith and that my comments weren't valid to this argument and now you are being benign because "you could have attacked" me much worse? What kind of a silly game is this?. If, I go by your statement: "People aren't perfect nor should we expect them to be", I would speedy close this case. Jrod2 01:06, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
* I am trying to have a civil and productive conversation with you about this incident. I am not playing any games nor am I on any 'high horse'. I stated the comments you made were not appropriate because of the meaning of the statements made by Alecmconroy. I sincerely hope you are not twisting my words to prove a point. My statement about perfection is clear and taking it to extremes is illogical and absurd. Good day (night), sir. Spryde 01:47, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
* Please Spryde, I am respectfully asking you to stop disrupting this discussion. I don't want to waste space on this section defending myself and my NPOV to you. Your initial comment was to me insulting and you missed my point entirely. I only thought that the statements on Alec's user page were relevant and consistent with someone who have some strong opinions about authority and the establishment itself and that should be examined. That could have explained why he chooses to have a conflict with Guy and his ways. I also asked that he stops all this. Now, that he wants Guy to apologize is to me a contradiction, there can be an element of thirst for authority if someone is trying to humble admin Guy. But again, you can accuse me of AGF violations, so I am going to refrain from making further comments. I would have stopped long ago had you not accuse me of not assuming good faith. Ultimately, I have come to terms with Alec's position and I wish him good luck. But, he has a long road (in my view) if he wants to prove that admin Guy deserves to lose his admin tools. Jrod2 03:54, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
* For the record, it would be awful if Guy were to lose his admin tools. I don't want that-- I want him to stop misusing them and to stop attacking people --Alecmconroy 07:15, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
* Guy you are waaay off the mark with your views on dans and PMs attack site linking. They simply reject the idea of instant censorship. And of course the drama is not being kept going by those who are trying to dicuss the policy (when they get a chance to discuss it without being labelled trolls) it is being kept going by people like yourself, who, in seeing this issue in black and white, label them trolls, claim their opinion is worthless because they are of that opinion and run around like a bull in a china shop trying to strip the links from long archived talk pages. Thats what creates drama, because you appear to have no concept of a civildiscussion - instead you blow your top, overreact and bingo, wikidrama ensues. Please try and think about that one. At no point has dan or PM said they advocate harrasment, they simply do not believe in thought crime. Viridae Talk 21:01, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* Viridae, I think it's rude for you to call Guy a "bull in a china shop." Please don't engage in argumentum ad hominem. - Jehochman Talk 21:09, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* It is critiscism of his method, so its a tad hard (ie not possible) to avoid ad hominem comments - when I am crisicising his approach, then I have to make my arguments "to the man". Bull in a china shop is not an insult anyway, it is simply a comment on the unsubtle way he conducts himself, which serves to magnify drama wherever he goes. Viridae Talk 22:32, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* Alecmconroy, I am sorry if you perceive my remarks as a "personal attack". Guy said something which you are using now to discredit him. Is that a personal attack? If it's not, then me bringing up your views on authority and BADSITES should not be considered one either.In addition, I am not comfortable with the tone of your comments against admin Guy. Have you crossed the line with WP:AGF yourself? I am not here to judge that, but I am not going to sit idle and let a good admin be treated like scam. Is it possible that you maybe biased on this dispute? I am just asking questions and the only thing I thought would be fair to this argument, is that you distance yourself from it. Thank you. Jrod2 21:13, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* No harm done-- and I'm sure everyone is aware that I speak as someone who opposed BADSITES, and therefore, if opposing BADSITES is grounds for blocking, as Guy seems to have indicated, obviously, I might well expect similar treatment as PM has gotten.
* However, we have a serious NPA problem going on in this dialog. There is a campaign of harassment and defamation trying to allege that I, PM, DanT, GTBacchus, and others are allied with hate sites. I've tried ignoring these attacks, and they continued. I've tried pleading for it to stop, and they continued. I'd tried mocking them, and they've continued. I've tried using forceful language, and they've continued. So, now, what am I left with?
* And Guy's as good a place to start as any. Either stands by his allegations or he does not. If he stands by his allusions, he should prove them, and all us anti-badsites trolls should be banned. On the other hand, if his accusations are groundless and unproven, he has spent all of today dragging the names of good editors through the mud, and I expect the community to take steps to stop him from doing this in the future.
* Hopefully, he'll apologize, and promise not to defame editors in the future, and that will be the end of it. --Alecmconroy 22:03, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
(arbitrary break) Allegation of sockpuppet abuse
(stricken, please do no rearrange my remarks, use a diff if you like) ++Lar: t/c 20:26, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* Okay, now that gets my attention. Are you telling me that PM was simultaneously editing Robert Black (professor) under two different accounts? Cause THAT would be a major problem. As I look over the history, I see from the page history and the talk page that, in addition to Privatemusings, the disputed link's inclusion in the article has been endorsed by myself (Alecmconroy), Altacc, Phase4, SchmuckyTheCat, Sfacets, Shojo(luke), and Hyperbole. Now, without naming names-- is Private Musing one of those people? If he is, then that would definitely be a problem. --Alecmconroy 14:00, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* Everyone's busy and who knows how long it's reasonable to wait for a reply-- but as the time questions like these go unanswered, my opinion tends to approach the conclusion that "No, PM hasn't actually simultaneously edited the same page at the same time under two different accounts" --Alecmconroy 15:05, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* I rather think that question has actually been answered. In response to my question whether "PM used his main account to abusively manipulate consensus or disrupt WP, which is what we are concerned about", JzG said the main account was "also active in this contentious area." In other words, not that specific article, but the harassment discussion in general. So, no, the second account did not disrupt wikipedia, but both accounts were simultaneously active in a broad sphere of policy. That is the only thing consistent with everything that's been said. Relata refero 16:08, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
This is crazyness. Privatemusings created this account and then was hounded by various Privatemusings-sounding like accounts (I blocked a few), culminating with User:MOASPN (who did edit that page). Now, edit warring is bad, whether through one's main account or any other. I do not, however, see the same accounts editing anywhere near the same time. I've yet to look into the whole block, I gather it was for edit warring? El_C 17:26, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* My summary above: a user editing in different articles, at different times, and about different specific issues, can be blocked by an admin as long as the editor in question espouses the same principles in both accounts, and the admin disagrees with those principles. I judge this to be the case from JzG's statement above: "extension form advocacy of a controversial opinion to performance of controversial actions in respect of content, that was and is the problem." Relata refero 17:35, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* That made me more confused, not less. El_C 17:40, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
* Exactly.
* PM's main account contributed to the discussion. PM created his secondary account for the ArbCom case: JzG thinks that was OK. Subsequently the second account did not go away, but was used to edit in contentious areas. JzG thinks that wasn't OK. There is no suggestion that they edited over the same specific issue, or in the same article; but both accounts edited in the same general area, though there is no suggestion that it happened at the same time. If you're confused, its because you're trying to understand. I'm a little confused by how this could happen myself. Relata refero 18:04, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
Reverting the block was way inappropriate. CBD should have respected Guy's admin action, discussed his disagreement in a dialog with Guy and convinced him to undo it himself, or gained consensus on the noticeboard for unblocking. Leaving aside how the unblock was done, the original block was the right thing to do. Whatever privatemusings' motivation, his seeking out controversy to involve himself in does not advance the project. He should have been stayed blocked. Tom Harrison Talk 00:04, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
* Leaving aside your needlessly insulting (and just plain wrong) comments, Tom, you really should also be open about the fact that you are also a party to the content dispute at Robert Black (professor) - and I would really encourage editors to take a look at the edits you have made, because as far as I can tell you are removing information expressly against consenses, without engaging on the talk page, showing no respect to traditions of our process. That is very poor form. Privatemusings 00:19, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
* Agree with Tom Harrison, he should be blocked, and I will block him if I have community support. Jbeach sup 00:51, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
* Disagree with the assessment that he should be blocked. There is not enough even alleged to support that, much less evidenced. I've in the last 24 hours encountered discussion over two blocks that so far as I can tell, come down to "blocked for holding an opinion I disagree with", that of KurtWeber and this one. That is not a sufficient reason for blocking, in either that case or this one. GRBerry 02:28, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
* Please don't block me again - I really fail to see how that could possibly help the situation. Privatemusings 02:55, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
After reading through all of this, I'm left with a current impression no different than my inital impression PM was created as a legit SOCK to avoid becomeing a victim in the contentious BADSITES fight, a tailored purpose for the SOCK. That's been established now, most of the policy is ironed out, and so on. PM then runs into regular articlespace and starts enforcing the policy as he interprets it, getting into a possible revert-war with a possible 3RR. I say 'possible', because the wording of the probably policy says that there's no 3RR on that sort of removal, or did last time I reviewed it, a few days back. JzG took this as something which PM's regular account could've done, and should've, or else PM (the person) should've sat on his hands. As a result of the contentious nature of the edits, he blocked the account, saying it had served it's purpose, and was now becoming an excuse for non-meta-policy contentions, which ought to be handled by the regular account. I support this assessment. I totally understand PM's intent in protecting himself, the 'bad sites' have some sick freaks there, who can blame him/her/them/it for wanting to remain safe I don't have any problem with it in theory, although it does make its edits less credible because of a lack of experience perception behind them. However, when she moves outside his declared purpose, they become the bad hand, and it should be blocked because he is not making the edits she declared them had the intent to do. I've shuffled the pronouns to the point that my eyes hurt, hope that helps. I support this block, not the unblock. However, if PM is only used from now on for meta-policy debates where exposure is bad, I can accept that. ANythign else, though, block the account and toss the key. ThuranX 03:36, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
* A disagreement. You are wrong in asserting that the no personal attacks policy allows 3RR violations to remove such links. The 3RR exception language was very explicitly killed, and we seem to have consensus on what language to use. This particular link had vanished from discussion at WT:NPA because the talk page there felt it had found a different reason for removal and that it was generally agreed that it was better to use reasons other than NPA when removing links from articles, but that different reason is appropriately discussed at the article's talk page rather than WT:NPA so there may or may not ever have been consensus formed around that. GRBerry 04:12, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
* Another disagreement: "However, when she moves outside his declared purpose, they become the bad hand, and it should be blocked because he is not making the edits she declared them had the intent to do." Why? Where in WP:GHBH does it say that you have to stick to your original declared purpose with an alternate account? Why should non-meta-policy contentions - not contravening policy - be handled by the main account? Isn't this precisely one of the uses of legitimate socks? WP:GHBH is set up to ensure admin candidates do not conceal their record and admins do not conceal their involvement in issues where they use the sysop bit. Which of those is happening here? Relata refero 04:48, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
* GRBerry, I stated I hadn't read it in a few days, hence the 'Possible'. Releta, PM stated that the edits from that account would specifically be for the contentious policy, not for randomly running around the project, making edits the main account could do. Further, if the editor knew those mainspace edits would be contentious, then hiding behind an alternate account to do so is contravening normal consensus building policy. Again - to protect oneself during a contentious policy debate about personal privacy makes some sense; to exploit the policies to accomplish edits which the regular account could simply find consensus for, or cite the policy to support is a problem. ThuranX 04:22, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
Couple of small points - looking at the edits you'll see that there was absolutely no violation of 3RR anywhere. It's my belief that you really have to squint at the situation to see an edit war also - but then these allegations have been largely retracted, which is good.
The irony of the whole situation, is that I can really see the points in your comments about appropriate use of accounts, and would have welcomed dialog on this - or at least notification that I was behaving in a way some felt to cross a hitherto undefined line (it's certainly not in any guideline yet - perhaps that's the more appropriate venue for discussion of this type). I've tried to respond immediately and politely to every concern raised with me - but what made me so upset and angry was from out of nowhere to be slap-banned forever and my talk page protected. I further believe there to have been serious ethical lapses, but would like at the moment for the whole situation just to calm down. I'm serving tea on my talkpage, if someone can bring the biscuits then we can leave AN/I alone. Privatemusings 03:47, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
* You were never banned. One of your alternate accounts was blocked. You said ahead of time that you were using this account because you expected that your edits would generate "anger or hot feeling", other words for disruption. You apprently knew it would be controversial so you explained your motivation ahead of time. So, how was this response unexpected? You knew the use of a sock puppet would be controversial because questions were raised about your previous use of sock accounts. Now you've said that you are going to "edit solely using this account", rendering pointless its use in the first place. I hope that commitment includes sticking to one account in the future. Using sock puppet accounts is not an acceptable and non-disruptive method for engaging in activity likely to result in "anger or hot feeling". If we aren't willing to take the heat that our actions may cause then perhaps we shouldn't take those actions. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 22:15, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
* To be indefinitely blocked with no warning was hugely unexpected. My decision to stop editing with my other account is an attempt to calm and resolve the situation. Your proposals for WP:SOCK may well gain interest and approval, but should be implemented there. Privatemusings 22:21, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
* You did expect to generate "anger and hot feeling". Intentionally generating anger and hot feelings is disruptive, and some might call it "trolling". WP:SOCK prohibits using a sock account to avoid scrutiny of your editing patterns. It also prohibits good hand/bad hand accounts. Both prohibitions seem to be involved here. May I ask if your user page announcement is in fact a commitment to use only one account in the future? ·:· Will Beback ·:· 23:18, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
* Involved, but not breached, unless WP:SOCK has been rewritten since the block. I have made this point above. Relata refero 16:36, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
* Not sure I follow that. ++Lar: t/c 13:02, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
* Predicting that one's perspective may make people angry with you is not at all synonymous with 'trolling' which of course also requires that to be the sole purpose of your maintaining it. In fact, for the record, I have found every single instance of the use of that word, not just referring to me, but all over the wiki, to be singularly unhelpful. It's just a rubbish way of making a point. </rant - not directed at Will specifically>. But yes, I have made a firm commitment to only edit using this account. Privatemusings 14:11, 3 November 2007 (UTC) | WIKI |
Get Started (Blazor)
1. Installation
Radzen Blazor Components are distributed as the Radzen.Blazor.
You can add them to your project in one of the following ways
• Install the package from command line by running dotnet add package Radzen.Blazor
• Add the package from Visual Nuget Package Manager.
• Manually edit the .csproj file of your application and include a project reference <PackageReference Include="Radzen.Blazor" Version="3.9.10" />.
2. Import namespaces
Open the _Imports.razor> file of your Blazor application and add these two lines:
@using Radzen
@using Radzen.Blazor
3. Include a theme
Open _Host.cshtml (server-side Blazor) or wwwroot/index.html (client-side WebAssembly Blazor) and include a theme CSS file by adding this snippet
<link rel="stylesheet" href="_content/Radzen.Blazor/css/default-base.css">
Optionally include Bootstrap.
Radzen also ships with themes that include some vital parts of Bootstrap (mostly layout). To use a theme bundled with Bootstrap include the file without -base suffix:
<link rel="stylesheet" href="_content/Radzen.Blazor/css/default.css">
4. Include the JS
Open _Host.cshtml (server-side Blazor) or wwwroot/index.html (WebAssembly Blazor) and add this snippet
<script src="_content/Radzen.Blazor/Radzen.Blazor.js"></script>
5. Use a component
Use any Radzen Blazor component by typing its tag name in a Blazor page e.g. <RadzenButton Text="Hi"></RadzenButton>.
Setting properties
<RadzenButton Text="@text"></RadzenButton>
@code {
string text = "Hi";
}
Handling events
<RadzenButton Text="Hi" Click=@ButtonClicked></RadzenButton>
@code {
void ButtonClicked()
{
}
}
6. Register Dialog, Notification, ContextMenu and Tooltip
• Open Shared/MainLayout.razor and add the following
<RadzenDialog/>
<RadzenNotification/>
<RadzenContextMenu/>
<RadzenTooltip/>
• In server-side Blazor applications register the services in the ConfigureServices method of Startup.cs. Import the Radzen namespace first.
public void ConfigureServices(IServiceCollection services)
{
// Snip
services.AddScoped<DialogService>();
services.AddScoped<NotificationService>();
services.AddScoped<TooltipService>();
services.AddScoped<ContextMenuService>();
// Snip
}
• In web assembly Blazor applications register the services in the Main method of Program.cs. Import the Radzen namespace first.
public static async Task Main(string[] args)
{
var builder = WebAssemblyHostBuilder.CreateDefault(args);
// Snip
builder.Services.AddScoped<DialogService>();
builder.Services.AddScoped<NotificationService>();
builder.Services.AddScoped<TooltipService>();
builder.Services.AddScoped<ContextMenuService>();
// Snip
await builder.Build().RunAsync();
} | ESSENTIALAI-STEM |
Overnight Health Care — Presented by Kidney Care Partners — VA unveils proposal to expand private health care for veterans | House Dems launch probe of 'skyrocketing' insulin prices | Fight erupts over late-term abortion bill in Virginia | TheHill
Welcome to Wednesday's Overnight Health Care, where we're still recovering from all of the drug pricing hearings yesterday. There's more drug pricing news today, on an insulin inquiry, but we'll start with news from the VA. VA unveils proposal to expand private healthcare for veterans The Department of Veterans Affairs Wednesday jumped into the controversial issue of allowing veterans to see private doctors. Veterans who live an average of 30-minutes driving time away from a Veteran Affairs medical facility would be allowed to see a private doctor under proposed guidelines released Wednesday. The proposal released by the Department of Veterans Affairs could potentially make more than a million more veterans eligible for private healthcare than under current rules. The proposal released Wednesday seeks to implement the VA Mission Act, which Congress passed in June and which Trump has touted as a signature legislative achievement. The law aims to address issues with an earlier law dealing with overhauling and consolidating the network of private health care providers accessible to veterans. The details: Right now, veterans can use their VA benefits to see private doctors if they live 40 miles away from a VA medical facility or if they have to wait more than 30 days for an appointment. The new proposed rules would allow veterans to see a private doctor for primary care or mental health care if they live at least 30 minutes away or have to wait more than 20 days for an appointment. For specialty care, the eligibility threshold would be increased to 60 minutes of drive time or a 28-day wait for an appointment. Veterans would also be allowed to go to an urgent care facility outside of the VA system but within a forthcoming network of community care provides. Timeline: The final rules are expected to be published this coming June. The debate: Critics have expressed concern that expanding private health care could drain resources from improving the VA system itself, undermining the system and ultimately leading to full privatization. Read more on the changes here. House Dems launch probe of 'skyrocketing' insulin prices There's yet another drug pricing investigation: House Democrats are now probing the three main insulin manufacturers in the U.S. over "skyrocketing costs." Eli Lilly, Novo Nordisk and Sanofi received questions about their pricing strategies from Rep. Frank Pallone Jr.Frank Joseph PalloneLawmakers call on Trump to keep tech legal shield out of trade talks Hillicon Valley: FTC fines Facebook B in privacy settlement | Critics pan settlement as weak | Facebook also faces FTC antitrust probe | Senate panel advances 'deepfakes' legislation | House passes anti-robocall bill House passes anti-robocall bill MORE (D-N.J.), chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee, and Rep. Diana DeGetteDiana Louise DeGetteHere are the 95 Democrats who voted to support impeachment Crucial for Congress to fund life-saving diabetes research Overnight Health Care — Sponsored by Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids — White House withdraws controversial rule to eliminate drug rebates | Grassley says deal on drug prices moving 'very soon' | Appeals court declines to halt Trump abortion referral ban MORE (D-Colo.), chairwoman of the panel's Oversight subcommittee. Pallone and DeGette said they worry about diabetics rationing their insulin because they can't afford to buy more. "When patients go without insulin--or ration their doses--there can be tragic consequences," they said in a letter to the drug manufacturers. "As one of the few manufacturers of insulin in the United States, your company is well-suited to shed light on these issues and offer potential solutions." The numbers: Pallone and DeGette say the price of insulin tripled between 2002 and 2013, and nearly doubled between 2012 and 2016. The three big insulin companies also control 99 percent of the world's supply. What to watch: Insulin prices in particular are an area of potential bipartisan action. GOP Sen. John CornynJohn CornynThe Hill's Morning Report - Trump on defense over economic jitters Democrats keen to take on Cornyn despite formidable challenges The Hill's Campaign Report: Battle for Senate begins to take shape MORE (R-Texas) questioned insulin pricing during a hearing on Tuesday as well. Dem bill in Virginia would loosen restrictions on late-term abortions Conservatives on Wednesday seized on Democratic abortion proposals coming out of Virginia. The state legislation would eliminate the requirement that abortions in the second trimester of pregnancy occur at state-licensed hospitals and would require only one doctor to determine if a pregnancy threatens the woman's life or health to allow abortions in the third trimester. Under current Virginia law a doctor and two consulting physicians are needed to make that determination. The bill is unlikely to pass given Republican control of the House of Delegates and was tabled on Monday. But a video clip of Delegate Kathy Tran (D) defending her proposed bill has since gone viral. Read more here. FDA is failing to stop underage teens from using e-cigarettes, report finds The federal government is failing to protect children from the dangers of electronic cigarettes, according to an American Lung Association report card published Wednesday. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) received an "F" from the group's 17th annual State of Tobacco Control. The FDA has taken some initial steps, but "continued to avoid meaningful action" on vaping products, the association said. "This year's report finds a disturbing failure of the federal government and states to take action to prevent and reduce tobacco use in 2018, placing the health and lives of Americans at risk, including our youth," the American Lung Association's national president and CEO, Harold P. Wimmer, said in a statement. The American Lung Association blamed a lack of regulation by the FDA for the high rates of teen vaping. The FDA has the authority to regulate tobacco products in the U.S. Read more on the report here. SPONSORED CONTENT - KIDNEY CARE PARTNERS Individuals with kidney diseases are living longer and fuller lives, but there’s more to be done. A continued focus on earlier diagnoses and innovative approaches to treatment are critical. Learn more. What we're reading Ex-Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz says he would improve ObamaCare, force Big Pharma to negotiate drug prices with the government (CNBC) The Medicare-for-All Trap (New York Times opinion) 'Medicare for all' is unlikely if Democrats take power, but an ObamaCare 'public option' seems inevitable (Washington Examiner opinion) State by state Oklahoma governor, GOP leaders open to Medicaid expansion (Associated Press) Bill seeks to keep ObamaCare protections in Maine, even if ACA is repealed (WGME) How a ballot initiative to expand Medicaid in Utah may be denied (The Atlantic) From The Hill's op-ed page Benzo prescriptions have increased substantially -- it's a major public health problem View the discussion thread. The Hill 1625 K Street, NW Suite 900 Washington DC 20006 | 202-628-8500 tel | 202-628-8503 fax The contents of this site are ©2019 Capitol Hill Publishing Corp., a subsidiary of News Communications, Inc. | NEWS-MULTISOURCE |
Smile CDR v2022.11.PRE
On this page:
19.0LiveBundle
Trial
Applications such as patient dashboards need to quickly extract rich data from FHIR Endpoints. The volume of complex queries these applications generate can result in slow response times. Smile CDR provides a resource bundle caching service called “LiveBundle” to improve the performance of applications in situations like this. Administrators configure aggregation rules that store named FHIR Resource Bundles on the server and keep the list of references behind these bundles "warm" so they can be instantly retrieved by applications at runtime.
This is best illustrated with an example. Imagine a maternity ward with a patient dashboard that monitors the health of patients on the ward. It calculates a Modified Early Obstetric Warning Score (MEOWS) for each patient using 5 vitals.
MEOWS
Without using LiveBundle, this application would regularly query the FHIR repository for the most recent Observation for each vital for each patient.
In place of such queries, we could set up a LiveBundle to keep track of these vitals for us. To do this, we would first create a Watchlist called "MATERNITY". When a new patient is admitted to the ward, we add them to this Watchlist so LiveBundle will start tracking data for this patient. We would then create a new LiveBundle rule called "MEOWS" attached to this Watchlist that stores the most recent Observation for each vital. Then, when the app needs to display this dashboard, it would request the MEOWS LiveBundle for each patient to retrieve these stored Observations.
19.0.1Configuration
Trial
LiveBundle configuration is managed on a FHIR Storage module. When you enable the LiveBundle feature on a FHIR Storage module, Smile CDR adds an interceptor to that matches incoming resources against LiveBundle filters and aggregates rules. Enabling the LiveBundle feature on a FHIR Storage module also adds new LiveBundle Operations to FHIR Endpoint modules attached to that FHIR Storage module.
LiveBundle aggregation rules are configured using JavaScript. This JavaScript can either be stored in a file on disk or in the database. To store the LiveBundle rules in a file, specify an absolute filepath in livebundle_service.script.file. Alternatively, store the JavaScript in the database directly in livebundle_service.script.text.
See LiveBundle Rule Definition and LiveBundle Keepers for details on how LiveBundle aggregation rules are defined in JavaScript.
By default, LiveBundle watchlists are cached in memory and refreshed once per minute. If a matching resource for a just-added subscriber arrives on a different server within that minute, then that resource will be missed and not stored in that subscriber's bundle. For this reason, it's best to add subscribers at a time when new resources are not being submitted for them. This LiveBundle watchlist cache can be disabled by switching off the Watchlist Cache Enabled configuration option. When the cache is disabled, the matching operation for incoming resources is reversed: With cache enabled, first the resource is checked against the in-memory watchlist cache and then if it's on the list it is matched against the filter criteria. However, when the Watchlist Cache is disabled, first the resource will be matched against the Filter Criteria and then a database lookup checks to see if any subscriber references are on the watchlist for that Filter.
19.0.2Usage
Trial
See LiveBundle API for details on how to call LiveBundle Operations on a FHIR Endpoint.
19.0.3LiveBundle Architecture
Trial
An overview of LiveBundle architecture is illustrated in the following diagram:
The top row of this diagram represents the flow of resources into the CDR. This means resources being created and updated, which are then used as sources of data for LiveBundles. It is described in the LiveBundle Aggregation section.
The bottom row represents requests for data stored in a LiveBundle, e.g. to display to a user in a dashboard. It is described in the LiveBundle Retrieval section.
LiveBundle Overview
19.0.4LiveBundle Aggregation
Trial
A LiveBundle aggregation rule has two parts, a "Filter" and a "Keeper". The Filter determines whether an incoming resource triggers aggregation and the Keeper determines which references derived from that incoming resource is stored. A Filter has a Watchlist associated with it that maintains a list of Subscribers to that Filter.
In our MEOWS example, the Filter would match Observations that have a code for one of the vitals we are tracking. The MEOWS Keeper would be configured to store only the latest Observation for each vital.
The LiveBundle aggregation is triggered when any resource is created, updated or deleted on the FHIR Storage module. It checks to see if the resource matches any LiveBundle Filters. Matching follows these steps:
1. First the resource type is compared to the "Root Resource Type" of the Filter.
2. If the resource type matches, then it checks to see if the incoming resource references a subscriber on the Watchlist for that Filter.
3. If it matches a Subscriber, then we check if the incoming resource matches the Filter Criteria.
If the incoming resource matches, it is passed to the "Keeper" associated with that Filter. The Keeper adds and/or removes LiveBundle references according to its algorithm. See LiveBundle Keepers for details on how Keepers work.
19.0.5LiveBundle Retrieval
Trial
The LiveBundle aggregation accumulates references for your Subscriber, so that they can later be retrieved as a resource bundle. A LiveBundle is retrieved by a Rule Name and SubscriberId.
In our MEOWS example, the Subscriber would be the maternity patient id and the Rule Name would be MEOWS.
LiveBundle retrieval follows these steps:
1. The Retriever collects all LiveBundle references stored for that Rule and SubscriberId (or list of SubscriberIds or SubscriberGroup).
2. If an _include parameter is on the LiveBundle request, those _included references are added to the list of references.
3. All references are expanded into resources and collected into a FHIR Bundle Resource.
4. FHIR Composition resources are added to the top of the bundle, serving as a table of contents for each SubscriberId in the bundle.
19.0.6LiveBundle Seeding
Trial
Sometimes when a Watchlist and Rule are defined and a new Subscriber is added to that Watchlist, there will already be pre-existing data for that rule that should be accumulated for that Subscriber. This is called "Seeding" the bundle for that Subscriber. When a Subscriber is added to the Watchlist, Smile CDR searches the FHIR Storage repository for matching resources and aggregates a starting set of references for that Subscriber. Going forward, as new resources arrive, this list is updated.
In our MEOWS example, perhaps the patient was initially admitted to the Emergency ward where and vitals Observations had been collected for them. When that patient is added to the MATERNITY watchlist, the MEOWS LiveBundle would search for these Observations and seed the MEOWS bundle for that patient with their most recent vitals.
LiveBundle seeding works as follows:
1. Search for Resources of the "Root Resource Type" of the filter.
1. Start with the Filter criteria
2. If the Keeper for this rule has a KeeperFilter (e.g. only keep resources less than 6 months old) then append this criteria
3. Cap the search results to the "Seed Count" of the Rule.
2. These search results are then fed to the Keeper one at a time as if they had been intercepted. The Keeper updates the LiveBundle references for that Subscriber according to its algorithm.
19.0.7LiveBundle Troubleshooting
Trial
The LiveBundle Troubleshooting Log can be helpful in diagnosing issues relating to Live Bundles. | ESSENTIALAI-STEM |
Archive
Posts Tagged ‘code first’
Data Annotations – ForeignKey Attribute in EF 6 & EF Core
January 7, 2018 Leave a comment
The ForeignKey attribute is used to configure a foreign key in the relationship between two entities in EF 6 and EF Core. It overrides the default conventions. As per the default convention, EF makes a property as foreign key property when its name matches with the primary key property of a related entity.
ForeignKey Signature: [ForeignKey(name string)]
• name: Name of the associated navigation property or the name of the associated foreign key(s).
Consider the following example of one-to-many relationship among entities.
public class Student
{
public int StudentID { get; set; }
public string StudentName { get; set; }
//Foreign key for Standard
public int StandardId { get; set; }
public Standard Standard { get; set; }
}
public class Standard
{
public int StandardId { get; set; }
public string StandardName { get; set; }
public ICollection<Student> Students { get; set; }
}
The above example depicts a one-to-many relationship between Student and Standard entities. To represent this relationship, the Student class includes a property StandardId with reference property Standard and Standard entity class includes collection navigation property Students. A property name StandardId in Student entity matches with the primary key property of Standard entity, so StandardIdin Student entity will automatically become a foreign key property and corresponding column in the db table will also be a foreign key column as shown below.
Entity Framework code-first example
The [ForeignKey] attribute overrides the default convention for a foreign key It allows us to specify the foreign key property in the dependent entity whose name does not match with the primary key property of the principal entity.
The [ForeignKey(name)] attribute can be applied in three ways:
1. [ForeignKey(NavigationPropertyName)] on the foreign key scalar property in the dependent entity
2. [ForeignKey(ForeignKeyPropertyName)] on the related reference navigation property in the dependent entity
3. [ForeignKey(ForeignKeyPropertyName)] on the navigation property in the principal entity
[ForeignKey] on the foreign key property in the dependent entity:
The [ForeignKey] on the foreign key property in the dependent entity and the related navigation property name can be specified as a parameter as shown below.
public class Student
{
public int StudentID { get; set; }
public string StudentName { get; set; }
[ForeignKey("Standard")]
public int StandardRefId { get; set; }
public Standard Standard { get; set; }
}
public class Standard
{
public int StandardId { get; set; }
public string StandardName { get; set; }
public ICollection<Student> Students { get; set; }
}
In the above example, the [ForeignKey] attribute is applied on the StandardRefId and specified the name of the navigation property Standard. This will create the foreign key column named StandardRefId in the Students table, preventing the generation of a StandardId column in the database.
Entity Framework code-first example
[ForeignKey] on the navigation property in the dependent entity:
The [ForeignKey] attribute can be applied to the navigation property and the related foreign key property name can be specified as shown below.
public class Student
{
public int StudentID { get; set; }
public string StudentName { get; set; }
public int StandardRefId { get; set; }
[ForeignKey("StandardRefId")]
public Standard Standard { get; set; }
}
public class Standard
{
public int StandardId { get; set; }
public string StandardName { get; set; }
public ICollection<Student> Students { get; set; }
}
In the above example, the [ForeignKey] attribute is applied on the Standard navigation property and specified the name of the foreign key property StandardRefId. This will create the foreign key column named StandardRefId in the Students table, preventing the generation of a StandardId column in the database.
[ForeignKey] on the navigation property in the principal entity:
The [ForeignKey] attribute can be applied to the navigation property in the principal entity and the related foreign key property name can be specified in the dependent entity as shown below.
public class Student
{
public int StudentID { get; set; }
public string StudentName { get; set; }
public int StandardRefId { get; set; }
public Standard Standard { get; set; }
}
public class Standard
{
public int StandardId { get; set; }
public string StandardName { get; set; }
[ForeignKey("StandardRefId")]
public ICollection<Student> Students { get; set; }
}
In the above example, the [ForeignKey] attribute is applied on the Students navigation property in the principal entity Standard. This will create a foreign key column StandardRefId in the Students table in the database.
Hope this help ! | ESSENTIALAI-STEM |
Talk:Cyclonus
Serious editing
OK guys, a lrage proportion of this article needs to be binned; specifically the bits that need to go concern the Original Research concerning fan debate over the so-called 'Identity Crisis' and associated speculation. I'm going to try and do some work on this tomorrow, so if people have an issue, speak now... in 24 hours I'm going to deleate anything I feel to be unsourced or OR, in line with Wikipedia guidelines. There is also an issue of notability, and as such this article can probably do with being about half the length it is. Anyhow, let me know what you think. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 18:56, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
OK, nobody got back to me so I have done two things: firstly, entirely deleted the 'confused dialogue' section. I can't see any way in which this conforms to Wikipedia notability... it's simply not encyclopedic, so let's move on. Regarding the 'identity crisis ' section, I have substantially cut it down. Despite a lack of citations, despite me commenting before, nothing had been done. The vast majority of the section constituted Original research as I'm sure the author(s) are/were aware, and as such has been binned. The rest of the article still needs work, but those were the two biggest flaws that i culd see, and have now been (virtually) dealt with. I'd still like a citation at the point indicated though ;-). Blackmetalbaz (talk) 22:30, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
* Someone has reverted some of the changes I made without citation. This may as well be vandalism in this case. However, I'm going to largely revert it all back but my justifications are as follows...
* 1/ In the opening profile section it needs to state that Cyclonus is made by Unicron from the bodies of either Skywarp and Bombshell. This is the least controversial way of putting this, as the actual animation is unambiguous with regard to this statement. The revert implied that Cyclonus was definitely Cyclonus (and what it said about Bombshell made no sense in English anyway). This is POV and as such has gone.
* 2/ Under identity crisis a paragraph has been reinserted consistenting of fan speculation. This constitutes original research and as such has to go. I'm sure how I can make this any clearer. It may be worth mentioned the appearing of Insecticons post-conversion in the animated series, so if someone could state, neutrally, which episodes they appear in that would be helpful (much like I did with the multiple Cyclonuses later in the series). The fact that Bombshell toys were on sale when Skywarp weren't may be a fascinating point of debate on a fan forum, but has no relevance on an encyclopedia. The speculation about personality traits, body colour and the rest is shockingly OR. If it's reverted again it will be treated as vandalism without a citation from a reliable source. Just to spell this out for the last time, this excludes Internet forums, fan-run sites, your blog and your mates in the pub.
* 3/ Similarly dialogue in the film is fan speculation and thus OR, and even if it wasn't is not notable.
The rest of the article still needs a bit of a rewrite to make it sound less 'in-universe' but these are the major problems. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 12:40, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
* Someone has readded material based on fan speculation concerning "dialogue confusion". Doesn't qualify as notable, and does qualify as fan speculation. I'm reporting this as vandalism. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 10:22, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
Identity Crisis
I agree with whoever put that the Identity Crisis bit needs to be shortened. Trouble is, how do we get rid of the unnecessary stuff without losing the various arguments. Anyone else think a new article might do it? SMegatron 19:20, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
* The arguments all constitute Original Research so losing them is exactly what needed to happen. It's been flagged for some time; problem now dealt with. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 22:32, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
I'm fairly sure that deleting the whole section is a better option than creating a separate article. It simply isn't relevant to an encyclopedia... at best, it is worth mentioning that there is some confusion. However, the section as it stands makes the issue look vastly more important than it actually is (come on, they started talking about shade differences on his knees!). Most importantly, the section constitutes original research if it's not referenced to legitimate sources, which would qualify it for deletion.
SKYWARP IS CYCLONUS
I'm not sure where this fits- but Cyclonus is SKYWARP. I have seen the movie countless times and there is no doubt in my mind that Cyclonus is Skywarp. Thundercracker became Scourge and Bombshell and the other Insecticons- became the sweeps. I hope this puts an end to the issue- but SKYWARP IS CYCLONUS.
Trust me, there is much debate about this, and always will be. The arguements are all stated on the Cyclonus main page. user:mathewignash
I have seen Tranformers: The Movie countless times and there is no doubt in my mind that Cyclonus is Skywarp and that Bombshell became one of the sweeps. I have been a fan of the Tranformers for more than 20 years and I have seen the movie enough to know that Skywarp was transformed into Cyclonus. There is no debate.
JCH
Henkei Cyclonus, Updated.
I updated the status of Universe Cyclonus, and added in an entry for Henkei Cyclonus. Feel free to add any information. Cheers! Optimus91 (talk) 06:18, 13 December 2008 (UTC) | WIKI |
GRAINS-Corn eases 1% as USDA tempers fears over crop condition
SYDNEY, July 16 (Reuters) - U.S. corn futures fell 1% on Tuesday after the U.S. Department of Agriculture said the condition of North American crops was better than expected, easing fears that production will fall short of official forecasts. FUNDAMENTALS * The most active corn futures on the Chicago Board Of Trade were down 0.9% at $4.43 a bushel by 0043 GMT, having closed down 2.7% in the previous session. Prices hit a five-year high of $4.64-3/4 a bushel on Monday on concerns about hot, dry weather, but turned lower on forecasts for rain. * The most active soybean futures were down 0.6% at $9.14-1/2 a bushel, having closed down 1.2% on Tuesday. * The most active wheat futures were down 0.6% at $5.04-1/2 a bushel, having closed down 2.9% on Monday. * The USDA said in a weekly report that 58% of the corn crop is good-to-excellent, ahead of market expectations of 56%. * It said 76% of the U.S. wheat crop is in good-to-excellent condition, down 2 percentage points and behind market expectations. * The USDA report said 54% of the U.S. soybean crops are in good-to-excellent condition, slightly ahead of market forecasts. MARKET NEWS * The dollar edged higher on Monday in thin summer trading, with its potential upside limited by expectations the Federal Reserve will cut interest rates at next week's policy meeting. * Oil prices sank about 1% on Monday on signs that the impact of a tropical storm on U.S. Gulf Coast production and refining would be short-lived, while Chinese economic data dimmed the crude demand outlook. * The benchmark S&P 500 index ended little changed on Monday after oscillating between positive and negative territory throughout the session after Citigroup Inc kicked off the earnings season with a mixed quarterly report. Grains prices at 0043 GMT Contract Last Change Pct chg Two-day chg MA 30 RSICBOT wheat 504.50 -3.25 -0.64% -3.54% 522.31 39CBOT corn 443.00 -4.00 -0.89% -3.54% 442.57 50CBOT soy 914.50 -5.50 -0.60% -1.83% 911.48 54CBOT rice 11.84 -$0.04 -0.38% -0.55% $11.77 73WTI crude 59.45 -$0.13 -0.22% -1.26% $56.21 60 Currencies Euro/dlr $1.126 $0.000 +0.04% -0.07%USD/AUD 0.7041 0.000 +0.03% +0.34% Most active contracts Wheat, corn and soy US cents/bushel. Rice: USD per hundredweight RSI 14, exponential (Reporting by Colin Packham; editing by Richard Pullin) | NEWS-MULTISOURCE |
2009 Zolder Superleague Formula round
The 2009 Zolder Superleague Formula round was the second round of the 2009 Superleague Formula season, with the races taking place on 6 January 2009. The main support series for the event was the EuroBOSS series. Other supporting events included the Youngtimer Touring Car Challenge, Formule Ford Benelux, Dutch Supercar Challenge and the Dunlop Endurance Cup.
Qualifying
FC Midtjylland (Kasper Andersen) claimed their first pole in the Superleague Formula in only their second competitive weekend in the series. They narrowly edged out Rangers F.C. (John Martin) to the pole position.
Race 2
Race Two eventually got under way after a Safety Car start due to the rain and spray. Victims of the first racing lap were PSV Eindhoven (Dominick Muermans) who had a spin and CR Flamengo (Enrique Bernoldi) who ran over the back of Galatasaray S.K. (Duncan Tappy) ending both their races.
Qualifying
* In each group, the top four qualify for the quarter-finals. | WIKI |
Media in Tulsa, Oklahoma
This is a summary of mass communications media in Tulsa, Oklahoma.
Radio
Tulsa is the 65th largest radio market in the country. The following is a partial list of radio stations serving the Tulsa area.
Television
Tulsa is the 58th largest TV market in the United States (as ranked by Nielsen and Arbitron).
Newspapers
Tulsa's leading newspaper is the daily Tulsa World, the second most widely circulated newspaper in Oklahoma (after The Oklahoman) with a 2006 Sunday circulation of 189,789. Urban Tulsa, another large publication, is a weekly newspaper covering entertainment and cultural events. Covering primarily economic events and stocks, the Tulsa Business Journal caters to Tulsa's business sector. Other publications include the Oklahoma Indian Times, the Tulsa Daily Commerce and Legal News, the Tulsa Beacon, This Land Press, and the Tulsa Free Press. Until 1992, the Tulsa Tribune served as a daily major newspaper competing with the Tulsa World. The paper was acquired by the Tulsa World that year.
Cinema
Feature films shot in the Tulsa region include the Francis Ford Coppola productions The Outsiders and Rumble Fish (both released in 1983), as well as "Weird Al" Yankovic's UHF (1989), Tulsa (1949), All-American Murder (1992), The Frighteners (1996), Phenomenon (1996), Keys to Tulsa (1997), and Tim Blake Nelson's Eye of God (1997). | WIKI |
Closed Bug 995697 Opened 8 years ago Closed 6 years ago
Intermittent browser_geolocation_privatebrowsing_perwindowpb.js | Test timed out | Found a browser window after previous test timed out
Categories
(Core :: DOM: Geolocation, defect)
x86
Windows 8
defect
Not set
normal
Tracking
()
RESOLVED FIXED
mozilla41
Tracking Status
firefox39 --- fixed
firefox40 --- fixed
firefox41 --- fixed
firefox-esr31 --- wontfix
firefox-esr38 --- fixed
People
(Reporter: RyanVM, Assigned: Gijs)
References
Details
(Keywords: intermittent-failure)
Attachments
(1 file)
https://tbpl.mozilla.org/php/getParsedLog.php?id=37699511&tree=Mozilla-Inbound
WINNT 6.2 mozilla-inbound pgo test mochitest-browser-chrome-2 on 2014-04-12 14:51:23 PDT for push ba77af4dbd10
slave: t-w864-ix-077
15:00:46 INFO - TEST-START | chrome://mochitests/content/browser/dom/tests/browser/browser_geolocation_privatebrowsing_perwindowpb.js
15:00:46 INFO - TEST-INFO | chrome://mochitests/content/browser/dom/tests/browser/browser_geolocation_privatebrowsing_perwindowpb.js | Got load
15:01:31 INFO - TEST-INFO | screenshot: exit status 0
15:01:31 WARNING - TEST-UNEXPECTED-FAIL | chrome://mochitests/content/browser/dom/tests/browser/browser_geolocation_privatebrowsing_perwindowpb.js | Test timed out
15:01:31 INFO - TEST-INFO | MEMORY STAT vsize after test: 738983936
15:01:31 INFO - TEST-INFO | MEMORY STAT vsizeMaxContiguous after test: 1893662720
15:01:31 INFO - TEST-INFO | MEMORY STAT residentFast after test: 154562560
15:01:31 INFO - TEST-INFO | MEMORY STAT heapAllocated after test: 54244974
15:01:31 INFO - INFO TEST-END | chrome://mochitests/content/browser/dom/tests/browser/browser_geolocation_privatebrowsing_perwindowpb.js | finished in 45021ms
15:01:31 INFO - TEST-INFO | checking window state
15:01:31 WARNING - TEST-UNEXPECTED-FAIL | chrome://mochitests/content/browser/dom/tests/browser/browser_geolocation_privatebrowsing_perwindowpb.js | Found a browser window after previous test timed out
After a month without any timeouts, this test is now timing out about once per day.
David: this intermittent geolocation failure started up (again) after your try push in comment 25 for bug 1042889. The subsequent intermittent reports are all on fx-team. Have any of your changes for bug 1042889 landed in fx-team? Could they have caused network timeouts when connecting to Google's Location Service?
Flags: needinfo?(dkeeler)
Looking at the test, I see this is probably unrelated to bug 1042889. This test just talks to a local network_geolocation.sjs page, not Google's Location Service.
Curiously, all these test timeouts happen on Windows.
Flags: needinfo?(dkeeler)
Garvan, I know this is an old bug, but do you think the recent changes to use the Windows 8 Location API (bug 512407) could break the geolocation tests that assume they can override GLS by setting the "geo.wifi.uri" pref?
Flags: needinfo?(gkeeley)
All the geo mochitests are tests of the network geolocation provider, with a fake web service (as you noted, the geo.wifi.url is overridden to point to this fake local service).
There are no geo mochitests that are affected by other providers (such as the CoreLocation or Windows provider).
Flags: needinfo?(gkeeley)
BTW, this test is super-annoying in that it fails one a day, mostly on Windows. The quick-fix (which seems to have worked with other geo tests that were timing out) was to increase wait times for responses. IIRC, this test looked correctly event-driven to me, and I didn't see any quick fixes, and didn't spend further time on it.
I should look at it again more closely when I have some time.
Chris one more comment on your question(In reply to Chris Peterson [:cpeterson] from comment #115)
> Garvan, I know this is an old bug, but do you think the recent changes to
> use the Windows 8 Location API (bug 512407) could break the geolocation
> tests that assume they can override GLS by setting the "geo.wifi.uri" pref?
Wouldn't this become non-intermittent if this was the case?
In m-c's firefox.js, the "geo.provider.ms-windows-location" pref is not in that file.
In the code, we have it defaulting to false:
https://dxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/source/dom/geolocation/nsGeolocation.cpp#817
#ifdef XP_WIN
if (Preferences::GetBool("geo.provider.ms-windows-location", false)) {
mProvider = new WindowsLocationProvider();
}
#endif
This is failing more frequently.
I just ran
./mach mochitest-browser --repeat 99 dom/tests/browser
on Windows 8.1 and I am getting intermittent failures.
Problem is, I get intermittent failures in other tests also, such as browser_test_new_window_from_content.js.
Going to try this on my mac now and see if I get similar intermittent failures in other tests. Point being, this may be a larger systematic problem, and not specific to this test.
And yet more notices of failure. I suspect this was failing in early 2013, because this mysterious commit happened:
http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/diff/d42a2a82f3d2/dom/tests/browser/browser_geolocation_privatebrowsing_perwindowpb.js
Which has changes that are unclear to me as to their purpose. The code prior to that commit looks more understandable to me.
An example is the change that adds toggling the "geo.wifi.scan" pref, which is not done in any of the many geo mochitests. Indeed NetworkGeolocationProvider will try to do a scan with the default setting, but this has never had an affect on the tests that I have seen, as is largely a no-op on the test machines.
We could try to back the code prior to that commit. Not that this will necessarily fix this case which appears to be resource starvation on the test machine. But would make for a simpler-looking test case :).
Ehsan, you reviewed the commit I mentioned in comment 132. It was a while ago, but any chance you recall something about that change?
Flags: needinfo?(ehsan)
(In reply to Garvan Keeley [:garvank] from comment #264)
> Ehsan, you reviewed the commit I mentioned in comment 132. It was a while
> ago, but any chance you recall something about that change?
Olli wrote that code.
Flags: needinfo?(ehsan) → needinfo?(bugs)
That change was about, IIRC, geolocation stuff crashing locally on linux.
This bug started to happen way later SnowWhite patch landed.
Flags: needinfo?(bugs) | ESSENTIALAI-STEM |
How Long is a Normal Pregnancy?
How Long is a Normal Pregnancy?
Last update: 03 May, 2018
Pregnancies generally last 9 months, yet not all pregnancies are the same. In this article we’ll explain how to calculate the duration of a normal pregnancy – there are several factors to take into account.
The moment you realize you’re pregnant, begin counting backwards. This is the time to begin to figure out how many weeks your pregnancy will last, and as a result, when you’ll be able to see your child.
Why is it important to know how many weeks pregnancy lasts?
From the doctor’s point of view, it’s necessary to determine the exact time of pregnancy, called the “gestational age.” When the pregnancy comes to an end, the fetus will be ready to be born naturally.
That’s why, upon determining that the due date is approaching, tests will be conducted more often. The mother and baby’s status will be observed, especially their vital signs.
The heart rate and lung development are two of the most important aspects during these tests. Both are linked to the time of birth.
“Knowing with certainty how many weeks a pregnancy lasts will allow doctors to observe the baby and determine if everything is normal for their gestational age”
How Long is a Normal Pregnancy?
Pregnancy normality
If any anomalies are observed in development, the obstetrician will take the appropriate measures.
Medical science today has many resources to intervene. Above all, any developmental problem for the baby will be diagnosed in advance.
A normal pregnancy is considered “to term” between 37 and 42 weeks. It’s such a wide range because there are many factors and habits that may affect pregnancy.
Generally, mothers that have given birth previously have shorter pregnancies. First-time mothers tend to have slightly longer pregnancies.
Influence of the pregnancy’s duration on birth and the baby
The length of pregnancy depends on whether it’s a normal, premature, or prolonged birth. If the pregnancy lasts less than 37 weeks, it’s considered “preterm” or premature.
If it passes 42 weeks, it will be a prolonged pregnancy. Both situations are anomalies and should be attended carefully.
• Premature birth
If a baby is born before their due date, the risks are higher. Babies are born premature when their gestational time is less than 37 weeks.
When the pregnancy begins with the first symptoms of birth before week 37, doctors can recommend steps to postpone birth. Complete rest is one of them.
If birth can’t be avoided, it’s important to have a pediatritian present, in addition to the obstetrician.
A baby that is born prematurely should be monitored during the first few days of life. They should stay in the hospital during this time for monitoring.
• Birth resulting from a prolonged pregnancy
When the duration of pregnancy exceeds the normal length, the doctor will likely decide to intervene. But why would it be a problem for the baby to stay within the uterus longer than normal?
The placenta only serves the functions of nutrition, immune support, endocrine support, and supporting the baby for 40-42 weeks.
After 40-42 weeks pass, the length of a normal pregnancy, the placenta becomes old and stops to serve these functions.
If the placenta stops working, the baby is exposed to risks, particularly respiratory and nutritional risks. That’s why for pregnancies exceeding 41 weeks, the doctor typically will induce birth.
How Long is a Normal Pregnancy?
How to calculate the length of a normal pregnancy
The length of pregnancy is counted from the first day of the last period. Obstetricians use this date as a guide to begin the count of 40 weeks. The birth date calculated in this way is considered “likely birth date” but is not totally certain.
Ovulation cycles can be irregular in women and this affects the date of fertilization. However, this is a useful tool to estimate the duration of a pregnancy.
The first way to calculate gestation is through the ultrasound conducted in the first trimester. This method is more precise than using the dates of menstruation.
With this ultrasound, the doctor can determine the date that the baby will be born almost with certainty.
Accurately estimating the birth date is important to avoid problems in the child and their mother, as well as unnecessary medical interventions.
The contents of You Are Mom is for educational and informational purposes only. At no time do they replace the diagnosis, advice, or treatment from a professional. If in doubt, it's best to consult a trusted specialist. | ESSENTIALAI-STEM |
María Itatí Castaldi
María Itatí Castaldi (born 16 October 1966) is an Argentine basketball player, member of Paralympics team for her country.
Biography
Until 2006 she was a hockey player and member of Ferroviarios club. That year she travelled to Frank, Santa Fe province to play a match, but a car accident caused a spinal injury.
In 2012 she started to play basketball in CILSA and they called the selection, they are testing female players, and the experience that first was part of her rehabilitation, she took her of several international competitions. | WIKI |
Mitsubishi Lancer Owners Manual
Control panel
For pleasant driving / Heater / Control panel
Mitsubishi Lancer: Control panel. A- Temperature control dial
A- Temperature control dial
B- Air selection switch
C- Blower speed selection dial
D- Mode selection dial
E- Rear window demister switch
Mitsubishi Lancer: Control panel. ► Button (F) is not available for use. The indicator below the button doesn’t Note
► Button (F) is not available for use. The indicator below the button doesn’t come on even if it is pushed.
Blower speed selection dial
Select the blower speed by turning the blower speed selection dial clockwise or anticlockwise.
The blower speed will gradually increase as the dial is turned to the right.
Mitsubishi Lancer: Control panel. Temperature control dial
Temperature control dial
Turn the temperature control dial clockwise or anticlockwise.Mitsubishi Lancer: Control panel. Note
Mitsubishi Lancer: Control panel. ► While the engine coolant temperature is low, the temperature of the air from Note
► While the engine coolant temperature is low, the temperature of the air from the heater will be cool/cold until the engine warms up, even if you have selected warm air with the dial.
Air selection switch
To change the air selection, simply press the air selection switch.
A sound will be made every time you push the switch.
► Outside air: Indication lamp (A) is OFF Outside air is introduced into the passenger compartment.
► Recirculated air: Indication lamp (A) is ON Air is recirculated inside the passenger compartment.
Mitsubishi Lancer: Control panel.
Mitsubishi Lancer: Control panel. Caution Caution
► Normally, use the outside position to keep the windscreen and side windows clear and quickly remove fog or frost from the windscreen.
If the outside air is dusty or otherwise contaminated use the recirculation position.
Switch to the outside position periodically to increase ventilation so that the windows do not become fogged up.
► Use of the recirculation position for extended time may cause the windows to fog up.
Mitsubishi Lancer: Control panel. ► When the heater operates with the selection switch in the outside position, Note
► When the heater operates with the selection switch in the outside position, the system automatically determines whether to continue using outside air or to perform recirculation.
If the outside air temperature is high, the system selects recirculation and causes the indication lamp (A) in the switch to illuminate.
Press the selection switch to return to outside air introduction.
Customizing the air selection (Changing function settings)
Functions can be changed as desired, as stated below.
► Enable automatic air control:
When the heater operates, the air selection switch will be automatically controlled.
► Disable automatic air control:
Even when the heater operates, the air selection switch will not be automatically controlled.
► Setting change method Hold down the air selection switch for about 10 seconds or more.
When the setting is changed, a sound is emitted and the indication lamp flashes.
• When the setting is changed from enable to disable 3 sounds are emitted and the indication lamp flashes 3 times.
• When the setting is changed from disable to enable 2 sounds are emitted and the indication lamp flashes 3 times.
Mitsubishi Lancer: Control panel. ► The factory setting is “Enable automatic air control.” Note
► The factory setting is “Enable automatic air control.”
► When the mode selection dial is turned to Mitsubishi Lancer: Control panel. of the windows the ventilator automatically switches to outside air even if “Disable, in order to prevent misting of the windows the ventilator automatically switches to outside air even if “Disable automatic air control” is set.
© 2022 www.mitsuguide.com. All Rights Reserved. | ESSENTIALAI-STEM |
User:Andrybak/todo
TODO
* Former featured articles
* Look into Uw-autobiography
* Maybe create Category:Anchor templates. For Anchor, Verse and other templates generating an HTML tag with id attribute.
* Default test cases
* Category:Pages with templates in the wrong namespace (including Template index/Category namespace)
* Clean up Category:Wikipedia lists
* Refresh screenshots at Menu bar. Check other KDE screenshots for usage.
* Refresh instructions at Help:How to move a page for Vector 2022.
Fixing CSS of Main Page history
In italics are usages, which don't follow the exact date ranges.
* Main Page history/2020 May 15/styles.css
* Main Page history/2020 May 15
* Main Page history/2020-05-28 styles.css
* Main Page history/2020 May 16 – Main Page history/2020 May 27
* Main Page history/2020 May 28 – Main Page history/2020 September 22
* Main Page history/2020-09-23 styles.css
* Main Page history/2020 September 23 – Main Page history/2021 January 23b
* Main Page history/2021 January 24 – Main Page history/2021 February 18b
* Main Page history/2021-02-19 styles.css
* Main Page history/2021 February 19 – Main Page history/2021 June 30b
* Main Page history/2021 August 1 – Main Page history/2021 October 12b
* Main Page history/2021-10-13 styles.css
* Main Page history/2021 October 13 – Main Page history/2022 February 1
* Main Page history/2022-02-02 styles.css – addition of styles for <h1> tag
* Main Page history/2022 February 1b – Main Page history/2022 April 14
* Main Page history/2022-05-12 styles.css (removal of portal links + cleanup)
* Main Page history/2022 April 14b – Main Page history/2022 June 12
* ❌ Main Page history/2022-12-06 styles.css Main Page history/2024-05-23 styles.css (responsive overhaul + dark mode support + other fixes = Special:Diff/1087520986/1225316504)
* Abandoned – modern (as of 2024-07-13) Main Page/styles.css works fine for 2022–2023 versions, see next section.
Modern Main Page styles
* Fix hlist (MediaWiki talk:Common.css/Archive 19) + Dark mode fixes (Special:Diff/1224667428 + Special:Diff/1224947685)
* Main Page history/2022 June 12b – Main Page history/2022 December 29 (last without hlist fix, see Special:Diff/1130278529/1130394546)
* Dark mode fixes (Special:Diff/1224667428 + Special:Diff/1224947685)
* Main Page history/2022 December 29b –Main Page history/2024 May 19 (last without dark mode fix for POTD)
* Dark mode fix (Special:Diff/1224947685)
* Main Page history/2024 May 19b – Main Page history/2024 May 21 (last without dark mode fix for captions of small images)
* Do nothing for now:
* Main Page history/2024 May 22 – Main Page history/2024 July 12
Just Template:Hlist/styles.css
* TODO Main Page history/2015 May 19 – Main Page history/2020 May 14
Gadgets/userscripts
* What IDE/development setup are people using?
* Propose some kind of syncing between the wiki and Git repositories (GitHub, GitLab, doesn't matter) | WIKI |
Starting the construction of my first custom mechanical keyboard.
Introduction
With the logical heart of the Tinkboard Zero configured, it is now time to connect the programmed microcontroller to a bunch of keyboard switches. This article is a photographic report of the building process, with explanation of the steps and the decisions I made.
Ordering the parts
These are the base components for the Tinkboard Zero. All standard off the shelf parts, except for the plate, which was ordered from a laser cutting service. Missing in this image are the stabilizers, which I ordered later.
Image
The plate was build to order for me. Most laser cutting service providers accept SVG files as input, which can be generated using the JSON file from Keyboard Layout Editor. To generate an SVG file for your keyboard, head over to builder.swillkb.com and paste the JSON text there to generate the SVG file. Usually, select “MX” switch type and “Cherry only” stabilizer type. I also selected the “Poker 60%” case type and 2.5mm hole size, since my keyboard case has the Poker mounting holes.
Important, and I got this wrong, check at your laser cutting service what the “Kerf” is. Kerf is the width of the material removed by a cutting tool. If you specify 0 (the default), all slots in the plate will be slightly too large. Ideally the plate should be 1.5mm thick. Most materials will do, I selected “POM” because that was the only material available in 1.5mm.
I had a very hard time finding out which diodes to use. Ironically, this is such common knowledge that it is hardly ever specified. Anyway, these are “1N4148” diodes.
Switches
First step: click (and I use that term “loosely”, pun intended) the switches in the front side of the plate.
Image
Now turn the plate over and put a hotswap socket on the back of every switch.
Image
Hotswap sockets are usually soldered on the back of a PCB. I am building what’s called a “handwired” keyboard where you solder wires to the switches. Instead of soldering directly to the switches, I put a hotswap socket on every switch and solder to the socket. This way I can still change the switches without having to desolder them.
Rows
I first create the row connections by soldering one leg of a diode to a hotswap socket and folding the other leg over to the next switch. Here it can be soldered to the next diode. Take care of the correct direction of the diode, in my case the black ribbon points away from the switch. Both directions are fine as long as they are all the same but “Column to row” is the QMK default. I keep an eye on the row layout I programmed (mirrored, I am working from the back now!) and duplicate this with the diodes.
Image
Columns
I stripped a couple of network cables to create the columns on the other pins of the hotswap sockets (again, mirrored!). Network cables contain 8 color coded wires, which makes following the connections a bit easier. Not ideal for soldering though, the insulation on those wires is not very heat resistant.
Image
Notice how the wires from the left loop over the top and cross back down a second column. This way they connect and form one column.
ProMicro
Now I need to connect every row and every column to the ProMicro. I threaded some wires through the gaps between the switches, connect one end to a row/column and the other end to the designated pin on the ProMicro.
Image
With everything now connected, I plug one end of a USB cable into the ProMicro and the other end into my laptop and check. Amazingly, it all works!
Image
So finish off: put on the keycaps, all done!
Image
OK, that is not finished at all. The ProMicro is dangling from the side and the back consists of exposed wires. Everything still needs to be packaged into the keyboard case. I did not really plan ahead that far. No way I can get the ProMicro neatly into the case with the short wires I used. Let’s call it a proof of concept for now and complete the construction later. | ESSENTIALAI-STEM |
The establishment of schools for children was among the early priorities of settlers in Edmond as they began to build their lives after the land run of 1889. The first schoolhouse in Oklahoma Territory opened in Edmond on September 16, 1889; nearly one year before the first meeting of the Territorial Legislature. The question of mixed or separate schools was addressed in 1890 by the Territorial Legislature, which passed a law that allowed for the establishment of separate schools in any district where the majority of voters in the county were in favor of it. Individual school districts could establish mixed or separate schools, as need and the voters directed. The landmark Supreme Court case of Plessy v. Ferguson in 1896 declared racial segregation of public facilities was legal as long as they were “separate but equal.” The following year, further legislation was passed in Oklahoma Territory that made it illegal for whites and African Americans to attend the same school or to be taught by a person of the other race. This and similar laws throughout the United States was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in the landmark decision of Brown vs. the Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas in 1954.
In its first two decades, Edmond had three schoolhouses for white children and one for African American children. The whites-only schoolhouses consisted of Edmond’s first public schoolhouse built in 1889 that was in use until the Kingsley School (AKA Eastside School) was built in 1901, and the Lowell School (AKA Westside School) built in 1908.
Edmond’s separate school opened in 1892 and was located at 21 West Edwards Street, just west of Broadway. It was approximately ½ mile from the majority school on East Second Street. The first territorial legislature, in 1890, provided for the establishment of a separate school for a minimum of eight students of either race. The predominant population for a district would be enrolled in the majority school, with the separate school being maintained for the minority group. Edmond’s separate school started with 22 African American students. Enrollment was reported at 15 students in 1899, the year that Kingsley school was built to accommodate the 232 white students who attended the majority school house. Victoria Saunders, the last teacher at the Edmond separate school, reported 16 students in December 1903.
Photographs of early separate schools are difficult to find. Although the photo above is one of the few that we have been able to find that was taken in Oklahoma, the exact location is unknown. There are currently no known photos of a separate school in Edmond or the surrounding areas in the collection of the Edmond Historical Society & Museum.
K.S. Smith served as principal and teacher from 1892 until 1895; Smith was followed by a succession of teachers who served for one or two years each. Teacher pay ranged from $25 – $50 per month, as determined by the type of license the teacher possessed and whether or not teachers were also given the title of Principal. This was consistent with the pay received by the teachers at the majority school.
News of the township and surrounding area schools occasionally appeared in the Edmond newspapers during this time. Annual staffing, student progress, and attendance were often reported on. It is notable that the separate school consistently reported a higher percentage of students who were attending school regularly. William Sulcer, who replaced K.S. Smith in 1895, submitted this end-of-term report which appeared in the Edmond Sun-Democrat on April 24, 1896. Many of the students listed in the report above lived on homesteads to the east of Edmond, but had family members who worked in town.
William Sulcer served in many Oklahoma County separate schools. He took over in Edmond as Principal of the Separate School in 1895-6 and called the school “Tuftime.” Sulcer worked with other educators for improved training for African American teachers; their efforts resulted in the establishment of a Normal University at Langston (now Langston University) in 1897.
In 1898, Charles (Charley) D. Clem took over as the teacher at the Edmond Separate School. He was an incredibly effective leader and fundraiser, and also an accomplished poet who published his first work, “Rhymes of a Rhymester,” while living here in Edmond; a fact that even the white citizens in the area celebrated.
In 1903, Caroline Covington had nearly completed her studies at the Edmond Separate school; all that remained was the graduation exam, which was held at a whites-only schoolhouse. When she arrived in the room with the other students, she was met with murmurs, suspicions, and walk-outs. Caroline was then taken to another room to take the exam. However, a member of the school board came and sent her back to the separate school to take the exam. Caroline passed the exam, and she ended up being the first African American student from Edmond to graduate from the school.
In 1904, Victoria Saunders took over as teacher of the Edmond separate school. Unfortunately, she didn’t have the leadership or fundraising abilities of Sulcer or Clem. Saunders struggled to keep the school afloat in the face of a declining population. The Edmond separate school closed in 1905, reportedly due to a lack of available students. The separate school in Edmond was an important cultural center of Edmond’s early African American community. Its closure further showed that there were better opportunities elsewhere in Oklahoma. By 1920, the African American population in Edmond had fallen to zero. | FINEWEB-EDU |
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Wind in the Willows (2007 Film)
The result was Speedy delete vandalism. Guy (Help!) 16:23, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
The Wind in the Willows (2007 Film)
* - (View AfD) (View log)
This page is a hoax. As shown in this diff, the page linked to several nonexistent pages at its creation; the vandal removed those links when he reverted my prod this morning. It claims that there was a 52-episode series before 2008 and 2009. The IMDB link in the infobox links to another film entirely. If any admins are reading this, I'd really, really appreciate a block on this guy (AIV documentation here and my ignored AN/I post here). Vashti 11:29, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
* Delete this and the TV show article as hoaxalicious. JuJube 13:59, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
* Comment Another one? *aims prod stick* Vashti 14:10, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
| WIKI |
Long-term Sabbatical
Shedding new light on Baker’s Law through synthesis
PI(s): Susan Kalisz (University of Pittsburgh)
Start Date: 3-Nov-2013
End Date: 30-Apr-2014
Keywords: mating systems, dispersal, invasive species, biogeography, ecology
Baker’s Law (BL) states that self-compatible organisms are more likely to be successful colonizers after long-distance dispersal than self-incompatible organisms. This simple prediction draws a link between mating-system evolution and diverse fields of ecology and evolution such as dispersal biology and colonization, the evolution of range size and range limits, demography and Allee effect, and invasion biology. However, after ~60 years of experimental research and theory development, the accumulated data yield varying and often contradictory support of BL. During my sabbatical year, I will co-lead the first two BL working group (WG) meetings focused on assessment of the predictions and assumptions of BL and the elucidation of ecological and evolutionary parameters that determine the relationships between mating system, dispersal, and colonization success. As a sabbatical researcher at NESCent, I propose to focus on two goals: 1) Compilation and analysis of the voluminous literature on BL to assess the current status of BL. I will take the lead on preparing a BL review paper for the Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution and Systematics. 2) Construction of a BL database that combines data gathered by two prior NESCent WGs (seed germination WG; mating system WG) with a third from an NCEAS WG on pollen limitation. Species data on dispersal, range size, and life-history traits will be added, creating a powerful platform for testing various questions on the relationship between mating-system and colonization success. Rapid database compilation with support of the NESCent community will accelerate our WG’s ability to generate valuable synthetic products. | ESSENTIALAI-STEM |
By Jorge Navarro
Summary: The degree of water contamination in México is often a matter of location and economic status. With available sources continuously under scrutiny, the search is always present to find a better alternative for all residents. As such, the idea of POU/RO units may have found its calling.
In the industrialized world, point-of-use (POU) units are used mainly to enhance the water quality supplied to homes. The water is supplied 24 hours a day and the quality usually complies with local water quality standards.
Often, water availability—rather than quality—is the more important factor in Latin America. A large percentage of the population doesn’t receive their water from a municipal water supply, and those who do will have it available for only a few hours per day. Most cities have rationed their water supply because almost half of municipal water is wasted through leaks in distribution system piping when it’s pressurized.
Detecting the problem
When the water service is cut off in a region, the system may be under a slight vacuum and groundwater may be siphoned into the piping if proper backflow prevention design isn’t employed or maintained. This groundwater is usually heavily contaminated as the sewage mains may be in worse condition than the municipal water mains and may leach into the drinking water system.
This contaminated water is the main vector for diseases such as cholera (bacteria Vibrio cholerae), typhoid (bacteria Salmonella tiphy), shigellosis (bacteria Shigella dysenteriae), giardiasis (protozoan Giardia lamblia), amoebiasis or amoebic dysentery (protozoan Entamoeba histolytica), cryptosporidiosis (protozoan Cryptosporidium parvum), rotavirus (virus causing diarrhea), etc.
Warmer waters than found in the United States also contribute to an increase in the significance of the microorganism problem. This likely recontamination of México’s municipal drinking water—either in the distribution system and/or cisterns and storage tanks—requires disinfection of the water at the point of use to assure consumers receive the highest quality water possible from the tap.
Pathogen removal/inactivation
The process of pathogen inactivation includes filtration to remove suspended solids followed by disinfection with free chlorine, ozone, chlorine dioxide, chloramines or UV light. Some of the oxidation byproducts are trihalomethanes (THM) such as chloroform, bromodichloromethane, dibromochloromethane and bromoform. In some regions in Latin America, iodine is used and can form iodoform.
Turbidity’s relevance
In México, the turbidity requirement is less than 5 nephelometric turbidity units (NTUs) coinciding with the World Health Organization’s requirements. As of Jan. 1, 2002, the U.S. National Primary Drinking Water Regulation will require that turbidity may never exceed 1 NTU and must not exceed 0.3 NTU in 95 percent of daily samples in any month.
It’s understood that higher turbidity:
• Interferes with disinfection
• Inhibits maintenance of an effective disinfectant agent throughout the distribution system, or
• Interferes with microbiological measurement.
According to a model developed by Mark LeChevallier, research director for American Water Works Service Co., Voorhees, N.J., an increase in turbidity from 1 NTU to 10 NTUs in the surface water, with a constant dose of chlorine, could result in an eight-fold decrease in disinfection.
Addressing the need
Among reasons POU units are needed in Latin America are:
1. To improve water quality in systems not pressurized all the time,
2. To minimize exposure to water disinfectant by-products (DBPs),
3. To improve bad tasting drinking water, and
4. To assure untreated or partially treat waters that may still need the removal of some contaminants such as arsenic, fluoride and others afford some sense of added protection to consumers.
The POU system may include a booster pump, sediment filtration, carbon filtration, reverse osmosis (RO) membrane, pneumatic tank, faucet and a shutoff valve. Post-carbon filtration may not be as helpful unless bacteriostatic materials are used because warmer waters increase the potential for microorganism growth in the cartridge.
There are some considerations to take into account when selecting or installing a POU unit in México.
Home piping in México
Normally, municipal water comes from underground mains to a box in front of the house where the water meter is located. In some areas, the water pressure is so low that the water supply is interrupted. To ensure the possibility of obtaining water, residences in these areas have cisterns or tanks on the roof to store water whenever it’s available.
Homeowners with higher income may have underground cisterns with chlorinating and hydropneumatic systems to keep a pressurized water supply during the day. Middle class homes have a cistern with a pump supplying water to an elevated storage tank (on the roof) where the water comes down by gravity to service the home. On lower income homes, they may have an elevated storage tank or a direct supply with no storage.
The piping may be buried under the floor (ceramic tile) or in the walls (concrete or bricks and cement), or it goes outdoors through the internal yards or “patios.” Otherwise, it may be installed in the ventilation ducts or through skylights.
Standards & water quality
In México, potable water standards are regulated (see Table 1) by NOM-SSA1-127 and the bottled water is regulated by NOM- SSA1-041. The standard, or norm, NOM-SSA1-180 covers water purifiers for domestic use. Water quality differs depending on what city in México is being discussed.
México City
Known as México, D.F., for Distrito Federal or Federal District, some neighborhoods located in the west, northwest and southwest parts of the city such as Las Lomas Chapultepec, Bosques de las Lomas, Polanco, Condado de Saavedra and Pedregal de San Ángel have good buying power, a reliable water supply and average total hardness (TH) is <150 parts per million (ppm)—or milligrams per liter (mg/L)—and with total dissolved solids (TDS) is <250 ppm. During the rainy season, they may get a higher turbidity than normal.
In the downtown area, the average TH is <400 ppm with a TDS <600 ppm. In the eastern part of the city, TH is <600 ppm with a TDS <1,000 ppm.
In the areas surounding the Federal District, there are different qualities as the water usually comes from wells and the entity managing the water supply (Comisión del Agua) mixes water from different sources. TH fluctuates from 300-to-600 ppm and the TDS from 400-to-1,000 ppm.
Monterrey, Nuevo León
The higher income neighborhoods are Colonia Del Valle, Valle Oriente and Valle Alto. They are located in the eastern part of the city. Their water quality has a TH of <350 ppm with a TDS <600 ppm. Middle class homes are located in the western part of the city and they have similar water quality. The worst water quality is in the northern part of the city in the neighborhoods of Apodaca and Escobedo. These are industrial zones or neigborhoods with lower economical resources, and contain TH of <1,700 ppm with a TDS <3,500 ppm.
Guadalajara, Jalisco
Some higher income neighborhoods are Villa Universitaria with excellent water quality, Jardín del Bosque with high TH, and other neighborhoods such as Puerta de Hierro, Ciudad Bugambilias, El Palomar and Santa Anita, which have good water quality in hardness and TDS, but contain fluoride. Middle- and low-income neighborhoods such as El Rosario, Atlas and San Pedro get their water from the Chapala Lake and have a TDS from 600-to-700 ppm.
Mérida, Yucatán
The higher income neighborhoods are La Ceiba, La Hacienda, Monte Cristo and Buenavista and they’re located in the northern part of the city. Middle income homes are to the west and east. Throughout the Yucatán Peninsula, the water comes from an aquifer and wells in the region have similar qualities with TH <500 ppm and TDS <700 ppm.
Conclusion
There is a need to remove suspended solids and microorganisms in the water to lower fluoride and arsenic content of the water and to lower TDS and other contaminants in some areas of México that may give rise to complaints from consumers. A well-designed POU/RO system backed up by excellent service may provide the best solution for all these needs.
Acknowledgment
The author would like to thank Ernesto Castro, International Marketing Development Manager, Osmonics Inc., for additional information and translation of this article. Castro can be reached at (262) 238-4400, (262) 238-4402 (fax) or email: [email protected].
References
1. Mexican Norms for Drinking Water Quality NOM-127-SSA1-1994.
2. Mexican Norms for Bottling Purified Water NOM-041-SSA1-1993.
3. Mexican Norms for water for human use and consumption, Domestic Water Treatment Equipments NOM-180-SSA1-1998.
4. Catalog of Mexican Norms, website: http://www.secofi..gob.mx
5. WHO Guidelines for Drinking Water Quality, 1993, website: www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/GDWQ/index.html
6. USEPA’s Primary National Drinking Water Standards, website: http://www.usepa.gov/safewater
About the author
Jorge Navarro has worked in water treatment for 34 years with Industrias Mass, S.A. de C.V. The company has been manufacturing equipment and systems for the Mexican water treatment market for 35 years in residential, comercial and industrial markets throughout the country. Navarro works in the technical department supporting Industrias Mass’ sales efforts. He can be reached at +52-5397-9800, +52-5361-6525 (fax) or e-mail: [email protected].
Share.
Comments are closed. | ESSENTIALAI-STEM |
Dopexamine
Dopexamine is a synthetic analogue of dopamine that is administered intravenously in hospitals to reduce exacerbations of heart failure and to treat heart failure following cardiac surgery. It is not used often, as more established drugs like epinephrine, dopamine, dobutamine, norepinephrine, and levosimendan work as well. It works by stimulating beta-2 adrenergic receptors and peripheral dopamine receptor D1 and dopamine receptor D2. It also inhibits the neuronal re-uptake of norepinephrine.
The most common adverse effects include fast heart beats and nausea.
It was discovered by scientists at Fisons, which licensed it to Ipsen in 1993, and Ipsen in turn licensed it to Élan in 1999. Ipsen licensed rights in North America and Japan to Circassia in 2008; the drug had never been approved in those countries. Dopexamine went off-patent in 2010.
Medical use
Dopexamine is used in hospitals as an inotropic agent to reduce exacerbations of heart failure and to treat heart failure following cardiac surgery. It is administered intravenuously.
As of 2010 dopexamine was not often administered in cardiac care because other, more well established drugs can accomplish the same effect, other such drugs include epinephrine, dopamine, dobutamine, norepinephrine, and levosimendan.
It should not be used in people taking monoamine oxidase inhibitors, nor in people who have certain adrenal cancers, low platelet counts, or people with left ventricular outlet obstruction.
It also should not be used in people with severe low blood pressure or reduced systemic vascular resistance. It should be used in caution in people with ischemic heart disease especially following heart attack or a recent episode of angina due to the risk of tachycardia. It should not be used in people with reduced blood volume.
Safety in pregnant women has not been established.
Adverse effects
Very common (greater than 10%) adverse effects include fast heart beats and nausea. Common (between 1% and 10%) adverse effects include tremor, headache, transient low blood pressure, vomiting, increased sweating, sepsis, sinus and nodal slow heart beat, cardiac arrest, myocardial infarction, cardiac enzyme changes, non-specific ECG changes, high blood pressure, hemorrhage, respiratory failure, acute respiratory distress syndrome, pulmonary edema, pulmonary hypertension, and kidney failure.
Like other ß2-agonists, dopexamine lowers potassium levels and raises glucose levels, so there is a risk of exacerbating hypokalaemia or hyperglycaemia.
People can develop drug tolerance to dopexamine if it is administered over a long period of time, as with other catecholamines.
Dopexamine may potentiate the effects of other catecholamines like noradrenaline. Effects of depexamine may be suppressed by concomitant use with ß2-adrenergic and dopamine receptor antagonists requires caution.
Pharmacology
The half-life of IV dopexamine is 6–7 minutes in healthy adults and 11 minutes in patients with heart failure.
Mechanism of action
Dopexamine stimulates beta-2 adrenergic receptors and peripheral dopamine receptor D1 and dopamine receptor D2. It also inhibits of neuronal re-uptake of norepinephrine (Uptake-1). These activities increase cardiac output and increase blood flow to peripheral vascular beds. It is not an α-adrenergic agonist, does not cause vasoconstriction, and is not a pressor agent.
As of 2004 there was some controversy surrounding the mechanism of dopexamine. Some held that its local effects of increased tissue perfusion were due only to increased output from the heart, while others held that were direct peripheral effects.
Chemistry
Dopexamine is a synthetic analogue of dopamine, a catecholamine. Its formula may be stated 4-[2-[4[[6-[(2-phenylethy)amino]-hexyl]amino]ethyl]-1,2-benzenediol or 4-[2-[4[[6-(phenethylamino)hexyl]-amino]ethyl]pyrocatechol.
Chinese manufacturers dominated the market for the active pharmaceutical ingredient as of 2015.
History
Dopexamine was discovered by scientists at Fisons and Fisons received the USAN name dopexamine in 1985 for its compound, then called FPL 60278.
The drug was marketed by 1992 and by 1996 had been approved in several countries.
Fisons licensed the rights to Ipsen in 1993, and Ipsen in turn licensed the rights to Elan in 1999.
The patent on dopexamine was controlled by Elan when it expired in 2003.
Dopexamine was approved for use in the European Union for treatment of symptoms related to heart failure in 2010.
In 2008 the UK company Circassia acquired the US, Canadian, and Japanese marketing rights to dopexamine from Ipsen; at the time, the company said it was planning to develop a new formulation of dopexamine in combination with fluids delivered via IV fluids, looking to improve outcomes following surgery. As of 2008 dopexamine had not been approved for any use in the US, Canada, or Japan. A
Teva recalled batches of dopexamine in the UK in 2014 due to quality control issues by the manufacturer, Cephalon.
Research
Use in sepsis has been explored in clinical trials, but use of an inotropic agent like dobutamine or dopexamine did not reduce mortality compared with norepinephrine or epinephrine. Use of dopexamine may be harmful in sepsis | WIKI |
List of certified albums in South Korea
The Korea Music Content Association (KMCA) was established in 2008, with the purpose of promoting the professional interests of its members, as well as being involved in anti-piracy. It introduced the first official South Korean music charts in 2010, and implemented record certifications in April 2018—only releases subsequent to January 1, 2018 would be eligible once they fulfilled the required thresholds. Releases prior to that date cannot receive certification.
Since 2018, 292 albums have been certified by the KMCA in South Korea. Got7's Eyes on You, NCT's NCT 2018 Empathy, and Wanna One's 0+1=1 (I Promise You) were the first to be certified, on May 5 of that year. The following month, Twice's What Is Love? (2018) became the first album by a female act to receive a certification. Blackpink's debut studio album The Album became the first by a girl group to receive Million certification, in 2020, while their second studio album Born Pink became the first to receive Double Million certification, in 2022. Baekhyun's third EP Bambi (2021) is the first album by a solo artist to receive Million certification. Jisoo's first solo album Me (2023) is the first album by a female solo artist to receive Million certification. . Boy band SEVENTEEN has the most-certified albums overall, with nineteen.
As of July 2024, South Korea's highest-certified records are Map of the Soul: 7 (2020) BTS, FML (2023) SEVENTEEN, 5-Star (2023) STRAY KIDS. The records were awarded quintuple million certifications in November 2022, July 2023, August 2023 respectively for selling over five million units. | WIKI |
User:Nhennies
Things
* Obsessively updating entries for Souled American, Lungfish, et al
* Member of The Weird Weeds
* Owner of two basset hounds, Tupper & Heidi
* Hometown: Louisville, Kentucky
* Current residence: Austin, Texas
* Degrees held from University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign and University of California, San Diego | WIKI |
Salamanca, New York
Salamanca (Seneca: Onë:dagö:h) is a city in Cattaraugus County, New York, United States, inside the Allegany Indian Reservation, one of two governed by the Seneca Nation of New York. The population was 5,929 at the 2020 census. It was named after José de Salamanca, a Spanish nobleman and cabinet minister of the mid-19th century. Salamanca invested in railroads around the globe, including the Atlantic and Great Western Railroad in New York State, Pennsylvania, and Ohio.
Geography
According to the United States Census Bureau, the city has an area of 16.15 sqkm, of which 15.52 sqkm is land and 0.63 sqkm, or 3.88%, is water.
Salamanca is within the Allegany Indian Reservation of the Seneca Nation of New York (one of the six tribes of the Iroquois Confederacy). The city population of about 5,900 is about 19% Native American; this does not include Seneca people living in the nearby hamlets of Jimerson Town (one of the two capitals of the nation) and Kill Buck. The city lies along the Allegheny River and is adjacent to Allegany State Park.
Salamanca is one of the two cities in Cattaraugus County, the other being Olean.
History
What is now known as the city of Salamanca was originally two separate communities, one on Little Valley Creek and the other on Great Valley Creek; the westernmost one of the two was called "Hemlock", a name derived from the numerous hemlock trees throughout the surrounding mountains. The eastern community (from modern-day Conrath Avenue eastward) was Kill Buck's Town; the eastern half of what is now Kill Buck remains an unincorporated hamlet independent of the city of Salamanca. Hemlock was later renamed "West Salamanca" and (although it was marked on road signs as late as the 1990s) was eventually incorporated into the single city of Salamanca. The city was incorporated in 1913. At one time the city was a thriving railroad hub, with the Erie Railroad (later Conrail), Buffalo, Rochester and Pittsburgh Railway (BR&P) (later Baltimore and Ohio Railroad) both having facilities there. Generations of Salamanca residents worked for the railroads, and much of the housing was originally built for them by the railroads. The city also benefited from the then-thriving lumber industry that dominated much of southwestern Cattaraugus County at the turn of the century, as boomtowns along the Allegheny River such as Elko, South Valley and Red House (all much-less-populated ghost towns today) all used the railroads to ship their goods upstream. At the time of the city's incorporation, it peaked at under 10,000 residents, not far behind Olean, 19 miles to the east, the major hub of the county; Olean, however, would continue to grow rapidly into the 1950s, while Salamanca's population would begin falling behind almost immediately. The Salamanca Rail Museum was opened in the former BR&P depot in 1984 to house its archives.
The majority of the city, with the exception of a northeastern spur along Great Valley Creek, was constructed on the Allegany Indian Reservation held by the Seneca Nation of New York, as established in various treaties. Under the nation's policy, non-Seneca residents are barred from owning real property on the reservation, and non-Senecas can only lease the property from the Seneca Nation. As arranged by the railroads, the previous leases had nominal payments and covered only the land; improvements (i.e., buildings and houses) were considered to be owned by the non-native citizens.
When the leases expired in the early 1990s, the nation tried to gain more from its leases, raising their costs and asserting not only the land, but the improvements were also subject to the native leases. Numerous people living in the city did not agree on the amount of lease payments or the legitimacy of the Senecas' absolute ownership claim. The controversy aroused bitterness, lawsuits, and appeals to government officials. Congress passed a law explicitly placing the improvements under Seneca jurisdiction, the new leases were put into effect, and fifteen houses were seized and their owners evicted for refusing to sign the leases. The current leases are in effect until 2030, with an option to extend until 2070; proceeds from the lease payments are distributed quarterly to enrolled Seneca Nation members, providing a basic income guarantee.
Despite the lack of ownership, leased land held by non-Senecas is subject to property tax, which the lessee must pay to the city, Cattaraugus County and the Salamanca City Central School District. Seneca-owned land is exempt under the Treaty of Buffalo Creek. Once a Seneca acquires the land, it is taken off the tax rolls; for this reason, the city of Salamanca does not auction-off abandoned properties on the reservation in a property-tax auction, for fear Seneca individuals will buy the land, removing it from the tax rolls.
Government
The city has a council-mayor system, with the mayor elected at-large and five trustees selected from wards, generally numbered from west to east.
"Between 2004-05 and 2009-10, State aid for the City, including casino revenues, increased by an average annual rate of nearly 50 percent (starting at $0.8 million in 2004-05 and peaking at $7.3 million in 2008-09). Salamanca’s average annual expenditure increases on debt service, general government, transportation, utilities and public safety between 2004-05 and 2009-10 were all in the double digits." This was attributable to revenues from the Seneca Allegany Casino.
Casino revenues
The Seneca Nation opened a gambling casino in Salamanca in May 2004. About 1,000 new jobs were created by the casino operation, resulting in a housing shortage in the small town as new workers entered the city. Under the arrangement with the state, a 25% share of the casino's revenue goes to the city and county, which they can use for needed projects. Revenues for the city increased dramatically (see above).
Significant change did not quickly take place in the city, with new construction in only a few select areas. Main Street and US Route 219 (which runs through the city) remain largely untouched. Redevelopment was delayed when the Nation stopped casino payments in late 2010, in a dispute with the state over its opening racinos elsewhere in the state; payments were resumed in 2013. The state provided the city with emergency funds to help support it until the dispute was settled. The Senecas again announced it would halt payments to the state in 2017, stating that a clause in the gaming compact had expired and its obligation to continue paying the state was no longer in effect. The Seneca Nation and the state of New York agreed to a settlement in January 2022, with the Senecas agreeing to pay the money owed, ahead of negotiations for a renewal of the compact in 2023.
Because of the contentious relations between Seneca and non-Seneca residents, columnist Selena Zito described Salamanca as a "failed American city" in 2011, in a column that soon drew the rebuke of city officials.
Economy
Retail shops include several Seneca-owned cigarette, tobacco, coffee shops, and gas stations; there are several empty storefronts, especially in the city's central business district on and near Main Street. The Seneca Nation has made efforts to diversify, establishing a tribal holding company in 2009 and an economic development corporation in 2011. In 2021, many of the city's vacant buildings and former smoke shops were converted into cannabis dispensaries, leading to a glut of retailers for the recently legalized product.
The city's only shopping mall, Salamanca Mall, hosts a regional hardware chain, a local antique shop, and a small taqueria Three hotels operate in the city.
A number of industrial factories, among them McHone Industries (a metal fabricating company) and Salamanca Lumber, operate in the center part of the city.
Ground
The Southern Tier Expressway (Interstate 86 and New York State Route 17) passes south of the city. Running through the city are U.S. Route 219 and New York State Routes 417 and 353, the last two of which terminate within a mile of each other on Salamanca's west end.
Salamanca serves as a hub for the area's public bus service. Coach USA, Fullington Trailways, the Seneca Transit System, and the Olean Area Transit System all converge on the city. The city's only active (freight) rail depot is on the east side of the city, serviced by the Buffalo and Pittsburgh Railroad.
In the past, the Erie Railroad and then, starting in 1960, the Erie Lackawanna Railway had operated passenger trains through Salamanca. Into the 1960s, the Erie Limited and the Atlantic Express/Pacific Express made stops there. The last passenger train making stops there was the Lake Cities which was discontinued on January 6, 1970. The New York and Lake Erie Railroad operated between Salamanca and Gowanda until 1990. Today, the station houses the Salamanca Rail Museum. Two miles to the east, the Buffalo, Rochester and Pittsburgh Railway had an "East Salamanca" station. The successor railroad, the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad last had passenger trains at the latter in the mid-1950s. Into the early 1940s, the Pennsylvania Railroad ran passenger trains into a third station for trains between Olean and Oil City, Pennsylvania.
Two of the former rail rights-of-way are now rail trails: the NY&LE right-of-way is now the state-owned Pat McGee Trail (which officially ends at the city line before entering the city) and the Pennsylvania Railroad path is now the Pennsy Trail. The Finger Lakes Trail also cuts across the city, mainly using city roads.
Air
Salamanca has no local major airports. Although Great Valley Airport is nearby, this airport is mostly used for general aviation, and no commercial passenger service operates out of it. The nearest public airports are Buffalo Niagara International Airport and Bradford Regional Airport.
Religion
The Catholic Church, Southern Baptist Convention (House of Prayer), Seventh-day Adventists, Free Methodist Church, and Lighthouse Baptist Church all have branches in the city bounds. At least two other independent churches also operate; the local United Methodist Church disaffiliated in the late 2010s.
Media
Radio stations WQRS (on the FM band at 98.3) and WGGO (on the AM band at 1590) are licensed to Salamanca. WQRS (The Goat, historically known as 98 Rocks) carries a classic rock format run by Seven Mountains Media out of Olean; WGGO is an owned and operated station of The Station of the Cross, a regional Catholic radio network, with its nominal studio in Kill Buck. W288EK (FM 105.5) is also licensed to Salamanca and simulcasts WOLY (Big Oly), another Seven Mountains station out of Olean.
From 2010 to 2021, WGWE (FM 105.9) was operated out of Salamanca. The station, licensed to Little Valley, shut down and sold its assets to a broadcaster who plans to operate the station elsewhere.
The Salamanca Press is the local newspaper. A daily paper (publishing Monday through Saturday) for most of the 20th century, the paper reverted to a weekly publication in 2009.
There is no direct television broadcasting in Salamanca; the city is ostensibly part of the Buffalo media market, and local cable and satellite providers carry those stations (as well as some from Erie, Pennsylvania and Toronto, Ontario), but the hilly terrain around the city makes television reception problematic. Two low-powered stations based in Olean can occasionally be received over the air. Breezeline is the local cable provider.
Demographics
As of the 2020 United States census, Salamanca had a population of 5,929. The ethnic and racial makeup of the population was 69.3% White, 2.6% African-American, 18.6% Native American, 0.7% Asian, <0.1% Pacific Islander, 6.7% reporting two or more races, and 6.7% Hispanic or Latino of any race. 66.3% of the population was non-Hispanic white.
As of the census of 2000, there were 6,097 people, 2,469 households, and 1,575 families residing in the city. The population density was 1,015.6 PD/sqmi. There were 2,749 housing units at an average density of 457.9 /sqmi. The racial makeup of the city was 74.26% White, 0.66% Black or African American, 20.74% Native American, 0.33% Asian, 0.08% Pacific Islander, 0.18% from other races, and 1.75% from two or more races. Hispanic or Latino of any race were 1.82% of the population.
There were 2,469 households, out of which 31.6% had children under the age of 18 living with them, 42.2% were married couples living together, 15.6% had a female householder with no husband present, and 36.2% were non-families. 31.8% of all households were made up of individuals, and 15.3% had someone living alone who was 65 years of age or older. The average household size was 2.41 and the average family size was 3.00.
In the city, the population was spread out, with 27.0% under the age of 18, 8.0% from 18 to 24, 26.9% from 25 to 44, 20.7% from 45 to 64, and 17.4% who were 65 years of age or older. The median age was 37 years. For every 100 females, there were 88.6 males. For every 100 females age 18 and over, there were 86.6 males.
The median income for a household in the city was $24,579, and the median income for a family was $30,996. Males had a median income of $25,549 versus $19,180 for females. The per capita income for the city was $12,812. About 18.0% of families and 22.2% of the population were below the poverty line, including 32.7% of those under age 18 and 15.9% of those age 65 or over.
Notable people
* George Abbott (1887-1995), theater producer
* Ray Caldwell (1888-1967), former MLB spitball pitcher
* Gordon Canfield (1898-1972), member of the House of Representatives for New Jersey's 8th congressional district
* Chuck Crist (1961-2020), former National Football League safety; he returned to his hometown to serve as a principal in the city schools
* Robert DeLaurentis (1966-), an American aviator, the first solo pilot to fly a Piper Malibu Mirage, a small, single-engine plane, around the world
* Maxine Crouse Dowler (1933-2015), teacher, Member of the Board of Seneca Nation Educational Foundation
* Ray Evans (1915–2007), musician/songwriter; composed the Christmas song "Silver Bells". The Ray Evans Seneca Theater is named in his honor; it was closed in 2011 due to disrepair and would not reopen until 2013.
* Albert T. "Ab" Fancher (1859-1930), New York state senator in the late 19th/early 20th century; co-owner (with E.B. Vreeland of the Seneca Oil Company, a subsidiary of Standard Oil Company); donated much of the land to New York that now comprises Allegany State Park, the largest state park in New York; developed the Fancher farm, on the western side of Salamanca, which boasts one of the largest barns in New York.
* Ira Joe Fisher (1947-), daytime television personality and weather reporter; born and worked in Salamanca, he spent most of his childhood in neighboring Little Valley.
* Ralph W. Gallagher (1881–1952), president and chairman of Standard Oil of New Jersey
* Marvin Hubbard (1945-2015), former pro football player; born in Salamanca, he spent most of his childhood in nearby Red House
* Paul Owens (1924-2003) player, scout, coach and general manager with the Philadelphia Phillies in the late 20th century. Raised in Salamanca's East End; graduated from local schools and St. Bonaventure University, and began his baseball career with the still-extant Salamanca Merchants amateur team.
* Edward B. Vreeland (1856-1936), banker, congressman, co-author of the "Aldrich-Vreeland Bill" that transformed the United States Banking system in the early 20th century. Senator Aldrich represented Rhode Island and was the maternal grandfather of Nelson Aldrich Rockefeller, governor of New York in the 1960s.
* Carson Waterman, Seneca Indian artist known for public art and illustrations in the Allegany Seneca Storybook and Seneca Coloring Book. | WIKI |
Park Beyond
Park Beyond is a construction and management simulation video game developed by Limbic Entertainment and published by Bandai Namco Entertainment. The game was released for Windows PC, PlayStation 5 and Xbox Series X and Series S in June 2023.
Gameplay
Park Beyond is a construction and management simulation video game in which the player can build their own theme parks. In the game, the player needs to build, design and manage various flat rides and roller coasters as the park's main attractions, as well as other relevant facilities such as shops and restaurants. These facilities can be extensively customized. Park Beyond introduces the idea of "impossification", which allows players to construct rides that defy physics and gravity. These rides generate a resource named Amazement. With sufficient Amazement, players will be able to research new ways to "impossify" their attractions. Players, as park managers, also need to keep an eye on social trends to ensure that their attractions will draw players to the park.
Players will meet different advisors in the game, who will present the player different conflicts. For instance, an imaginative attraction proposed by an advisor may be scrutinized by another because it may not be feasible financially. Players have to face these dilemmas and make decisions regularly. The player will also participate in pitch meetings in which they will explain to the park's board of directors their plans for the park.
Development
Park Beyond is currently being developed by German developer Limbic Entertainment. After working on Tropico 6 (2019) for four years, the team wanted to create something new, and two theme park enthuisasts pitched to management the idea of making a theme park simulator. According to Limbic's CEO Stephan Winter, the pitch was welcomed by the team because it was "fresh enough to excite everyone", and that they were able to "transfer a lot of know-how" from working on a city-building game to a theme park simulation game. While the team introduced the idea of "impossification", they still wanted the game to be "grounded in reality" and "believable".
The game was announced by Limbic Entertainment and publisher Bandai Namco Entertainment at Gamescom 2021. Bandai Namco became majority stakeholder of Limbic Entertainment in October 2022. Initially set to be released in 2022, the game was delayed and released on 16 June 2023 for Windows PC, PlayStation 5 and Xbox Series X and Series S. A closed beta for the game was held from 9 to 19 May. Players who pre-ordered the standard edition of the game received the "Pac-Man Impossification Set". In addition, players who purchase the "Visioneer Edition" will gain access to the "Zombeyond Impossification Set". These packs were made available as separate DLC packs at a later date.
The first major DLC pack, Beyond eXtreme, was initially scheduled for release on 29 September alongside an update that allows players to share their creations online. On 18 September, it was moved to a later date. A DLC pack themed to Chicken Run: Dawn of the Nugget was released alongside the movie on 15 December.
Reception
According to review aggregator Metacritic, the PC and PlayStation 5 versions of the game received "mixed or average" reviews, while the Xbox Series X version received "generally positive reviews". It was the 38th best-selling video game in the UK in its week of release. | WIKI |
Jay Triano
Howard James "Jay" Triano (born September 21, 1958) is a Canadian basketball coach and former professional player, who is currently an assistant coach for the Sacramento Kings of the National Basketball Association (NBA). He previously served as the head coach of the NBA's Toronto Raptors and Phoenix Suns. A former Canada national team player who competed in two Olympics, he has also had two stints as head coach of the national team.
Early life and family
Triano was born in Tillsonburg, Ontario and raised in Niagara Falls, where he attended A. N. Myer Secondary School. He is of Italian descent through his great-grandfather, who landed on Ellis Island, then made his way to Welland, Ontario. His younger brother Jeff was a draft pick of the Toronto Maple Leafs in the 1982 NHL Entry Draft, after playing OHL hockey for the Toronto Marlboros. Brady Heslip, his nephew and son of his sister Jody, played basketball at Baylor University and played for the Canada national team.
Playing career
As a student at Simon Fraser University, the 6 ft, 194 lb Triano broke or equalled eleven school men's basketball records, including having the most career points with 2,616. At Simon Fraser, he befriended Canadian athlete and activist Terry Fox. He was drafted in the eighth round of the 1981 NBA draft by the Los Angeles Lakers, but was cut during training camp and never played in the NBA. The same year, he was also drafted by the Calgary Stampeders in the sixth round of the 1981 CFL Draft.
Triano was a national team player from 1977 to 1988, captained the team from 1981 to 1988, and played in the 1984 and 1988 Olympics. He led the Canadian team that won Gold at the 1983 World University Games in Edmonton, Alberta, defeating the United States in the semi-finals, which was led by Karl Malone and Charles Barkley, and Yugoslavia in the final, led by Dražen Petrović. He played three seasons of professional basketball, two in Mexico and one (1985–86 season for Fenerbahçe Istanbul) in Turkey.
Coaching career
After retiring as a player in 1988, Triano became head coach at his alma mater, Simon Fraser. He attempted to recruit high school star Steve Nash and later served as his mentor. In 1995, when the nearby Vancouver Grizzlies debuted, he became team director of community relations and worked as the colour commentator for their radio broadcasts. In 1998, Triano became the head coach of the Canadian men's national basketball team. He coached the Nash-led team to a 5–2 record and a seventh-place finish in the 2000 Sydney Olympics, losing to France by five points in the quarter-finals. Two years later, he became an assistant coach for the Toronto Raptors, becoming the second Canadian-born coach in the NBA. He served under Lenny Wilkens, Kevin O'Neill, and Sam Mitchell.
In 2004, Triano was fired as national team head coach, and replaced by Leo Rautins the following year.
In 2008, Triano was named an assistant coach for United States national team. On February 13, 2008, Triano served as head coach of the Toronto Raptors in their 109–91 victory over the New Jersey Nets, in place of head coach Sam Mitchell, who was absent from the team as a result of the death of his father-in-law, making history as the first Canadian to serve as head coach for a regular-season NBA game.
On December 3, 2008, Triano was named interim head coach of the Raptors after Mitchell was relieved of his coaching duties. He became the first Canadian-born head coach in NBA history and first Canadian head coach in NBA history. Triano guided the Raptors to a 25–40 mark.
On May 12, 2009, Triano was given a three-year deal to remain head coach of the Raptors.
In Triano's first full season as the Raptors head coach in the 2009–10 season, Toronto missed making the playoffs by one game to the Chicago Bulls, going 2–5 in their final 7 games. The team finished 40–42.
In the 2010–11 season, without All-Star Chris Bosh on the roster, Triano led the Raptors to a dismal 22–60 record.
On June 1, 2011, the Raptors announced they would not be picking up the option on Triano's contract, but gave him another position within the organization, the vice-president of pro scouting.
On August 17, 2012, Triano was named as an assistant coach for the Portland Trail Blazers. The following week, Triano was also named head coach of Canada's national team for the second time in his career.
On July 27, 2016, Triano was hired by the Phoenix Suns as associate head coach.
On October 22, 2017, after a 0–3 start to the season, including one of the worst losses in Suns history and the worst loss to open up a regular season in league history, Triano was promoted to interim head coach of the Suns after the firing of Earl Watson. In his first game as head coach since 2011, Triano guided the team, which had suffered 40-plus-point losses earlier in the year, to leads as much as 22 points before winning 117–115 on October 23, against the Sacramento Kings for their first win of the season. On December 26, 2017, Triano became the first foreign-born head coach in NBA history to win 100 games in the league with a 99–97 win over the Memphis Grizzlies. However, the Suns finished the season with a 21–58 record under his tenure, and he did not return as head coach after that season. On July 2, 2018, Triano was hired by the Charlotte Hornets as an assistant coach.
On August 12, 2022, Triano was hired by the Sacramento Kings as an assistant coach. | WIKI |
Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Civility noticeboard
* The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellany page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the debate was there's only about six users who want this page kept as a concept. There another few who wanted more time for this page to develop, to see what would happen with it, but the concers of the delete side, particularily the links pointing to misunderstandings of the scope of this page, rebutt those arguments in my mind. A substantial portion of the keep side does not want the page to be in operation, so there's actually very little support for the concept itself. Those conclusions, as well as the two-thirds numerical majority of the delete side, make me close this complicated debate as a delete. Tito xd (?!? - help us) 01:15, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
Civility noticeboard
This page serves only to fragment discussions, complicate issues and spread conversations across multiple locations, none of which is good for our project. It encourages solution shopping. It attempts to establish specific editors as arbiters of civility. This will make dispute resolution more difficult, and may even have a paradoxically inflammatory effect. FreplySpang 00:20, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* NOTE: I have 'concordified' this page by moving it to Concordia/Civility noticeboard, since there was certainly no consensus to introduce this procedure into the main project space. The Land 19:27, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* User:Computerjoe has seen fit to move it back. The Land 18:50, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
* Delete Agree that this is making dispute solving more difficult, people are taking Concordia as "civility experts" whose opinion has more value than others -- Drini 00:23, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* Strong Delete per above. Ande B 00:26, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* Delete per Freply and Drini.--Sean Black 00:30, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* I agree with FreplySpang, who puts it better (and more politely) than I ever could. fuddlemark (befuddle me!) 00:33, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* Delete per comments above. Another bureaucratic solution in search of a problem. --ⁿɡ͡b Nick Boalch \ talk 00:35, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* Delete as above. Failing that, suggest Rob Church as Prosecutor-General. Mackensen (talk) 00:52, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* String support for this proposal :P – Gurch 17:33, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* Keep Many of the arguments above are concerned with the problems it 'may' cause ... I'd like to see it fail before deleting it. -- ∞Wirelain 00:55, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* Comment You may want to re-read the above comments in support of deletion. The concern is that it is already causing problems, not that it might do so in the future. Given the current activity, we can expect that it will continue to be problematic. Ande B 01:06, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* Well, this is nothing more than "community justice" renamed, and it's been already being used to fuel disputes by users arguing these "experts" dictamined an statement was uncivil or not -- Drini 00:57, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* It does not seem fair to judge this page's worth five hours after it has been created. Nothing is perfect the first time around. (^'-')^ Covington 10:21, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* If nothing else this does bring up the issue of rampant incivil out of control editors. At the very least Rejected, I'm only not flipping to delete to try to stop future incarnations. -- ∞Wirelain 17:12, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
* Delete FreplySpang has it about right I think. In any case the group isn't nearly stable enough, there was all sorts of push back about changing the name and the constant assurance that there wasn't any mediation involved. Then all of the sudden the name changes and a new dispute resolution component added. The Deletion Noticeboard WP:DN should go as well. Rx StrangeLove 01:12, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* It seems to me here (please correct me if I am wrong) that your argument stems from your opinion that Concordia's leadership is unstable. Esperanza's leadership also had problems recently, yet all their programs have not been nominated for deletion. (^'-')^ Covington 10:21, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* That's a part of it, but I think it's a matter of degree. I'm not in charge of what's getting nominated for deletion. I'm not going to nominate any of their programs because I'm not familar enough with them to know if that would be a good idea or not. In any case there are more reasons than just that for this deletion. For example Concordia's own members are not really being all that civil so I would be concerned about them setting an example for others. Rx StrangeLove 04:58, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
* Whether a good idea or not, this does seem to be a good faith offering. The appropriateness of the page should be discussed and decided on the page's Talk page. If it turns out to be a bad idea, keep it with a rejected tag. That way, we will be able to learn from our mistakes. Rossami (talk) 01:23, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* I think that discussion is taking place right here. For my part, forking the dispute resolution process is often a bad thing, especially when the leadership is demonstrably unstable. Mackensen (talk) 01:28, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* Why is it happening here? A discussion on the Concordia talk page would be less divisive. It does not seem right to call this for a full-fledged deletion before expressing your concerns on Concordia's talk page. (^'-')^ Covington 10:21, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* If someone showed up on the Concordia talk page and said "pack up your tents, your project is pure bunkum", they'd be well-received, yes? It's not a case of how Concordia can be improved; it's a case of how we can get rid of it before it causes any serious trouble. fuddlemark (befuddle me!) 12:08, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* Quite honestly, I would have more respect for your opinion if you would have stated that opinion on our talk page instead. (^'-')^ Covington 15:05, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* I haven't seen a demonstration of a lack of good faith. Even if motivations were suspect, the request is not unreasonable and appears to be getting a full discussion right here rather than on the less visible talk pages urged by Rossami. Ande B 02:00, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* Yes, my intent was to get greater visibility from the community. I believe that the Concordia/CJ talk pages are insular. Other people have raised concerns there and not much has happened. FreplySpang 13:06, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* Delete - I would urge the people involved with this page and CJ (or whatever it's called this week...) to put their effort in answering civility related requests on the Village Pump, the Admin Noticeboard, and/or RfCs. We could certainly use the help, but dividing the discussion is less than helpful. JesseW, the juggling janitor 03:20, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* Delete per nomination. Sandstein 04:31, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* Keep. I think there is work for this to atleast be tried out. People complain CJ/CCD does nothing - then try and delete everything it does. Ian13/ talk 08:33, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* Hey, I'm not complaining that whatever CJ is called this week "does nothing". I've seen what you've tried to do, and that's why I want it killed with a stick. Get rid of it. Bury it in quicksand. And if, in twenty years time, anyone says "hey, remember whatever CJ is called this week and all its derivatives? Were you involved in that?", lie to them. fuddlemark (befuddle me!) 09:29, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* Why should I lie? Why should I be ashamed that I participated in a project whose aim was to encourage and spread civility among people? Why are you (and others) judging all people involved by the mistakes done by others and the bad kind of people the project attracted? Misza 13 T C 11:25, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
* Strong keep These need rephrasing to make them sound more seperate to CJ, but they were requested by many users - and are being used. Computerjoe 's talk 08:45, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* Being used by people who don't know what they're talking about, pretending to be the final authority on civility, and being cited as an alternative to ANI et al. No, no, thanks. fuddlemark (befuddle me!) 09:29, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* Where is this cited? We (not best word to use) are not a final authority but merely a way to point someone in the correct direction. Computerjoe 's talk 10:30, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* Here's at least one example. CN looks like a forum for people who've received answers they don't like from cluey users and/or administrators to go to less-cluey people and say "hey, back me up here". That in itself is reason enough to bury it, without the scary vigilante feel of the supporting project. fuddlemark (befuddle me!) 12:08, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* Keep Everyone moans that we dont do anything, so we make a big change to Concordia and open up some programs, and you go and nominate it! Its only been there for one day and youre already jumping to conclusions. Most of your reasons for delete are things that may happen. Why dont you give it a chance first? It will turn out well - • The Giant Puffin • 10:08, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* Delete as per my policy on not violating Confuscian standards. Bongout 10:14, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* First edit this week. (^'-')^ Covington 10:21, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* Strong keep This page was nominated for deletion five hours after its creation. Five hours is not a reasonable time to determine whether a good faith effort warrants deletion. Those of who do not like what we are doing could go to our talk page and express their opinions before taking it out on an AfD. Better yet, join us and improve Concordia. Let us hear your ideas and let us prove ourselves before labelling us as a candidate for deletion. (^'-')^ Covington 10:21, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* Comment I can't see anyone say delete Concordia (unless this is all it is), I'm not sure what the length of time has to do with it, the key objections I can see stand if it is 1 minute or 1 year old and are pretty fundamental to the idea, i.e. is not a matter of tweaking. If you only need 5 hours to see something is a bad idea better to deal with it then. --pgk( talk ) 10:37, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* Yes, if I wanted to say "delete Concordia", then I would say so explicitly. And, no, thanks, I'm not going to join the group either. "Doing something" is not a good thing if the "something" is bad for Wikipedia, as I believe this to be. Pgk is correct. My aim is to stop this before it further complicates, divides and inflames dispute resolution, which it was already starting to do within hours of creation. FreplySpang 13:16, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* Yes, if I wanted to say that you wanted to "delete Concordia", then I would have said so exclusively. I did not use the phrase "delete Concordia" in my above response because I understand that this discussion is about this very page, not Concordia itself. Yes, you are entitled to your opinion, but please don't claim I said something that I did not say. (^'-')^ Covington 15:05, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* You say "Better yet, join us and improve Concordia. Let us hear your ideas and let us prove ourselves before labelling us as a candidate for deletion", The first sentence seems to identify "us" as the group Concordia, the latter part refers to us throughout, I've not seen an individual page referred to as "us" before. It then seems a reasonable conclusion to me that you believe the votes are for deletion of "us" aka Concordia. Apologies if I misunderstood. --pgk( talk ) 16:20, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* Delete I've alredy seen this being quoted as authoratiative. And per FreplySpang the general concept of another channel which enables soloution shopping is flawed, as JesseW if the Concordia people are interested why not work within the existing framework. --pgk( talk ) 10:32, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* Delete. This duplicates existing pages, such as WP:PAIN and the generic WP:ANI. Agree with nom as to the risk of forum shopping. Suggest that if Concordia really want this, they have it on their project to make clear that it is part of that project and not one of the usual noticeboards. --bainer (talk) 10:43, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* Keep. And who ever said it's only the Concordia members that are allowed to react there and voice their opinion? CCD only maintains it and plans to be most active there. Misza 13 T C 11:00, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* Delete one too many noticeboards.--MONGO 11:01, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* Keep. — Nightst a llion (?) 11:04, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* Delete as per nom. Sarah Ewart (Talk) 11:29, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* Keep let's try the concept out instead of nipping it in the bud. Grue 11:30, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* Keep. While another noticeboard is not needed and the early discussions are disappointingly misdirected, there is no good reason to kill it. Let it die a natural death or else grow into something useful. NoSeptember talk 11:50, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* Update my vote. This page should be kept as a subpage of Concordia so that Concordia members will have the responsibility to handle any trolling that goes on there, NoSeptember talk 13:39, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
* Keep. I'm persuaded by the comments of NoSeptember and Rossami. --Tony Sidaway 12:08, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* For what it's worth, I agree that Rossami makes a good point. I wouldn't object to this thing hanging around as the equivalent of a rejected policy, so long as it was made clear that it is, in fact, rejected. fuddlemark (befuddle me!) 13:02, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* Yes indeed, that is a good point. However Hughcharlesparker also makes a good point here: . --bainer (talk) 14:29, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* Meh, I don't tend to be impressed by "you didn't dot the is and cross the ts!"-type arguments as a rule. If what you're doing is the Right Thing, then there's nothing wrong with being WP:BOLD. fuddlemark (befuddle me!) 14:37, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* Nor should you be, but I think there's a valid point: skipping directly to the implementation, on something with this intended scope, would seem to be ill-advised. More careful consideration, debate and fine-tuning from the whole community (not just one project), which a proper proposal would have brought, may well have produced a more robust result. --bainer (talk) 00:23, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
* Delete (changed opinion, old one struck out). Having seen it in operation, I now think it's inevitably troll-bait. --Tony Sidaway 08:52, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
* Delete. If I understand How to create policy correctly, this needs to be proposed, not just implemented. FreplySpang is right, and so is JesseW--Hugh Charles Parker (talk - contribs) 14:34, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* I've taken the liberty of removing that silly vote icon. xfD is not a vote, and the icons have no place here. Feel free to scream at me if you feel I was out of line to edit your comment. fuddlemark (befuddle me!) 14:37, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* It add's nothing but a bit of colour, but it takes nothing away. I don't see the problem, but if you're happier without - meh, OK. --Hugh Charles Parker (talk - contribs) 14:42, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* Much happier, thanks. As a closer, I find the presence of the image distracting; as an editor, I see the presence of things which encourage the misconception that xfD is a vote all too often degrades the quality of a discussion. That's why I object to them. fuddlemark (befuddle me!) 14:46, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* ::::How is xfD not a vote? The decision gets made based on consensus, which is a vote. Am I missing something? — Nathan 15:15, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* You're missing something fairly fundamental: consensus is not a vote. See Consensus. --ⁿɡ͡b Nick Boalch \ talk 15:24, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* Fine, I withdraw my comment. — Nathan (talk) 15:34, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* Strong Speedy Keep because it could be very useful if you gave it more than a day to be worked on. I Lo ve Plankton ( L) 15:09, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* Um, why? You know what "speedy keep" means, no? fuddlemark (befuddle me!) 15:10, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* (Wracks brain for the correct school playground language) I think it means "keep, skinch and no getties back." --Tony Sidaway 15:12, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* Oh, good grief. Do you think you could please try to simplify your signature a little? fuddlemark (befuddle me!) 16:14, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* Keep per Rossami — Nathan (talk) 15:15, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* Keep It's hardly had time to take shape, lets give it a chance before deleting it. -- Scot t 16:57, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* Delete Sorry to be so negative about this new notice board. I know the intentions are good. Strongly feel that there are too many notice/discussion boards already. Duplicate discussions are a waste of volunteers time. They also make it difficult for administrators and editors to find the relevant discussion pertaining to a problem user. Please, let's eliminate this duplicate board ASAP. FloNight talk 17:16, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* Strong Keep – for a few days at the very least. Project pages intended for collaborative processes don't work like articles – they have to be used before you can really gauge how useful they are. It may not be particularly effective, or it may turn out to be wonderful and save everyone heaps of time, but we don't know yet. Yes, it should have been implemented as a proposal, but now it's here, there's no point deleting it just because it wasn't. Those who don't want to use it, treat it as if it were a "trial run" of a proposal, and ignore it. If it becomes apparent that it's not helping anyone, we can re-list it, and have a more informed discussion – Gurch 17:33, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* Delete - All I see there is non-admins who think they know better than admins and are trying to overrule them on policy decisions. -- Cyde↔Weys 17:44, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* All I see are admins who think they are better than non-admins trying overule the consensus. I Lo ve Plankton ( L) 19:49, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* This may well be true but that doesn't mean that maintaining this board is a good answer to such problems. It just adds to difficulties. Ande B 21:04, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* Strong Keep - I highly suspect those who wish to delete this noticeboard. --Nikitchenko 18:44, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* Suspect what? Computerjoe 's talk 18:54, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* Note User Nikitchenko will not be able to respond to this question because he has been indefinitely banned from Wikipedia. Ande B 20:53, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* Nikitchenko might want to review the notion of "Assume Good Faith." It is best applied when considering opinions that differ from one's own. Ande B 19:01, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* Delete, per Bainer. This largely duplicates existing procedures in an unhelpful manner. That said, productive discussion about introducing something similar, would be a good thing. The Land 19:32, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* Keep, and echoing NoSeptember, let's keep an eye on its future development. Initiatives tending to improve the levels of civility and harmony within the comunity are always worthy of testing. Should it end up degenerating into something different than helping the community, it can always be re-submitted for deletion. Changed to delete upon further review. While I still believe that it is a good initiative by itself, a deeper analysis of the way this noticeboard is being used concerns me. P h a e d r i e l ♥ tell me - 19:36, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* Delete please. Phaedriel, it has already degenerated. I'm sure users of good will are involved with this page, but it's bound to also function as an invitation to trolls and malcontents who'd like to turn it into our very own Wikipedia Review. For example: at the moment it's dominated by rather vengeful posts by User:Nikitchenko, just now indefinitely banned for in fact linking to Wikipedia Review, and for little things like being an abusive reincarnation of a banned user. You can see him "highly suspect" his opponents above. Me, I'm cynical, I thought it was bound to turn out that way. Over and over, if we keep it around. Bishonen | talk 20:08, 27 May 2006 (UTC).
* Move to subpage of project.--Rayc 20:42, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* Delete, This page can be and already has been easily abused as a vehicle to defame an editor or administrator on wikipedia. --Fahrenheit451 20:46, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* Delete per Fahrenheit451. Th e Gerg 21:47, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
* Propose it as a board under WP:AN? --<font color="#228B22">Avillia <font color="#228B22">(Avillia me!) 03:52, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
* Keep per Rossami and NoSeptember. --Ter e nce Ong 04:21, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
* strong keep: Much needed venue with a great potential for inducing simple, preemptive means to address immediate problems quickly, perhaps a less divisive way to nip problems at the bud and to confront oppressive stakeholder groups before more onerous processes divert too much attention from the more productive task of editing. Ombudsman 06:10, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
* Delete. Encourages forum shopping, is likely to result in less civility rather than more of it. Let's focus on the encyclopedia and use existing forums and procedures for the more serious civility disputes. Civility is nice but we can all be grumpy at times and sometimes the best response to a grumpy person is to be extraordinarily nice to them, not to go shouting off about it. --kingboyk 10:47, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
* Comment Could not have said it better than --User:Kingboyk Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 23:23, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
* Keep but reject as we do not remove things just because they didn't work. That being said, the tone of this and community justice I find deeply disturbing. Quote from the talk "When do we start enforcing this?" Eeek. - brenneman color="000000" title="Admin actions">{L} 11:38, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
* Keep - i just posted to it hoping to find help for a serious poblem that has me on the verge of not only quitting WP, but letting the world know what a f*cked up place it is -- and here it is already slated for delation only FIVE HOURS after being created. What kind of safety does that provide me, the new user who posted looking for advice because i am being called a vandal, unfit editor, crap editor, garbage editor, and so forth by a clique of religious treu belivers who don't want it known by the world that their guru published many racist statements. Sure, go ahead and delete it. I'm out of here. Catherineyronwode 12:49, 28 May 2006 (UTC) (Comment reinserted and struck out after initially being removed from the page by Catherineyronwode. --ⁿɡ͡b Nick Boalch \ <sup style="font-size: 70%;">talk 13:42, 28 May 2006 (UTC))
* Sorry that you've had a bad experience -- but the point that many of the people voting delete in this discussion are making isn't that there shouldn't be a place to bring problems with civility, but that such places already exist. --ⁿɡ͡b Nick Boalch \ <sup style="font-size: 70%;">talk 13:05, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
* Keep. --Randy 16:38, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
* Delete without prejudice. Ral315 (talk) 21:24, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
* Delete There are already places like it that can actually do something. This just confuses new users. --mboverload @ 22:57, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
* Comment to mboverload: Adding to the confusion of newcomers has apparently already happened, with unhappy effect. Note Catherineyronwode's experience: well regarded in her field, she faces problems and doesn't know where to turn for resolution and ends up at the Civility notice board, possibly mistaking its purpose and this action. Just get rid of the thing before it causes more problems. Ande B 02:08, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
* Keep, but re-Concordify Keep this, but I recommend re-Concordifying it. --Shultz IV 01:52, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
* Delete. My God. Does this do anything but attracting trolls? Dr Zak 07:39, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
* Delete The experience of User:Catherineyronwode above says it all. This is a page without a process behind it. Publicise the existing processes . Dont create a dead end for people needing help. Lumos3 09:12, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
* Delete: duplication of efforts and wastage of our resources - suitable mechanism already exists for such issues. --Bhadani 15:15, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
* Delete. Where the instruction creep ends, RfC and the other existing dispute resolution facilites begin. We don't need this. BigBlueFish 16:38, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
* Delete Based on my experience: I was targeted by User:Nikitchenko for alleged incivility on Civility noticeboard. Computerjoe placed a post on my talk page stating A post regarding your civility is on WP:CN - there was no mention of Concordia, and as the page is named as the Wikipedia:Civility noticeboard I assumed it was an official reporting board and was being handled by sysops. As such when I saw replies (by the board officials) to Nikitchenko's claims such as "he needs a serious wikibreak before he gets kipped out of Esperanza" followed by "Yes, it seems discussions are taking place over this here." I began to draft a long explanation of the full picture and the tone in which the edits were made, as well as the history of personal attacks and what others discribed as wikistalking by Nikitchenko (now permanently banned) towards me. I did this because I thought I may be blocked by those responding to his claims. To discover that this board is not anything close to official nor has any administrative power has thoroughly frustrated me as I have worked on a full reply. - Gl e n TC (Stollery) 20:31, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
* There are no board officials. Computerjoe 's talk 20:35, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
* Sorry "Councillors". - Gl e n TC (Stollery) 20:42, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
* But it isn't ran by CCD, just frequented. Computerjoe 's talk 20:47, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
* Delete trollbait. --Doc ask? 22:38, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
* Delete; this was created with good intentions, but we all know what the road to hell is paved with. Opabinia regalis 02:12, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
* With frozen door-to-door insurance salesmen, isn't it? Bishonen | talk 16:57, 2 June 2006 (UTC).
* Delete, or keep as rejected per Rossami. Christopher Parham (talk) 04:55, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
* Keep I share the opinion that WP:ANI can be a black hole. --HResearcher 08:28, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
* WP:Civility noticeboard: "This is not a formal step in dispute resolution, but a way for editors to get advice on how to proceed."
* Comment Advice from people who may not have a very clear picture of guidelines already in existence, of whom some have themselves been accused of incivility? And if ANI is a "blackhole," is it not because of a lack of people to watch it? Would not the effort being put into monitoring the civility noticeboard not be better spent watching those we already have? Why then the warning templates? What would the advice be if the template messages were ignored? :) Dlohcierekim 14:02, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
* Delete also kill, ablate, and devote efforts to making existing systems work. Midgley 21:37, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
* Concordify Will ( <sup style="margin-right: -0.2em">E <sub style="margin-left: -0.2em">@ ) T 13:15, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
* Delete per Glen's experience. Rockpock e t 07:03, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
* Delete "Remember, kids, only you can prevent ForestFires!" --Smokey the Bear, as channeled by Ashibaka tock 21:38, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
* Delete. Quite possibly the stupidest page ever created on wikipedia - akin to throwing out a welcome mat for trolls. Raul654 16:11, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
* Delete per Raul654 Nacon kantari 18:02, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
* Delete per nom We need to use processes already in existence, not go making up new ones. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 23:20, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
* Delete per nom - we have way too many noticeboards, my watchlist is getting too big -- Tawker 02:19, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
* Strong Delete - per above. -- GeorgeMoney T·C 02:51, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
* Strong Delete per Raul654. Instruction creep at its finest and without bothering to check community temperature first. Shell babelfish 06:14, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
* Delete per nom. — Khoikhoi 20:15, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
| WIKI |
Long-buried debris could hold lessons for today
Along US 52, near New Richmond are the remnants of a school that played a role in American history. Until now, that school had been largely forgotten.
But a professor at Northern Kentucky University is hoping to uncover details about the Parker Academy by unearthing its debris and bringing its story to light.
James Parker was a Presbyterian minister who moved to southwest Ohio from New England in the early part of the 19th century. He was also an abolitionist and may have been a member of the Underground Railroad.
In 1839, Parker and his wife Priscilla started a school in Clermont County. The Parker Academy was fully integrated with black and white students and men and women sharing the classroom.
William Landon, Ph.D., says that was out of the norm for the day.
Landon is chair of the Department of History and Geography at Northern Kentucky University (NKU). He was to lead a team of 18 students Tuesday morning on an archeological dig at the site of the school, in partnership with the National Underground Railroad Freedom Center. The dig near New Richmond involves students from several different disciplines in NKU’s undergraduate and master’s programs.
Landon has been studying the family’s archive, which includes personal letters, and it’s revealed a lot about who Parker was and why he founded this unusual school.
“It seems that he is someone who was very much driven by his desire to see equality in the United States," Landon says. "His partner, his wife, Priscilla, was also an exceptionally devout woman. And we’re beginning to believe she was also a motivator behind a lot of his public actions.”
Landon says that includes withholding communion from slavery supporters and defending his school against slave catchers who would cross the river into Ohio to abduct students and sell them into slavery.
But even though Landon says much is known about the lives of the Parkers through the family archive, it’s still important to sift through the dirt.
“When we’re relying solely on text, you realize people aren’t always truthful in what they leave behind in text," Landon says. "So what we can do is take the text left behind by the Parkers, left by students, left by family members and other correspondents who wrote to the Parker family, we can then compare that to the material culture left at the site.”
That “material culture” is any physical object left behind. Bottles, buttons, coins and anything else the students at Parker Academy may have dropped.
“For our students who are involved in this, it’s going to be a way of making people who lived a century and half ago seem real," Landon says. "And it’s going to humanize them. And that’s one thing, as historians and archeologists and public historians who are involved in this, it’s important for us always to emphasize that we’re studying our fellow human beings. And it makes them come to life.”
Landon says after reading and researching so much, he thinks of James and Priscilla Parker as heroes whose lives still resonate today.
“Anybody who’s paying attention to things that are happening in the United States right now realizes that there are strains that we’re facing; things that we have to address through collaboration, and through communication and education," Landon says. "If we go back to the 1830s, and realize that we’re talking about the United States in a period where human slavery is still legal… We realize that it’s very difficult, but there are really decent humane people doing everything they can to try to make things better.”
Landon says the story of the Parkers has motivated him to try to be more active in his own community.
The on-site dig is expected to continue through May with a class on the Parker Archive in the fall. There will eventually be a display on the academy at the National Underground Railroad Freedom Center. | FINEWEB-EDU |
Page:The New International Encyclopædia 1st ed. v. 17.djvu/145
* EICH. 12.T RICHARD I. 1818), and Narraticc of a Residence in Koordi- sltin and on the Hite of Ancient Xitieich, with Journal of a Voijuge Doirn the Tiijris to Bagdad, and an Account of a Visit to Shira: and Pcrscpolis (2 vols., 1836), edited with a biographical sketch by his widow. His Oriental collection was ac- quired by the British Museum. RICH, Edmund. An Archbishop of Canter- bury. See Edmund, Saint. RICH, John (1682?-1761). A noted English harlequin and theatrical manager. His father, Christopher Rich, had been a manager of Drury Lane, and after the death of the elder Rich, in 1714, the son opened the new theatre in Lincoln's Inn Fields. It was in ITIC that he introduced the performances in which, under the name of Lun, he himself acted the part of Harlequin (q.v.). Before many years these had dcvelojied into the regular English pantomime (q.v.) and had become immensely popular. In 1732 he opened the theatre of Covent Garden, which he continued to manage till his death. In his harle- quinades Rich combined an extraordinary agility and pantomimic gift with great ingenuity in de- vising novelties to attract the public. Consult Doran, Annals of the Stage (ed. Lowe, London, 1S88). RICH, Penelope, Lady (c.l5C2-1607). The object of the poetic passion of Sir Philip Sidney's sonnets addressed to 'Stella.' She was a daughter of the first Earl of Essex, who, togetlier with his son Robert, Elizabeth's favorite, received kindly Sidney's ofi'er of marriage. But her guardian, the Earl of Huntingdon, married her, probably in 1581, to Robert, Second Baron Rich, appar- .ently against her will. The sonnets Astrophil and Stella, published after this marriage, sneer at the husband's lack of worth and of ability to appreciate her worth — an attitude toward Lord Rich which is also taken by Richard Barnfield. Bartholomew Yonge, and otliers wlio wrote poetry to Lady Penelope. But her marital unhappiness did not stop at this stage. In 1595, at the latest, she had formed a liaison with Lord Moiuitjoy, to whom she bore three sons and two daughters, and with whom, after Rich's abandonment of her, which did not occur until after the execution of her brother Robert ( 1001), she lived openly, even before her divorce in 1005. After her husband's remarriage she m.arried Jlnuntjoy. then Earl of Devonshire, and thus lost her standing at Court, where she had been a great favorite. RICH'ARD I. (11.57-99). Surnamed Cceur DE Lion, or the Lion-Hearted. King of Eng- land from 1189 to 1199. He was the tliird son of Henry II. and his Queen, Eleanor, and was born at Oxford, September 8. 1157. When a mere infant it was decided that he should in- herit Aquitaine, and he was betrothed to Alice, or Alicia, the youngest daughter of Louis VII., King of France. Like his brothers, Richard on several occasions rebelled against his father. King Henry II., and was the most prominent figure in the final reliellion. which hastened the death of that monarch. Since the eldest son of Henry II. had died, in 1183. Richard succeeded to all the possessions of his father. He had taken the cro.ss in 1187, on the news of the capture of Jerusalem by Saladin. Philip Augustus. King of France, had done likewise, and in 1190 both started on the Third Crusade. Richard, in onler to prepare suitably for this Crusade, had burrowed and ex- torted money wherever possible. The adminis- tration of England during his ab.seneu wa« in- trusted to William Longchanip (q.v.), but the prelate was opposed by the King's brother, John Lackland, who gradually usurped the govern- ment of the country. The Crusade proved a failure almost from the start, chiefly on account of the luck of harnitmy between the two kings. After various deluva Richard reached -Messina on September 23, lllio. He tarried in Sicily more than half a year, and betrothed his nephew Arthur to the infant daughter of King Tancred. The Sicilian tlirone was at that time claimed by the Kmperor Henry VI., and the alliance with Tancred, for this reason, afterwards turned out a very un- lucky one for Richard. He fell out with the French King, refused to marry his sister Alice, and on April 10, 1191, sailed from Messina, carrying along with him Berengaria of Navarre, whom he married on May 12, 1191, in the Island of Cyprus, where he halted on his way to Pal- estine. The prodigies of personal valor which he performed in the Holy Land have made the name of Richard the Lion-Hearted famous in romance. After Acre had been captured, on July 12, 1191, Richard executed 2700 prisoners of war because the payment of their ransom was delayed. (.Sec Crusade.) He quarreled bitterly with Philip Augustus, who went home. After spending months in indecisive contests against Saladin, Richard finally made a truce by which .Jerusalem was left in the hands of the .Siiltan. On October 9, 1192, he set out on his return to England. As he was making his way through tlie dominions of Leopold, Duke of Austria, be was seized by that prince, who had been insulted by Richard while in the Holy Land, and was handed over to the Emperor Henry VI., who detained him as a captive. John, meanwhile, ruled in England, and he and Philip of France had good reasons for wishing that Richard should never return to his king- dom. He was finally released, however, after paying a heavy ransom and agreeing to hold hia kingdom as a fief of the P^mpire. On JIarch 13, 1194, he found himself once more in England. His brother, John, who had acted so treacherous- ly toward him, he magnanimously forgave, but with Philip Augustus he made war. while he left the actual government to the able adminis- trator Hubert Walter (q.v.). He was on the whole victorious in his war against France, but was killed by an arrow shot from the Castle of Chaluz, which he was besieging, and died .pril 6. 1199. His character has generally been sliown by modern historians in a very imfavor- able light. Sismondi's words are often quoten- tnry he became the hero of many legendary tales, and he has always been viewed in popular litera- ture as a hero of romance. Consult : Stubbs. Constitutional History of England, vol. i. (0th | WIKI |
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Richard Monroe
This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page, if it exists; or after the end of this archived section. The result of the debate was DELETE. Golbez 01:10, Jun 26, 2005 (UTC)
Richard Monroe
Not notable. Complete article reads: "A man from Kent, Washington who claims to have been assaulted by the on-stage entourage of rapper Snoop Doggy Dog" DS1953 01:42, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
* Delete, but a speedy delete candidate. If it's not a full sentence, it's definitely criterion #1. There is no subject to the clause. Geogre 01:54, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
* Delete or Speedy Andrew Lenahan - St ar bli nd 01:58, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
* Speedy delete / Merge into bio of Snoop Dogg, as no other relevance seems attached to this person. Speedy under "Articles" 1. Kevin Wells 02:01, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
* Delete not notable. Cleduc 03:00, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
* Delete Woulda been more notable if he had pushed back Chairboy 03:43, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
* Delete non notable. JamesBurns 07:29, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
* Delete unverifiable and POV. -- Natalinasmpf 15:18, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
* Delete unless this turns into a major court case, then MAYBE, but right now he doesn't merit his own article. --Etacar11 19:49, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
* Delete not notable--Sara22 23:53, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
* ''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be placed on a related article talk page, if one exists; in an undeletion request, if it does not; or below this section. | WIKI |
When most people think of “ancient times,” they often picture rudimentary tools made from crude stone and rough wood, houses of bare branches held together with twine and dung, and utensils made from clay and stone. It’s true that the ancient Romans didn’t have cars, planes, and high-tech computers, but their weaponry was much more advanced than most people realized.
The Romans had two primary steel swords that served them well in battle. The most well-known of these was the gladius, a steel short sword about 18 inches (45.72 cm) long. The spatha, a long, straight steel sword between 28 and 30 inches (71.12 and 76.2 cm) long, was also popular.
The rest of this article will further discuss Roman steel swords and Roman steel in general – how good it was, how swords were made, and more. It’ll also touch briefly on the history of steel swords and provide some other interesting information about Roman weaponry.
Also see Did the Romans Know About China? to learn more.
Gladius vs. Spatha: Similarities and Differences
Both the gladius and the spatha were made of high carbon steel, and the Romans used both weapons regularly in battle. The primary difference between them was their lengths.
The more popular gladius was a short sword most often used in close combat situations. It was a thrusting weapon; Roman soldiers or gladiators would edge in close to their opponents and stab them with the gladius’ blade.
The spatha was about ten (or more) inches (25.4 cm) longer than the gladius and much more suited to fighting opponents from a distance. Because of its triangular-shaped head, it was more suited to slashing than stabbing.
Eventually, the spatha would all but replace the gladius as the weapon of choice for Roman soldiers and fighters, thanks mainly to its long reach. Ironically, though, the gladius is probably the better known of the two today, likely because of its name and the popularity of Roman gladiators.
Also see Did the Romans Declare War on Neptune? to learn more.
What Other Steel Weapons Did the Romans Have?
The gladius and the spatha are probably the most famous steel weapons, but they weren’t the only ones the Romans had.
Other Roman steel weapons included a long, steel-shafted spear called the pilum, a short, thick, steel-tipped dart called the plumbata, and a short steel dagger called the pugio. The Romans may also have eventually replaced their iron helmets and pieces of armor with steel.
They had other, more sophisticated weapons, as well, but they usually constructed these from wood, leather straps, and iron. Some of these include the corvus, which they used to help them board enemy ships, the onager, a type of large sling/catapult, and the carroballista.
This last device was a mobile bolt-shooting machine capable of doing a lot of damage to their opponents.
Also see Did the Romans Have Pasta? to learn more.
How Good Was Roman Steel?
Roman steel was excellent for that period in history. While the quality of steel weapons then might not be on par with the quality of steel weapons made today, archeologists have excavated enough remains to show that Roman smiths and metallurgists knew how to make high-quality weapons.
Then again, just because some Roman smiths knew what they were doing didn’t mean all of them did.
In her “Study of the Metallography of Some Roman Swords,” Janet Lang examines five specific swords. The quality of these swords ranges from “rather bad to perfect.” That means that, just as is the case today, some Roman smiths and metalworkers were more dedicated to their crafts than others.
How Were Steel Swords Made?
According to Lang’s study, steel swords in Roman times could have been (and probably were) made in several different ways. Each smith likely had their own preferred way of doing things, but there were likely some similarities in the process.
The following is an example of how a smith could have made a Roman steel sword, step by step:
- They extracted metal from ore and heated it in furnaces.
- They shaped the “bloom” of metal into ingots, bars, etc.
- Smiths worked these pieces in a forge.
- They shaped them, hammered them, flattened them, etc.
- They made some swords by “piling” various metal pieces.
- They made others from a single piece through “folding.”
- The swords were tempered and work-hardened (not quenched).
Scholars believe some Roman smiths created swords with flexible, twisted iron cores and then fitted them with steel blades. The two separate sections (three for double-edged swords) were heated and hammered until they were joined into a cohesive unit.
The smiths would continue to heat, hammer, and temper the blade until it was almost ready. Then, they’d grind, shape, and sharpen the edges to get them precisely right. They did this with files and grindstones.
Finally, they’d attach the blades to a hilt and crosspiece to hold them together securely.
They decorated some swords, but most were relatively plain, especially by today’s standards. They may have also added jewels to blades if they were intended for the Roman elite, but that was also a rarity.
Also see Did the Romans Have a Flag? to learn more.
When Were Steel Swords Invented?
The Romans were among the first people to make steel swords, but they weren’t the very first. That invention, as many innovations are, happened in Asia.
The Chinese invented steel swords in the 5th century BC during the Warring States period. Before that, the Chinese, like the Romans, had been using iron swords.
When the Chinese and Romans first made steel swords, though, they probably didn’t quench-harden them. Although some evidence exists to show that some swords were quench-hardened, it seems most smiths didn’t yet know about the relationship between cool water and hot metal.
In fact, according to D. Scott MacKenzie’s History of Quenching, the art of quenching metal didn’t become truly popular until centuries later. Quenching was used in ancient times, as Homer talks about the process in The Odyssey, but most of the early Chinese and Roman steel swords were work-hardened instead.
Although their steel might not have been as high-quality as modern-day steel, the Romans did have steel swords, as well as other steel weapons. | FINEWEB-EDU |
Nakshi kantha
Nakshi kantha, a type of embroidered quilt, is a centuries-old Bengali art tradition of the Bengal region, notable in Bangladesh and Indian states of West Bengal, Tripura and part of Assam. The basic material used is thread and old cloth. Nakshi kanthas are made throughout Bangladesh, but the greater Mymensingh, Jamalpur, Bogra, Rajshahi, Faridpur and Jessore, Chittagong areas are most famous for this craft.
The colourful patterns and designs that are embroidered resulted in the name "Nakshi Kantha", which was derived from the Bengali word "naksha", which refers to artistic patterns. The early kanthas had a white background accented with red, blue and black embroidery; later yellow, green, pink and other colours were also included. The running stitch called "kantha stitch" is the main stitch used for the purpose. Traditionally, kantha was produced for the use of the family. Today, after the revival of the nakshi kantha, they are produced commercially.
Word origin
The word kantha has no discernible etymological root. The exact time of origin of the word kantha is not accurately known but it probably had a precursor in kheta (khet Bengali means "field"). According to the word kantha originated from the Sanskrit word kontha, which means rags, as kantha is made of rags.
Tradition
Like any other folk art, kantha making is influenced by factors such as materials available, daily needs, climate, geography, and economic factors. Probably the earliest form of kantha was the patchwork kantha, and the kanthas of the decorative appliqué type evolved from this.
In literature
The earliest mention of Bengal Kantha is found in the book Sri Sri Chaitanya Charitamrita by Krishnadas Kaviraj, which was written some five hundred years ago. The famous Bengali poet Jasimuddin also had a very famous poem 'Nakshi Kanthar Math' on Nakshi Kantha
Making
Traditionally old sarees, lungis and dhotis were used to make kanthas. Kantha making was not a full-time job. Women in almost every household were expert in the art. Rural women worked at leisure time or during the lazy days of the rainy season, so taking months or even years to finish a kantha was normal. At least three to six sarees were needed to make a standard-size kantha. Today the old materials are replaced by new cotton cloths. Traditionally the thread was collected from the old sarees. That is rarely done today.
When a kantha is being made, first the sarees are joined to attain the required size, and then layers are spread out on the ground. The cloths are then smoothed, and no folds or creases are left in between. During the process, the cloth is kept flat on the ground with weights on the edges. Then the four edges are stitched and two or three rows of large running stitches are done to keep the kantha together. At this stage, the kantha can be folded and stitched at leisure time.
Originally, designs and motifs were not drawn on the cloth. The design was first outlined with needle and thread, followed by focal points, and then the filling motifs were done. In a kantha with a predominant central motif the centre was done first, followed by corner designs and the other details. In some types of kanthas (carpet, lik and sujni, etc.) wooden blocks were used to print the outline. The blocks are replaced today by patterns drawn in tracing papers.
Types
The following is how kanthas are categorized, according to the stitch type:
Running stitch
The running stitch kantha is truly the indigenous Zidan Al Hakim. They are subdivided into Nakshi (figured) and par tola (patterned). Nakshi (figured) kanthas are further divided into motif or scenic kanthas.
Lohori kantha
The name was derived from Sanskrit, as in "'Soundarya Lahari" or "''Shivananda Lahari"- Religious poetic works in Sanskrit by Adi Shankara. It is also found in Persian Language giving the same meaning, 'lehr'', which is "wave". This type of kantha is particularly popular in Rajshahi. These kanthas are further divided into soja (straight or simple), Kautar khupi (pigeon coop or triangle), borfi or diamond (charc
Lik or anarasi
The Lik or Anarasi (pineapple) type of kantha is found in the Chapainawabganj and Jessore areas. The variations are lik tan, lik tile, lik jhumka, and lik lohori.
Cross-stitch or carpet
This type of kantha was introduced by the English during the British Rule in India. The stitch used in this kanthas is the cross-stitch.
Sujni kantha
This type of kantha is found only in Rajshahi area. The popular motif used is the undulating floral and vine motif.
Influence of religion and folk belief
Hindu women during 19th century used human and animal forms to tell stories of Gods and Goddesses and their Vahanas. Bengali women were free to draw upon their rich indigenous surroundings as well as their contemporary stories. To them the fabric was the artist and the person was the artisan. Mid 19th century, colour schemes and designs of Nakshi Kantha began to change to make them suitable for use on modern garments. 1940 Kabiguru Rabindra Nath Tagore and his daughter-in-law Pratima Devi trained Santali women in Birbhum District and quality work was produced under the tutelage of 'Kalabhaban' Artists.
Kantha consists of the simplest stitch in the language of embroidery – the running stitch, yet it is making a mark in the National as well as International Market. Nowadays,'Nakshi Kantha' is treated as traditional form of folk art as well as catering to top designers for their haute-couture creations. Nakshi Kantha in Bangladesh – Jessore, Faridpur, Mymensingh and Jamalpur have similar styles when it comes to stitching. These precious works of art remain silent witnesses of past, present and future of Bangladesh.
Stitches
The earliest and most basic stitch found in kanthas is the running stitch. The predominant form of this stitch is called the phor or kantha stitch. The other forms of stitches used are the Chatai or pattern darning, Kaitya or bending stitch, weave running stitch, darning stitch, Jessore stitch (a variation of darning stitch), threaded running stitch, Lik phor or anarasi or ghar hasia (Holbein) stitches. The stitches used in modern-day kantha are the Kasmiri stitch and the arrowhead stitch. Stitches like the herringbone stitch, satin stitch, backstitch and cross-stitch are occasionally used.
Types
Kanthas generally denote quilts used as wrappers; however, all articles made by quilting old cloth may also be referred to by the same generic name. However, depending on the size and purpose, kanthas may be divided into various articles, each with its specific names. The various types of kantha is as follows:
* Quilt (lep in Bengali): A light quilted covering made from the old sarees/dhotis/lungis and sometimes from sheet cloths.
* Large spread (Naksi Kantha in Bengali): An embellished quilt embroidered in traditional motifs and innovative style
* Puja floor spread (Ason in Bengali): Cloth spread for sitting at a place of worship or for an honoured guest.
* Cosmetic wrapper (Arshilota in Bengali): A narrow embroidered wrapper to roll and store away a woman's comb, mirror, eye kohl, vermilion, sandal paste, oil bottle, etc. Often, a tying string is used to bind the wrap, as in later day satchets.
* Wallet (Batwa thoiley in Bengali): Small envelope-shaped bag for keeping money, betel leaves, etc.
* Cover for Quran (ghilaf in Arabic and Bengali): Envelope-shaped bag to cover the Quran.
* Prayer mats (Jainamaz in Bengali): Mats used by Muslims to say prayers.
* Floor spread (Galicha in Bengali): Floor coverings.
* Cloths wrapper (Bostani, guthri in Bengali): A square wrapper for books and other valuables.
* Cover (Dhakni in Bengali): Covering cloths of various shapes and sizes.
* Ceremonial meal spread (Daster khan in Bengali): A spread for eating place, used at meal time.
* Pillow cover (Balisher chapa or oshar in Bengali): A flat single piece pillow cover.
* Handkerchief (Rumal): Small and square in shape.
* Modern-day articles: Today newer uses are found for nakshi kanthas, such as bedspreads, wall hangings, cushion covers, ladies' purses, place mats, jewellery boxes, dress fronts, skirts border, shawls and sharees.
Motifs
Motifs of the nakshi kantha are deeply influenced by religious belief and culture. Even though no specific strict symmetry is followed, a finely embroidered naksi Maheen will always have a focal point. Most kanthas will have a lotus as focal point, and around the lotus there are often undulating vines or floral motifs, or a shari border motif. The motifs may include images of flower and leaves, birds and fish, animals, kithen forms even toilet articles.
While most kantas have some initial pattern, no two naksi kantas are same. While traditional motifs are repeated, the individual touch is used in the variety of stitches, colours and shapes. The notable motifs found in naksi Sabbir are as follows:
Lotus motif
The lotus motif is the most common motif found in kanthas. This motif is associated with Hindu iconography and thus is also very popular in the kantha. The lotus is the divine seat. It is also symbolic of cosmic harmony and essential womanhood. The lotus is also the symbol of eternal order and of the union of earth, water and, sky. It represents the life-giving power of water, and is also associated with the sun for the opening and closing of the petals. It is also the symbol of the recreating power of life. With the drying up of water, the lotus dies and with the rain it springs to life again. The lotus is associated with purity. There are various forms of lotus motifs, from the eight-petaled astadal padma to the hundred petaled satadal. In the older kanthas, the central motif is almost always a fully bloomed lotus seen from above.
Solar motif
The solar motif is closely associated with the lotus putki. Often, the lotus and the solar motifs are found together at the centre of a nakshi kantha. The solar motif symbolizes the life giving power of the sun. The sun is associated with the fire which plays a significant part in Hindu rites, both religious and matrimonial.
Moon motif
The moon motif has a religious influence, and is popular amongst the Bengali Muslims. Mostly it is in the form of a crescent moon accompanied by a star. This motif is particularly found in jainamaz kanthas.
Islamic Motifs
Religious motifs of Mosques, stars, Arabic calligraphy, Islamic arts as well as motifs of Jamdani which is a part of the Muslim heritage of Bangladesh, is used in Nakshi katha which are used for religious activities such Prayer rug and cover for the Quran.
Wheel motif
The wheel is a common symbol in Indian art, both Hindu and Buddhist. It is the symbol of order. The wheel also represents the world. The wheel is a popular motif in kanthas even when the maker has forgotten the significance of the symbol. The motif is relatively easy to make with chatai phor.
Swastika motif
Su asti in Sanskrit means it is well. As a motif in Indian art, it dates back to the Indus Valley civilization. It is symbol of good fortune. It is also known as muchri or golok dhanda. With the passage of time, the design is more curvilinear than the four armed swastika of the Mohenjodaro seal. The symbolic design has significant influence in Hinduism, Buddhism, and Jainism.
Tree of life motif
The influence of this motif in Bangladeshi art and culture (as with kantha) may be traced back to the Indus Valley civilization. It is likely that the Indus people conceived the pipal as the Tree of Life with the devata inside embodying the power of fecundity. During the Buddhist times, the cult of the tree continued. Pipal is sacred to the Buddha because he received enlightenment under its shade. It reflects the fecundity of nature and is very popular in Bengal. Vines and creepers play an important role in kanthas and they contain the same symbolisation as that of tree of life. A popular motif in Rajshahi lohori is the betel leaf.
Kalka motif
This is a latter-day motif, dating from the Muslim rulers of Mughals times. The kalka or paisley motif originated in Persia and Kashmir and has become an integral image of the subcontinental decorative motif. It can be compared with a stylized leaf, mango or flame. The kalka is an attractive motif and number of varieties are experimented. Similar motifs can be found in traditional Kashmiri shawls.
Other motifs
* Water Motif:
* Mountain Motif:
* Fish Motif:
* Boat Motif:
* Footprint Motif:
* Ratha Motif:
* Mosque Motif:
* Panja or Open Palm Motif:
* Agricultural Implements:
* Animal Motifs:
* Toilet Articles:
* Kithen Implements:
* Kantha Motif:
* Palanquin Motif:
Borders
Most nakshi kanthas have some kind of border. Either a sari border is stitched on or a border pattern is embroidered around the kantha. The common border found in kanthas are as follows:
* The Paddy stalk or date branch (dhaner shish or khejur chari)
* The Scorpion border (Biche par in Bengali)
* The Wavy or bent Border (Beki in Bengali)
* The Diamond border (Barfi)
* The Eye border (chok par in Bengali)
* The Amulet border (Taabiz par in Bengali)
* The Necklace border (mala par in Bengali)
* The Ladder Border (Moi taga)
* The Gut taga
* The Chick taga
* The nolok taga
* The Fish border (Maach par in Bengali)
* The panch taga
* The Bisa taga
* The Anaj taga
* The shamuk taga
* The wrench border
* The anchor (grafi par in Bengali)
* The pen border (kalam par in Bengali)
Bangladesh
* Bangla
* Design Centre, BSCIC
* Folk Art and Crafts Foundation
* Bangladesh National Museum
India
* Ashutosh Museum, Kolkata
* Calico Museum of Textiles, Ahmedabad
* Gurusaday Museum, Thakurpur
Organizations which make Nakshi Kanthas
* Bangladesh Rural Development Board (BRDB), Karu Palli Sales Centre
* Kumudini Handicrafts (cares), Bangladesh
* BRAC-Aarong, Bangladesh
Controversy regarding Geographical Indication
In 2008, the Indian state of West Bengal applied for the Geographical Indication for Nakshi kantha, while Bangladesh was also a strong contender for the same. But due to absence of proper law on Geographical Indication in Bangladesh that time (which was later adopted), Bangladesh could not officially apply for the GI. The registry office handed over the Geographical Indication to West Bengal in 2008.
Bangladesh authority however later passed the "Bangladesh Geographical Indication (Registration and Protection) Act, 2013" in parliament and with other necessary preparations now waiting for the next re-applying time cycle to claim the Geographical Indication for Nakshi kantha to Bangladesh. | WIKI |
Trending Articles
Skin
What are Skin Lesions? – Causes, Types, and More
What are Skin Lesions?
Skin lesions are a portion of the coating that is different And also starting the skin around it. It may be a lump, a sore, or an area of skin that is not normal. It can also be skin cancer. The skin lesions are of frequent occurrence and may represent a local pathology or manifest a systemic problem. Since the dermis is such a large organ, it is necessary to pay attention to these alterations.
Causes and Tips of Skin Lesions
Frequent Skin Lesions
The skin diseases may have different origins and affect one or more of their structures. We refer to the nails, the hair follicles, and the sebaceous or sweat glands. The specialist indicates to treat them is the dermatologist, who you should visit if you have an alteration.
Acne
It appears at any age but is more common in adolescence. The sebaceous glands fill with detritus, resulting in blackheads, nodules, and blemishes. And also, It is a cosmetic problem, but it can negatively impact your self-esteem.
Prevention consists of keeping the skin very clean by using unique soaps. In addition, there are products design to control the proliferation of the Propionibacterium Acnes bacteria, responsible for the infection of these lesions.
Atopic Dermatitis
It usually makes an appearance in childhood. It is characterize by the presence of plates that. In general, locate symmetrically. You will see them located on the flexor surfaces of the arms and legs, although they also affect the trunk.
It is a kind of eczema that causes redness, itching, and fine scaling. In these cases, the skin lacks certain defenses. Which causes an exceptional sensitivity to irritants. To avoid outbreaks, it is convenient to protect yourself from irritants and use moisturizing and antihistamine products. You should also avoid scratching, as it can worsen the picture.
Vitiligo
This disease is characterize by the appearance of areas of depigmentation and has its origin in the immune system. Which attacks and destroys melanocytes. Lesions can appear anywhere. This depigmentation can even involve the mucous membranes, hair, eyes, and eyelashes.
There is no cure or prevention, but the spots can be alleviated with topical medications and phototherapy. These treatments can include in health insurance and slow down the course of the disease.
Malignant Skin Lesions
Some skin conditions can be malignant or premalignant. Therefore, it is essential that you know and monitor them. In addition, of course, to restrict exposure to solar radiation, closely relate to its appearance.
Non-melanomatous Lesions
Actinic keratosis, basal cell, and squamous cell carcinoma are found in this group of pathologies. You will see that they are lesions in the form of scaly spots and darker than the rest of the skin. Its origin has to do with solar radiation and the presence of the human papillomavirus or HPV.
Malignant Melanoma
This skin cancer is common among white people and appears in the areas most expose to the sun. Such as the face and arms. It is a lesion similar to a mole but with rapid growth, asymmetry, and irregularity in the edges and the pigmentation tone.
The skin lesions involve varying importance. To take care of your health, you need to consult your dermatologist.
Type of Skin Lesions
Primary Morphology
Lip Melanotic Macula
A patch is a large macula. The macules are flat and nonpalpable lesions that usually measure < 10 mm in diameter. They represent a color change and are not uneven from the skin’s surface (neither raised nor depressed). Examples include freckles, flat nevi, tattoos, port-wine stains (hemangiomas), rashes from rickettsia infections, rubella, and measles (papules and plaques may also occur)—some drug allergies.
Skin Lesion (Papule)
The pimples are raised lesions usually measure < 10 mm in diameter that can be felt or felt. Some examples are moles, warts, lichen planus, insect bites, seborrheic and actinic keratoses, some acne lesions, and skin cancers. The term maculopapular often use inappropriately and inaccurately to describe many red-colored skin rashes. Since it is a nonspecific and easily misused term. It should avoid. Abscesses are generally palpable raised lesions of 10mm diameter. Lichen planus (photo) can manifest as a popular rash.
Psoriatic Plaque
The plates typically measure nonpalpable lesions > 10 mm in diameter and are elevated or depressed than the skin surface. The containers can have a flat or domed roof. Basically, lesions of psoriasis and granuloma annular often form plaques. Plaques are palpable raised lesions > 10 mm in diameter. Psoriasis usually manifests as plaques covered with thick, silvery scales of skin.
Secondary Morphology
Trauma-induced injuries, including abrasions caused by the patient’s nails, are typically linear. The configuration is the shape of the individual lesions and the arrangement in groups. The linear lesions arrange straight and said specific contact dermatitis, epidermal nevus linear, and lichen striate.
Skin Lesion (Annular)
The annular lesions form rings with a more apparent central area. Examples include granuloma annular, drug eruptions, dermatophyte infections (e.g., ringworm), and secondary syphilis. Annular lesions appear as rings with a clear central area. And also, granuloma annular is a typical annular skin lesion.
Nummular Dermatitis (Hands)
The nummular lesions are circular or coin-shaped; an example is a nummular eczema. Round erythematous plaques are present on the back of the hands and wrists.
Target Injuries
The target lesions (porthole) appear as rings with a clearer and are classic of the central erythema multiforme. Basically, target lesions (sometimes called iris lesions) manifest as annular lesions with a purplish center and pink halo separated by a pale ring. Such lesions, typical of erythema multiforme, are symmetrically distributed.
Conclusion.
Skin lesions are a joint presentation in primary care, many of which can diagnose based on history and clinical examination. However, the challenge for GPs is distinguishing between benign and malignant lesions so that only those that require urgent review and treatment are referred under the 2-week wait.
And also, the temporary nature of certain types of skin lesions can create confusion in the mind of the inexperienced clinician.
Examination of an animal with a ‘pustular’ disease may characterize clinically by a predominance of papules (preceding the bumps) and crusts (which develop as the pimples dry out and heal). The blemishes may be relatively minor in number and hard to find.
An understanding of the evolutionary process of skin lesions is essential. In addition, a pruritic eruption may transform by chewing and licking into an alopecic. And also, excoriated bleeding patch.
Also Read: Belly Fat
Related posts | ESSENTIALAI-STEM |
Putún Maya
Putún or Chontal Maya is a collective name for several groups of Maya that displaced much of the older leadership of the Maya Lowlands during the Late Classic and Postclassic. The Putún, who came from the Gulf coast in the northwest region of the Maya area, are generally held to have been more Mexicanized than their contemporaries. They were associated with the Puuc architectural style and distinctive orangeware pottery. The Itza are often considered a group of Putún Maya. The contemporary Chontal Maya of Tabasco speak a closely related language. | WIKI |
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Peerage and Baronetage/Archive 1
Ok. I've been a Wkipedia editor for about a year now and since then the number of historical articles has increased dramatically. The articles on royalty are now much more detailed and structured than they were a year ago. I think the efforts of a number of individuals, whose desire was to create unambiguously titled articles has been a success. The articles on the titles of the British and Irish peerage still remain a bit of a mess. Whilst we have standardised the general style of a peer and his title like so 'James Richard Cutherbertson, 3rd Duke of Mercia' there's no standard for how a page listing (or disambiguating) a peerage should be presented. There are a number of styles currently being used. e.g.
* [Duke of Buckingham]
* Duke of Norfolk
* Duke of Albany
* Duke of Devonshire
* Earl_of_Castlehaven
* Earl of Bristol
* Duke of Somerset
* Marquess of Bristol
* Earl of Cork
* Earl of Derby
* Earl of Essex
NB I'm using old versions of these pages so that if someone edits the page into a different format (as I've done with the Earl of Derby) the comparison still makes sense.
While many of these individual styles have their merits, I think it would make sense to agree on a standard format. I don't expect that peerage articles to be born wholly conforming to any particular format, but it would be nice to agree on something that we would like to aim for. I know some people who have a particular interest in the peerage have followed a similar format to that used in Debrett's, Burke's etc. but we do not have to limit ourselves to squeezing information into one page in the way they do. I'll leave the floor and see if anyone else would like to make a contribution to this discussion. Mintguy 10:08, 22 Aug 2003 (UTC)
* Yes, I agree that our strength should be the ability to include details of the history of a title. But I also agree that we should have a basic format that is standardised. Deb 17:12, 22 Aug 2003 (UTC)
I agree that there should be a basic format for the articles on particular peerages. I somewhat partial to the format I used for the "Duke of Albany" article. I deliberated modelled this entry after the existing entries for the other dukedoms associated with the English, Scottish, and British royal families (e.g., Duke of York, Duke of Kent, Duke of Clarence). Perhaps one should reserve detailed biographical information about the holders of particular peerages (e.g., the 3rd Duke of Norfolk or the 8th Earl Spencer) for separate entries?
I would suggest: a) a succinct (or not, if so desired) description of the history of the title, with particular reference to multiple creations, if applicable, and some attention to subsidiary titles; followed by b) a list of holders of the title which ought, when applicable, to be separated out by creations. For articles on individual peers, do we think that all subsidiary titles should be listed, or not? john 17:35, 23 Aug 2003 (UTC)
I've been looking to craft an entry on the Earl of Derby, and I think he does deserve his own entry, as does the peerage itself. Besides which, keeping all the members of a house together (with say, the Cecils or the Bentincks), could get rather confusing. Mackensen 21:45, 25 Aug 2003 (UTC)
I've written up Lord John Manners, 7th Duke of Rutland. Should the page be listed as Lord John Manners, or as John James Robert Manners, 7th Duke of Rutland? Mackensen
* The latter, or simply "John Manners, 7th Duke of Rutland", would probably be appropriate. On the other hand, we have Lord John Russell, 1st Earl Russell, so who knows? john 06:04, 1 Sep 2003 (UTC)
* Except that, technically, he was only "Lord John Russell" as a courtesy title while he was still merely the 3rd son of the Duke of Bedford. After being created 1st Earl Russell, the courtesy title no longer applied, and he generally shows up in book indexes, Webster's Biog. Dictionary, etc., as "John Russell, 1st Earl Russell." My personal taste would be for not using all of some peer's half-dozen forenames, as that would only make him harder to search, right? --Michael K. Smith 19:38, 22 Sep 2003 (UTC)
Not much constructive comment on here for the general format of peerage title pages.
I was thinking, do people think it might be helpful to have a table at the bottom of the page for people holding hereditary peerage, whereby the the previous and following holders of their titles are shown. Similar to what we do for Prime Ministers? Mintguy 23:11, 11 Sep 2003 (UTC)
That sounds like a fine idea, particularly with the Stanleys, Bentincks, Cecils, and Lennoxes, who show up frequently. I'd be all for it.
* Mackensen 01:45, 12 Sep 2003 (UTC)
* That seems like a good idea to me. Of course, what happens when someone holds several peerages which were inherited by different people. I think of, for instance, the 5th Duke of Sutherland. His Ducal title and related titles were inherited by his heir-male, a distant cousin, while his title of Earl of Sutherland was inherited by his heir-general, his niece. That kind of thing would have to be taken into account. Also someone like the last Duke of Portland - his Ducal title became extinct, but his title of Earl of Portland was inherited by his distant heir-male (a descendant of the 1st Earl of Portland, but not of the 1st Duke). And so on. john 05:36, 12 Sep 2003 (UTC)
* Well, it was precisely in these cicumstances that I was thinking it might be useful. Um... here's a ficticious example.
* Or something similar to this anyway Mintguy, might be a bit cluttered. 08:16, 12 Sep 2003 (UTC)
--- I beg to suggest as follows: ("associated titles"= Duke of Devonshire and Earl of Devonshire; Duke of Westminster and Earl Grosvenor; etc.)
* The history of the title & associated titles
* The reamainder, if different from the standard "heirs male"
* A list of holders of the title & associated titles in the form:
--Earls of X, first Creation (1700)--
* A B C D, 1st Earl of X (?-1725)
* A B C D, 2nd Earl of X (1675-1750)
--Earls of X, second Creation (1800)--
* A B C D, 1st Earl of X (1750-1825)
* A B C D, 2nd Earl of X (1775-1850)
* A B C D, 3rd Earl of X (became Duke of X in 1860) (1800-1875)
--Dukes of X (1860)--
* A B C D, 1st Duke of X (1800-1875)
* A B C D, 2nd Duke of X (1825-1900)
* A B C D, 3rd Duke of X (1900-)
In order to standardize, the following must also be determined:
* circa or ca. or c.
* (?-1600) or ''(d. 1600)
* (1950-) or (b. 1950)
* 3rd Creation or third Creation
-- Lord Emsworth 23:34, Nov 9, 2003 (UTC)
Your suggestions sound good to me. In terms of standardization, I'd recommend "c.", "(d.1600)", "(b.1950)", and have no particular preference with respect to "3rd" or "Third". john 05:22, 10 Nov 2003 (UTC)
Associated titles are often redirects which is why I've used a format in which they are displayed as a list in bold. Also when listing the peers, headings need to show the peerages that were created at the same time. Is it really necessary to list the same person under two (or more) titles as above where it says so-and so became so-and-so in XXXX. Look at Duke of Hamilton for a complicated example (that could probably be simplified or split up). Or Earl of Lichfield for a case where a peer of a completely different creation inherited the title. Mintguy
Instead of "Earl of X (became Duke of X in XXXX)", one could write: "Earl of X (later Duke of X)." The purpose of this is perhaps to indicate a continuity, rather than presenting the titles as unrelated. Lord Emsworth 17:31, Nov 10, 2003 (UTC)
Shall we now generally formalise what has been so far discussed? One could list the general ideas on the page, and then add details as they are debated and determined. -- Lord Emsworth 22:25, Dec 15, 2003 (UTC)
That sounds fine. john 23:59, 15 Dec 2003 (UTC)
A couple questions
Why is the order included on some titles (XXXX, 2nd Duke of XXXX) and not for others (XXXX, Duke of XXXX).
Does Earl of Hopetoun need to be moved? [EDIT: It was moved a minute after I posted this.]
--Jiang 05:54, 19 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Some people are not true holders of peerages and are listed under a courtesy title like John Manners, Marquess of Granby and Edward Adolphus Ferdinand Seymour, Earl St. Maur who both died before inheriting their father's titles. William Douglas, Duke of Hamilton became a duke on account of his wife being named the Duchess of Hamilton in her own right and doesn't have an ordinal. Some peers are also the only peer within that creation such as [Robert Carr, Earl of Somerset]] (I'm unclear as to whether these should have an ordinal or not). Others were named holders of titles at a time when it was unclear as to whether the they had the right to hold them and are therefore not truly the nth Duke or whatever and finally Royal princes do not generally have an ordinal for their other titles. Mintguy 09:50, 19 Dec 2003 (UTC)
I concur with Minguy for the most part. I do think, though, that Robert Carr should have an ordinal, since the title which was then attainted was not Earl, but Duke, of Somerset. Others, like Thomas Beaufort, Duke of Exeter, and so forth, probably shouldn't. I think that in all other cases, an ordinal should be used, even when it's "1st" for the only holder of a peerage. using "George Eden, 1st Earl of Auckland", instead of "George Eden, Earl of Auckland", means that the reader immediately knows that he was Earl in his own right, and not merely a courtesy peer. I've been moving some like that, although I probably should have discussed it here first... anyway, what do others think? john 20:46, 19 Dec 2003 (UTC)
I think that the idea of using the ordinals for only holders is fine. If one wished, then one could use the longer form: nth and last Duke of X, but the same could be relegated from the title to the first line of the article. -- Lord Emsworth 22:32, Dec 19, 2003 (UTC)
I don't think "2nd and last" or whatever should be used in the article title. john 23:10, 19 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Listing
Do you believe that listings of peers should be bulleted or numbered? -- Lord Emsworth 23:11, Dec 19, 2003 (UTC)
* I think bulleted - the numbering will be evident from the article titles.
Multiple Peerages of the Same Rank
For multiple peerages of the same rank, what should be the rule? My general principle has been that if someone has the same ordinal for both peerages, use both, as Charles Lennox, 3rd Duke of Richmond and Lennox, but if they have different ordinals for their different peerages, to just use the senior one, as Thomas Herbert, 8th Earl of Pembroke, rather than Thomas Herbert, 8th Earl of Pembroke, 5th Earl of Montgomery (which is awkward), or Thomas Herbert, 8th Earl of Pembroke and Montgomery (which is incorrect.) Other opinions on this? john 00:35, 20 Dec 2003 (UTC)
I agree that the senior title should be used. -- Lord Emsworth 00:39, Dec 20, 2003 (UTC)
"Baron" or "Lord"?
For barons, should we use "Baron" or "Lord" in the article title? Currently, it's rather a mishmash... john 00:35, 20 Dec 2003 (UTC)
For barons, I would suggest 1st Baron, 2nd Baron, etc. But for Scottish Lords of Parliament, 1st Lord, 2nd Lord, etc. should be used. -- Lord Emsworth 00:39, Dec 20, 2003 (UTC)
I'm delighted that progress is been made with the format of peerage titles, and I must take my hat (not a coronet) off to Lord Emsworth for his relentless work. Mintguy 21:08, 20 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Any reason for deleting the section on associated titles for Duke of Somerset? Mintguy
There were several problems. Firstly, it listed certain titles as still in existence, though, as has been noted, only one subsidiary title still exists. One is misled to beleive that the title is still associated with the dukedom. Another problem was with the Barony of Warkworth, which belongs to the Duke of Northumberland and not Somerset. -- Lord Emsworth
So when a user clicks on Earl of Hertford and is taken to the Duke of Somerset and finds that there is barely a mention of this title until fairly 3 quarters of the way through the title, it might be a bit confusing? I deliberately called the section titles that HAVE been associated with the title. Mintguy 19:34, 21 Dec 2003 (UTC)
* re: Earl of Hertford, that should not redirect to Duke of Somerset to begin with, as that title is currently held by a different peer, the Marquess of Hertford. There were also numerous Earls of Hertford in the Middle Ages who had no connection to Somerset. Earl of Hertford should have a separate article. john 00:52, 22 Dec 2003 (UTC)
I have re-instated the section, with some minor changes. The Northumberland titles do not appear any more, for there is no indication of how they were severed Dukedom of Somerset, but if such information is known, then by all means one could place those titles as well in the appropriate place. -- Lord Emsworth
* It probably belonged to the Dukedom of Somerset at one time, since the Dukes of Northumberland inherited many of the titles of the 6th Duke of Somerset, who died in the mid-18th century.
* Fair enough, i'm sure I've made a number of such erros. I believe I took most of my information about who held what peerages when from http://www.thepeerage.com/. Unfortunately I'm not in possesion of Burke's or Debretts etc.. and paying a subscription for Burke's online seems like a bit of an extravagence. Mintguy 00:45, 23 Dec 2003 (UTC)
* It would appear that the 6th Duke of Somerset died one year before the creation of the Barony of Warkworth. ; -- Lord Emsworth 00:18, Dec 21, 2003 (UTC)
* Well, in that case, it's just wrong...
* It is possible that the differences in years is due to the differences between the Julian and Gregorian calendars. -- Lord Emsworth 00:58, Dec 21, 2003 (UTC)
I have a question: Why does the eldest son of Duke of Buccleuch and Queensberry use the title "Earl of Dalkeith," whilst the Marquessate of Dumfriesshire is available? -- Lord Emsworth 00:01, Dec 21, 2003 (UTC)
* I am not completely sure. It may have to do with avoiding confusion with the Earl of Dumfries, the courtesy title of the eldest son of the Marquess of Bute. There's also the fact that the Dumfriesshire title is associated with the Queensberry Dukedom (I believe), while Dalkeith has always been the subsidiary title of the Buccleuch Dukedom. john 00:09, 21 Dec 2003 (UTC)
* The second reason appears likely; the Marquessate of Dumfriesshire was created in the same year as the Dukedom of Queensberry. -- Lord Emsworth 00:21, Dec 21, 2003 (UTC)
* Well, it was certainly a title belonging to the Dukes of Queensberry. I'm not sure that this means that that is why it wasn't used. john 00:28, 21 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Linking place names etc in titles
What do peopel think about linking place names in titles of articles, such as Lord Hailsham of St Marylebone? Personally I'm against it as I think it breaks up flow the name and title. Mintguy
Generally, I am in support of your idea. However, sometimes, there are two different titles differenced only by the place names. Note, for instance, the Lords Archer of Sandwell and Weston-Super-Mare. Furthermore, there are some titles in the form of "A of B of B," for instance: Baron Erskine of Rerrick of Rerrick. In such a case, the second use of the placename should be dropped, but perhaps the first could be retained. -- Lord Emsworth 01:50, Dec 23, 2003 (UTC)
* No. I think you mis-understand me. I'm talking about the linking in the article title. i.e. Lord Hailsham of St Marylebone instead Lord Hailsham of St Marylebone of at the top of Lord Hailsham of St Marylebone looks horrible to me. Mintguy
* Oh, I understand what is meant now. I would agree that the place name need not be linked to. It could be noted later in the article, perhaps. -- Lord Emsworth 17:32, Dec 23, 2003 (UTC)
Earls of Essex
Does anyone know of the name and birth date of the present Earl of Essex? I have only been able to find information for Earls of Essex until the 8th Earl, who died in the middle of the 1960's. -- Lord Emsworth 01:50, Dec 23, 2003 (UTC)
* According to, the 10th Earl (b.1920), succeeded his 3rd Cousin, once removed, in 1981. His name is/was Robert Edward de Vere Capell. But he may very well have died in the meanwhile, considering his age. He was apparently a postal worker before succeeding to the earldom, if you trust
* I would guess, though, that he hasn't died, because if he had died in the time since the Burke's online was put out, his death would probably be posted on alt.talk.royalty somewhere
* According to, the 9th Earl of Essex was named Reginald George de Vere Capell, and lived 9 October 1906 - 18 May 1981. He was the son of the 8th Earl. john 05:29, 23 Dec 2003 (UTC)
* Thanks for the information. -- Lord Emsworth 11:33, Dec 23, 2003 (UTC)
St. or St
Some articles, such as Edward Adolphus Ferdinand Seymour, Earl St. Maur, tend to use St. instead of St. Would the general policy be that the period be dropped when giving the title of a peerage, or should it be retained? -- Lord Emsworth 02:39, Dec 23, 2003 (UTC)
My understanding was that British spellings tend to drop the punctuation, but not being British, I probably shouldn't be relied on here. Whatever the British usage is should be maintained. john 05:29, 23 Dec 2003 (UTC)
* I would not know, for I am not British either. I have seen the use of St without the period in most cases, though, so I would assume that the punctuation be dropped. I think that the general rule is that where the last letter of the abbreviation is the last letter of the word, the punctuation is not used. (Rt Honble, Mr, Dr, Bt). -- Lord Emsworth 11:33, Dec 23, 2003 (UTC)
LOL. So where do you guys hail from? I had assumed you were both British. Mintguy
* I'm American. Back home in dear old Maryland, at the moment. john 20:44, 23 Dec 2003 (UTC)
* I am a resident of the US, but of the Republic of India. -- Lord Emsworth
Inclusion of titles in the article title
Much controversy surrounds the move of Benjamin Disraeli to Benjamin Disraeli, 1st Earl of Beaconsfield, and the proposed move of Lord John Russell to John Russell, 1st Earl Russell. I think that Wikipedia ought to have a most clear convention on when it is acceptable to exclude the technically correct title. I think that, with the system of redirects in place, it would be best to have the "correct" title match the article title, and the more "common" title redirect to it. Here are some example articles that do not use the peerage title:
* Herbert Asquith (1st Earl of Oxford and Asquith) PM
* Clement Attlee (1st Earl Attlee) PM
* Stanley Baldwin (1st Earl Baldwin) PM
* Stanley Bruce (1st Viscount Bruce) PM of Australia
* Arthur Balfour (1st Earl of Balfour) PM
* Anthony Eden (1st Earl of Avon) PM
* Harold Macmillan (1st Earl of Stockton)
* Alfred Tennyson (1st Baron Tennyson) Poet
I think that we should aim for consistency and correctness generally, for redirects would take care of the more common titles. -- Lord Emsworth 18:02, Jan 4, 2004 (UTC)
* Consider also the case of Bertrand Russell. I bet few mathematicians or philosophers are even aware that he was 3rd Earl Russell (and a grandson of the troublesome Earl Russell alluded to above). Loren Rosen 23:32, 4 Jan 2004 (UTC)
I think if we are going to be consistent (which we should) then all peers should have the titles in their article headings. Lord E has expressed a fear of being accused of Anglocentrism if he moves Stanley Bruce to Stanley Bruce, 1st Viscount Bruce of Melbourne and Westminster. As an Australian I can assure him that no-one here gives a bandicoot's bum about Stanley Bruce, so he should make the change as he sees fit. Only three Australians were ever made peers: Bruce, (John Forrest, 1st Baron Forrest of Bunbury and Forret (note spelling: Forret is a place in Fifeshire whence came the ancestral Forrests), and Richard Casey, Baron Casey of Berwick and Westminster. All three died mercifully without heirs. Adam 01:24, 5 Jan 2004 (UTC)
I would agree with the sentiment that all peers should have the titles in the article headings, with the sole exception of peers for life. -- Lord Emsworth 01:43, Jan 5, 2004 (UTC)
* Hmm...I think anybody who received a peerage after retirement ought to be listed under their proper name, without title. David Lloyd George, 1st Earl Lloyd George of Dwyfor would be bizarre. or Harold Macmillan, 1st Earl of Stockton. Sigh...I think I'd prefer simply playing it by ear on a case by case basis. Certainly we should have William Pitt, 1st Earl of Chatham, among other things... john 03:19, 5 Jan 2004 (UTC)
* I don't think that there would be anything particularly bizarre about, say, David Lloyd George, 1st Earl Lloyd George. Sure, the title would be very long and perhaps tedious to type out, but David Lloyd George would always redirect there. -- Lord Emsworth 20:05, Jan 5, 2004 (UTC)
Seeing as Lloyd George only held that title for a few months before his death, and long after he had ceased to play any significant role in public affairs, I think it's unnecessarily obscurantist to do that. Especially since there are people objecting to putting Pitt the Elder under Chatham (see Talk:William Pitt, 1st Earl of Chatham). john 21:15, 5 Jan 2004 (UTC)
I think there is a fundamental problem, in so far as some people are known by their title, some by their career of which their title was secondary. As this isn't Burke's Peerage, I don't think we should have a hangup about using exact titles in all cases. Lord John Russell, for example, is known 99% of the time in that format, not as a later earl. David Lloyd George is known universally as that, not by his later peerage. Ditto with Herbert Asquith and many others. Following peerage titles and format can in some cases produce absurdities. Francis Pakenham, 7th Earl of Longford may be technically correct but it is nonsensical. Pakenham was an internationally renounced author, activist and politician, known at different times as Frank Pakenham or Lord Longford. But no-one, bar perhaps his mother, called him "Francis". To be recognisable, it has to be Frank Pakenham, 7th Earl of Longford. But (as the person who started the reorganising the royal titles on wikipedia to give them structure rather than the ridiculous Charles Windsor nonsense that was the wikipedia standard at the time) insisting that Frank Pakenham be called Frank Pakenham rather than Francis, I ran the gaunlet of people screaming "but you can't call an earl 'Frank'!" We need reality and accuracy here, not dogmatism. If someone is known universally by a lower title or none, they should not be placed in as a rarely known, theoretically more correct, higher title in the article title. That can be covered by redirects and in the article itself. FearÉIREANN 21:35, 5 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Then we should have a clear convention about when articles are to be named without the inclusion of the title. Perhaps the criteria could be (note that these are but draft proposals): I think that the most controversial criteria might be the third and final ones. -- Lord Emsworth 21:47, Jan 5, 2004 (UTC)
* 1) The individual played a very significant role in public affairs and held a public office prior to being elevated.
* 2) The individual was not active in public affairs after being elevated.
* 3) The individual was known by the peerage title for an insignificant amount of time.
* 4) The lesser title is far more common than the peerage title.
* 5) When the subject inherited a title, the title ought to be included in the article title, regardless of the above.
You folk keep talking as if this was a paper encyclopaedia. The beauty of this format is that it doesn't matter what articles are called. Anyone who wants Lloyd George will search for "Lloyd George" and find the article whether his title is part of the heading or not. I would include all titles in headings. There should be redirects from other forms of their names. For example Lord John Russell should redirect to John Russell, 1st Earl Russell. Adam 23:28, 5 Jan 2004 (UTC)
I disagree. Why should someone in an encyclopædia as Lord John Russell, the British prime minister, be put in under a different name? It makes no logical sense to opt for a name 0.01% of people would recognise in preference to one that just about anyone interested in mid-19th century British or Irish politics would recognise. It is like putting in Jimmy Carter as James Earl Carter. It isn't as in monarchs where the formal title and ordinal is central. For people like Packenham, Russell, Lloyd George, Atlee and others their title was a minor footnote. I am all for as much accuracy in titles as possible, but there are commonsense limits, or else we should, in strict accuracy, have a page called Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Australia, Canada, New Zealand . . . I think Lord Emsworth's suggestion worth considering in detail. It makes perfect sense. FearÉIREANN 23:47, 5 Jan 2004 (UTC)
FYI, Russell was PM twice, the second time as Earl Russell. Most encyclopaedias and history books index him as Earl Russell. And Pakenham was much better known as Lord Longford (if that's who you're talking about) than as Frank Pakenham. Adam 23:53, 5 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Actually no, Pakenham was known as Frank Pakenham in the 1930s and 1940s during his writing of his most important book and his political career. Long Longford was his brother the theatre impressario. Talk about Lord Longford in the 1940s and 1950s and people would instinctively have thought of the Gate Theatre manager. Talk about Lord Longford later and they would have thought of Frank Pakenham. Today's Lord Longford is universally known as Thomas Pakenham the historian. Even his friends don't think of him as Lord Longford. So simply talking about Lord Longford is meaningless, when you don't simply have many Lord Longfords, but two Lord Longfords who were internationally renouned historians. FearÉIREANN 20:37, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
* Yes, but on the other hand, Walpole or Macmillan were hardly known as Orford and Stockton...I think something like Lord Emsworth's idea should be used - the highest title by which the person was known during the time they were actually active in public life. That, unfortunately, leaves us with the Earl of Balfour (and I'm not sure where it leaves us with Shelburne/Lansdowne), but I think leaves us in a relatively satisfactory position for almost everybody else. And Adam's certainly right that it doesn't really matter where the article is located, so long as there's a redirect. So long as Jimmy Carter hits the article, I wouldn't especially object to an article at James Earl Carter. (James Carter, 1st Earl Carter of Plains would, however, be inappropriate) john 00:08, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Surely it is better to have a consistent rule, rather than have to make subjective judgements all the time? (What, incidentally, are we doing with Alec Douglas-Home, who was successively Viscount Dunglass, 15th Earl of Home, Sir Alec Douglas-Home and Baron Home of the Hersel, and active in public life under all four titles?) Adam 00:14, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
* Normally, one would have the highest title- Earl of Home. This rules out the courtesy title of Lord Dunglass. Then, we already have a rule that life peerages and knighthoods are not to be indicated in the title. So finally, we are left with Alec Douglas-Home, 14th Earl of Home, or Alec Douglas-Home. I prefer the latter because the former title was disclaimed. Similarly, Tony Benn rather than Tony Benn, 2nd Viscount Stansgate. -- Lord Emsworth 00:18, Jan 6, 2004 (UTC)
* Private Eye always calls him "the former Viscount Stansgate" just to annoy him. Adam 00:22, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
I fail to see how the addition of a title would detract from the article, though I can see how the removal of one would. Nonetheless, it has been pointed out that strictly accurate articles could have extremely long titles, such as the one on Elizabeth II. However, long-winded titles must of course be reduced in length. We have agreed to eliminate all but the highest title in the case of peers, as well as in the case of monarchs. For instance, we do not have Elizabeth II, of the United Kingdom ... Queen, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith. Instead, following a simple rule, we have Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom. We further use the "primary" title - I don't think that many will argue that the UK monarchy is not Her Majesty's primary one - for the Queen. We are thus being accurate and consistent. Indeed, if we were to include every title, then even for peers the heading would become very long. Just as we have a reduced but accurate and consistent title for the monarch, we could have a reduced (to the highest title) but accurate and consistent title for peers. Ideally, I would agree with Dr Carr on this matter, and suggest that all articles ought to be consistently titled, with the inclusion of the peerage. However, there was vehement opposition to the idea, and not that much support; the practicality of getting my way was difficult, for which reason I have proposed the above criteria. -- Lord Emsworth 00:15, Jan 6, 2004 (UTC)
I also would not exactly oppose just using highest title, unless disclaimed, but seeing as there's people who want to move William Pitt, 1st Earl of Chatham back to William Pitt the Elder, when he actually is called Chatham a lot, I hate to see what people will do with Maurice Harold Macmillan, 1st Earl of Stockton or Robert Anthony Eden, 1st Earl of Avon. john 00:29, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
What a pity... But I think that once we have some sort of consensus here, then we can perhaps move one or two of those controversial pages, and have people then directed here to debate the matter. Next, if we manage to convince such people, then we might adopt the convention. (I don't know about the formalities of adopting an official convention, though.) If, however, said people are unconvinced, then I will resign myself to the criteria that I have proposed. -- Lord Emsworth 00:35, Jan 6, 2004 (UTC)
I think you should just rename the pages as you see fit and then argue with anyone who objects on a case-by-case basis :) Adam 00:38, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Here's a test case: Harold MacMillan, 1st Earl of Stockton Adam 00:40, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
For now, I will be satisfied with renaming Anthony Eden, 1st Earl of Avon, who incidentally held the earldom for over fifteen years, making argument a bit easier there. I will try moving a few more a little later, but I am interested in first seeing reactions to the two moves already made. -- Lord Emsworth
Just to guage the sentiments of others, I intend to take an informal poll. I think that I will reserve a formal vote for later, probably for deciding finally on whether to accept the convention or not. '''INFORMAL POLL: Ought all articles whose subjects are peers include the highest title of the peer in the article title?
YES (3): Lord Emsworth, Adam, PMA
NO (2): john (I think nearly all articles should do this, but I'd favor exceptions for people who received or inherited peerage titles after their retirement from public life) FearÉIREANN (yes in most cases but I think there has to be exceptions. Producing obscure and unrecognisable forms simply because they were their technically correct title could undermine the credibility of relevant title usage. As the experience over monarchical titles showed, there are a lot of people who vehemently oppose any titles being used. OTT 'in all cases' title usage could produce a backlash and re-invigorate the 'ditch imperialist titles brigade' lot who still whine about the work a few of us did to sort out the monarchical titles mess and try every so often to re-open the debate.
(Add three tildes - - next to the previous voter's name in order to cast your vote.)
Note: In order to avoid cluttering the space, I removed the dates and times indicated next to the names. -- Lord Emsworth 02:15, Jan 6, 2004 (UTC)
I'm coming into this conversation a bit late, don't have time to read every talk page on the Wikipedia after all, but could we please make some headroads into changing Benjamin Disraeli to an article rather than a redirect, and Duke of Wellington into an article instead of a disambiguation page, in keeping with the caveat of "best known in English"? I don't think a WikiProject should attempt to trump something that fundamental. - Hephaestos 01:50, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Benjamin Disraeli, 1st Earl of Beaconsfield is already an article. Adam 02:00, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
* Really? You call him that in common conversation? This would be something I think is quite uncommon in the English-speaking world, as a matter of fact. The fact that he was 1st Earl of Beaconsfield is widely known, but seldom said outside Burke's. - Hephaestos 02:26, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
* Not so, Hep. Many history books taking about Disraeli's later career exclusively call him Beaconsfield. I don't see the point in calling Macmillan the Earl of Stockton as he was not called that except in his retirement. But Disraeli was known as Beaconsfield during his career so IMHO is a necessity in the article title. FearÉIREANN 20:29, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
* Seldom said? The encyclopaediae Britannica, Encarta, and Columbia mention the Earldom in the title of the entry, as does Bartlett's Quotations, and several other reference works. Not, of course, that I am suggesting that we should entitle our articles based on other reference works. I simply think that the idea that the fact is seldom mentioned is not particularly accurate. -- Lord Emsworth 02:51, Jan 6, 2004 (UTC)
I also think, with the greatest of respect to Hephaestos and others, that the mysteries of the peerage are something that Americans have very little understanding of, and that they ought to allow those with expertise in the field (such as Lord E) to establish protocols. Adam 02:05, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
* See, the thing about an encyclopedia is to remove "mystery" (I should mention I just mistyped "mysery") and get people to the proper name. This project has gotten completely out of control with regard to famous peers. I mentioned something along these lines to Jtdirl about a year ago with no satisfaction, but it seems to me the "naming conventions" advocated by this closed group will border on vandalism if unchecked. The full name and title in bold in the first line of the article should be enough. - Hephaestos 02:26, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
* Haephestos thus proves my point about Americans presuming to know everything about everything. The fact is that naming peers is a difficult issue, which does not admit of a simple solution. Lord E and others are rtying to devise a solution to this. Exactly what is being vandalised by calling people by the correct forms of their names and titles? I think this is just anti-British prejudice. If we were proposing to use correct but arcane titles of (for example) Native American chiefs, no-one would dare object, for fear of being called un-PC. But silly old dukes and earls are easy game. Adam 02:34, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
* Bull. I've made this same argument at Talk:Sitting Bull and come to an amicable conclusion quite quickly (certainly well under a year). - Hephaestos 02:48, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
* Without intending to be rude, I beg to suggest that the idea that we are committing vandalism to be quite ridiculous, and perhaps even insulting. -- Lord Emsworth 02:35, Jan 6, 2004 (UTC)
* I appreciate keeping the conversation on a civil level, but I call it as I see it. It is rather these article names that are ridiculous. The article naming guidelines are here for American, British, Australian, Indian, Israeli, heck every English-speaking reader of the Wikipedia, and I think you folks here are forgetting that. - Hephaestos 02:48, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
* Firstly, I hardly think that calling individuals expressing the point of view that articles ought to include peerage titles vandals is particularly civil. Secondly, it is my considered opinion that we have not forgotten anything at all about who these guidelines are for. I pray to ask what, indeed, have I or anybody else said that would imply that we are ignoring American, Australian, Indian, or Israeli readers? -- Lord Emsworth
* What's the exact issue here, Hephaestos? If we have redirects, what mystery is there? I think it would be awkward to have some people at their highest peerage title when they are never actually called that (as Asquith, Lloyd George, Baldwin, Attlee, Eden, Macmillan, Bertrand Russell), but I don't see how it would be confusing in any particular way. At any rate, accusations of vandalism are completely uncalled for. We've been having lively discussion of these issues for some time, and I don't think anyone has been trying to force the issue. Whatever position being arrived at is being arrived at through open discussion. That people who are generally not interested in contributing to articles on British politics or the peerage have not generally involved themselves is, I suppose, natural, but doesn't mean that we're some kind of cabal or clique. I do think that some deference ought to be shown to the preferences of the people who actually do work on this material, just as I don't tend to get into nomenclature arguments in areas of wikipedia to which I don't contribute. john 02:41, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
I would absolutely object to changing "Duke of Wellington" into an article on the first duke. Clearly, one cannot relegate it to the level of a mere disambiguation page? Indeed, I think that it is not a disambiguation page; rather, it is a page on the dukedom in question. I see absolutely no reason to change the article on the dukedom to an article on the first duke.
Secondly, the "best known in English" convention that you cite has its own caveat: Note: Because of the complexities involved, monarchical titles and noble titles are covered by a separate naming convention, namely Naming conventions (names and titles). Thus, I respectfully and humbly suggest that I don't believe that we are trumping anything too fundamental. Of course, there could be a similar requirement in the second page governing peers, but it would be such a requirement that we are trying to "overturn". -- Lord Emsworth 02:06, Jan 6, 2004 (UTC)
Hephaestos, in what sense does adding "1st Earl of Beaconsfield" to the article title, or whatever, lead to confusion among Indian, American, Australian, readers, or whatever? "Benjamin Disraeli" is still there in the article title for everybody to see (unlike the Sitting Bull example). Furthermore, English language histories generally do use the full peerage title for indexing purposes, at least, and for the time when the person held that peerage. Again, as long as there are redirects, I'm not sure what the problem is, especially since adding peerage titles does not actually obscure the person's more commonly known name, as Tatanka Iyotake does. john 02:59, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
To take an obvious example: few people call Asquith by his title, which he acquired late in life. But if anyone wants to find the Asquith article, they just search for "Asquith" and are taken straight to it. What difference does it make whether they are taken to Herbert Asquith or Herbert Asquith, 1st Earl of Oxford and Asquith? Both are perfectly clear titles, one just happens to be more fuller and more accurate than the other. What harm is being done? What is being vandalised? Adam 03:01, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Well that is wrong. His name was Herbert Henry but Margot made him drop the Herbert, which she considered common. So he was definitely Henry from the time of his 2nd marriage, which was well before he was PM. Adam 03:08, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
I've always seen "Herbert Henry Asquith"...perhaps we should move the page? john 03:09, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
* Benjamin Disraeli was the 1st Earl of Beaconsfield because of what he did. I tend to think he would turn in his grave if the title were a defining item in an article about him. This whole scheme borders on the ridiculous. Certainly members of the peerage deserve articles solely on that basis; however, Horatio Nelson doesn't deserve to be belittled in such a manner, and I fear he might be next in this onslaught. Neither do any of the others, such as Disraeli. I think Disraeli might be turning in his grave to think that 21st century writers think "Beaconsfield" is worthy of more than a footnote.
* We have guidelines here. Duke of Wellington should be an article about the first Duke, with a disambiguation line at the top saying "for others (etc. etc.) linked to Duke of Wellington (disambiguation). Unless all of the writers here feel they owe some kind of fealty to the dukedom.
* I can assure you that I feel no fealty whatsoever to any dukedom. However, I do feel that I must not be innaccurate. To suggest that "Duke of Wellington" be on the first duke only is ridiculous. It is like suggesting that "Princess of Wales" be on Lady Diana Spencer, later Diana, Princess of Wales, just because she is the most famous holder of the title. Rather, I feel that the title deserves a separate article, just as the dukedom deserves a separate article. -- Lord Emsworth 11:31, Jan 6, 2004 (UTC)
* (PS and here I got into two edit conflicts over "Herberts". It's quite ridiculous.) - Hephaestos 03:11, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
The guidelines we have do not support the position you are arguing. Further, it is ridiculous to suggest that including someone's peerage title is somehow "belittling" Lord Beaconsfield, or Lord Nelson, or whomever. Further, why is it belittling to Beaconsfield to include his title, but not to the Duke of Wellington, who also received his title because of what he did. And why on earth should the Duke of Wellington article be completely different from every other article about a general peerage title? The Iron Duke was known as simply "Arthur Wellesley" for his earlier career. Why is it wrong to use Lord Beaconsfield's title in addition to his name, but also wrong to include Wellington's personal name in his article at all? john 03:17, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
* Basically because when one says "Lord Beaconsfield" few people know who you're talking about. Sheesh. And I invite other Britons to confirm this. - Hephaestos 03:20, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
But nobody's saying "Lord Beaconsfield" except for the 1876-1881 period, which is fairly standard in historical works (not universal, but certainly at least as common as the other). A.J.P. Taylor calls him Beaconsfield after 1876, for instance, and he's hardly some sort of High Tory traditionalist. "Benjamin Disraeli" will still be present in the article title, and he's referred to as Disraeli before 1876. john 03:23, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
* I think actually that's how all this started, with how the names were listed in the 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica. It doesn't hold today. - Hephaestos 03:32, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
I can assure you that Nelson would be grossly offended if his title, of which he was inordinately proud, was not used. Disraeli was a bit more cynical, but he was a great upholder of the aristocratic principle. Adam 03:24, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
* Used, in bold, on the first line of his article. As I said, I think that's enough. The hoi polloi read this thing. They're ultimately what we're geared toward. - Hephaestos 03:32, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
* Your argument is constantly changing. Again, please explain what exactly is confusing about the Firstname Lastname, #th HighestPeerageRank (of) Peeragetitle format? Would anyone really be confused as to whether we mean Disraeli or not? john 03:35, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
* I think rather you should explain what exactly is confusing about Firstname Lastname, except in the case of a duplicate. - Hephaestos 03:40, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
* It is neither complete nor correct. Most peers are known by their peerage title. By your standard articles should be at Arthur Wellesley, Henry Temple, Robert Jenkinson, Frederick Robinson, and so forth. Using the full peerage standard leaves no ambiguity, and is clearly the best option for most articles. john 03:44, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
* Could one identify easily, without titles: Philip Mountbatten, Frederick Robinson, Edward Stanley, or even Arthur Wettin? -- Lord Emsworth 22:12, Jan 6, 2004 (UTC)
* Yes, while Disraeli probably wouldn't exactly be offended to have the title deleted, he'd certainly be delighted if it was used... john 03:28, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
To be clear, there would be no problem in my mind in renaming the Horatio Nelson article as Lord Nelson or even Admiral Lord Nelson, both of which are more common names. To go with Horatio Nelson, 1st Viscount Nelson is patently ridiculous. I would prefer that that the Wikipedia not be patently ridiculous. - Hephaestos 03:49, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Why is this patently ridiculous? This form is uniquely identifying and frequently used in reference works and indexes. Furthermore, it is correct in a way that Admiral Lord Nelson or whatever, simply isn't. And using this standard means one always knows where an article should be, and doesn't have to make constant judgment calls about what the most "commonly used" version is. john 03:52, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
* "Why is this patently ridiculous?" Let's try Richard Temple-Nugent-Brydges-Chandos-Grenville, 1st Duke of Buckingham and Chandos. What does a general English speaker call him? Well, nothing, they've never heard of him. What do his friends call him, "Dick"? The point is nobody rattles that off their tongue when referring to a person, ever. "Benjamin Disraeli", "Lord Nelson" "Winston Churchill", that's what I always hear, and I guess I'm in a majority in the English-speaking world in hearing it. - Hephaestos 04:01, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
* Firstly, I agree that no individual "rattles off their tongue". However, encyclopedias do. Several individuals would tend never to use such English as is required in encyclopedic writing, but should we stop using correct grammar just because individuals would not? Now, addressing your points, firstly, Winston Churchill was never a peer. Secondly, to have an article on "Lord Nelson" would be to engage in terminological inexactitude, and it would be wholly uncencyclopedic to name an article thus. Thirdly, we have already addressed the point about Disraeli. -- Lord Emsworth 11:38, Jan 6, 2004 (UTC)
What Heph fails to grasp is that a peerage is not just a title. Horatio Nelson, 1st Viscount Nelson was actually the man's name once he became a peer. A peerage involves a change of name. Once Arthur Wellesley became Duke of Wellington, Arthur Wellesley ceased to exist as a legal person. To omit the full name is to falsify history. Adam 04:03, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
* What Adam (bless you for having a four-letter name that I don't have to heavily type) fails to grasp is that it doesn't really matter a damn what someone calls themselves, it's what they're generally known as. Like Paul Simon or Kim Beazley, junior. - Hephaestos 04:12, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
I imagine one would have called the fellow "The Duke of Buckingham" while he was alive (or "Lord Buckingham" before 1821). After his death, it'd be rather unclear. The "1st Duke of Buckingham" certainly wouldn't clear things up, since there'd been several of those. Perhaps "the 1st Duke of Buckingham and Chandos." But yeah, it's difficult. and those Buckingham&Chandosers certainly had ridiculous surnames (Richard Grenville, 1st Duke of Buckingham and Chandos would probably be appropriate, although not particularly correct.) In any event, your view of things would leave us in complete chaos. Every single article about a peer would have to be played by ear, and there'd be no possible way to have any logical progression of articles about peerage titles in general, since you'd force us to have Duke of Wellington or Duke of Marlborough or whatever be articles about an individual, rather than about a title. And all this, and you've still not explained what exactly is wrong with the system pretty much everybody else here has accepted (at least, for the majority of peers, with some exceptions, at least IMO), except that it means that articles aren't listed at the location where they're "most commonly known." Seeing how nebulous such a judgment is, I'm not sure what to make of it. Certainly, I'd expect William Pitt, 1st Earl of Chatham to be where an encyclopedia would list that gentleman, for instance. john 04:22, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
I think we will have to agree politely to ignore Hephaestos, and rename the articles accordign to the convention we have agreed on. Adam 04:42, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
It doesn't matter a damn what they were called back in the day, it matters what they're called now. Sorry Adam, but this isn't an easily ignorable item. Some of these articles will be moved shortly, and it's probable that additional editors will agree and move others to their proper places. - Hephaestos 05:02, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
* The devil? I think you fail to realize the scope of the peerage project here. Ultimately, there will probably be entries on all of the major lines (certainly the major families are well represented already). What you suggest is administrative chaos. Do you realize how many Lords Derby there are? And how many were well-known? The current system safeguards against ambiguity, and several people have gone to tremendous effort to devise and implement it. Finally, as a history major, I have to say that what they were called "back in the day" is indeed what matters. We cannot go back and subjectively give whatever name we want. To do so would, among other things, render Wikipedia absolutely worthless as a research tool. Mackensen 20:44, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Avoid the passive tense. "will be moved" avoids responsibility. Do you mean to say "I will start an edit war over this issue"? john 05:12, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Surely what matters, Heph, is what they should be called. Adam 05:33, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Actually I think I have to disagree with Lord E on the Duke of Wellington question. I think Duke of Wellington should be a redirect to Arthur Wellesley, 1st Duke of Wellington, because that is what most people want when they go looking for "Duke of Wellington." The material which is currently at that article should be at an article called Dukedom of Wellington (or if that is thought too clumsy, perhaps Dukes of Wellington), and by analogy all articles which are about particular peerages rather than about individual peers should take that form. Adam 13:24, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
* I don't think that Duke of Wellington ought even to redirect. Perhaps, however, one could have a message of "disambiguation" at the top. Now, however, regarding the general move from the singular to the plural, I would not necessarily agree, but it would be something worth considering. -- Lord Emsworth 21:55, Jan 6, 2004 (UTC)
* I think the fact that Wikipedia has redirects is being used as an excuse to put an article at odd places where it would never occur in any other reputable, modern encyclopedia. And I think it hurts Wikipedia's credibility. - Hephaestos 16:07, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
* What on earth are you talking about? As people have demonstrated, most other encyclopedias include full peerage titles. For Disraeli, Britannica has "Disraeli, Benjamin, Earl Of Beaconsfield, Viscount Hughenden Of Hughenden," Columbia Encyclopedia has "Disraeli, Benjamin, 1st Earl of Beaconsfield," Bartlett's Quotations, rather oddly, has "Benjamin, Earl of Beaconsfield Disraeli". Encarta has "Disraeli, Benjamin, 1st Earl of Beaconsfield." The BBC has "Benjamin Disraeli, Earl of Beaconsfield, Viscount Hughenden of Hughenden" . Can you find a reputable encyclopedia which does not include Disraeli's peerage title, Hephaestos? john 17:42, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
* Notably Columbia which you mention.
* Er...it's not alphabetized under Beaconsfield, but Beaconsfield is part of the title. See here . john 23:30, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
* Certainly the full name and title should be used in the first line, that's standard Wikipedia convention as well. Nor do I advocate dropping titles from the vast majority of the articles that have them; in many cases, that is the name they're best known by in English. However to quote from the naming convention for royalty:
* If a person is best known by his cognomen, or by a name that doesn't exactly fit the guidelines above, revert to the base rule: use the most common English name.
* (Bolding not mine.) This clearly applies to "Beaconsfield" and "Wellesley", as well as many others. Sometime, I don't know when, some people took it that for some strange reason this didn't apply in the case of the peerage. It should be changed back to be in line with the rest of the encyclopedia. Ideally, the article's name should almost always match what someone types into the search engine. - Hephaestos 21:26, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
* As to Adam's comment, if someone wants to move all pages on peerage titles to Dukedom of Wellington, or whatever, that's fine. But that would require an inordinate effort, and I'm not volunteering (are you, Adam?) john 17:42, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
* (re Heph)That's patently absurd. If anything, the redirects are being used because articles were put in odd places (like, Lord John Manners was moved to John James Robert Manners, 7th Duke of Rutland). There have been any number of Lords John Manners throughout history, and we cannot afford to show any one precedence because the scope of the wiki is not limited to the 19th century. We have to consider these people in a broader context. There is more than one Duke of Wellington. Mackensen 20:44, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
I have to completely disagree with Hep on this one. I think Hep's argument is flawed in theory and would be dismissed out of hand by all historians, academics, researchers, authors and biographers I have ever come across. (And I come from the Republic of Ireland, not the UK.) Adam is correct in pointing out that a title is someone's name. The argument of using what is commonly thought of as someone's name, rather than their actual name, is absurd. And far from hitting wikipedia's credibility, I know that in the area of royal and titled nomenclature is very highly regarded, with one of the US's biggest encyclopædias, in preparing their next edition, seeing wikipedia's accuracy with titles as being something they hope to aim to match. FearÉIREANN 20:55, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
* If using what is commonly thought of as someone's name, rather than their actual name, is absurd, then why don't we just set about moving Gregory Peck, Jimmy Carter, Alfred the Great, and dozens of other straightforward, unambiguous article titles to their "proper" names, since as things stand now apparently peerage rate a special exemption that Wikipedia does not even grant to royalty, as noted above. - Hephaestos 21:26, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
* Firstly, I fail to see where one would otherwise have the article on Gregory Peck. Secondly, in the case of peers, nicknames seem to be allowed (see Frank Pakenham, 7th Earl of Longford, for example). Thirdly, in the case of Alfred the Great, one would make an allowance for him and certain others under some proposals allowing the common name to be used in certain cases - see the draft criteria that I proposed allowed. Finally, it does not matter whether royalty merits something or not: there is no special exception to "merit". Let me ask Hephaestos: Is it your proposal that all references to the peerage be dropped in the title? If not, what is your proposal? -- Lord Emsworth 22:01, Jan 6, 2004 (UTC)
* My proposal is simply that we use the naming conventions that have been in place all along, such as using English and common names. These are general guidelines for Wikipedia, and predate the change made for peerage in Naming conventions (names and titles), which being a specific convention should never trump one of the general ones.
* For instance, I think the first Duke's article should be titled Duke of Wellington, because that is how he is overwhelmingly known, and when speaking of other Dukes of Wellington it's usually necessary to specify "no, not the Duke of Wellington". It should have a disambiguation block at the top:
* This article is about Arthur Wellesley, 1st Duke of Wellington. For other holders of the title, please see Dukes of Wellington
* Why would we want to do this? Most every peer is best known as simply "Lord Suchandsuch" or the "Duke of suchandsuch". It would invite chaos to try to put all their articles at those locations.
* ...or whatever is decided that the disambiguation page currently at Duke of Wellington should be titled. Likewise Lord Nelson, Lord Salisbury, etc.
* Dear Lord, the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, and 7th Marquesses of Salisbury have all been notable figures in politics. So was Robert Cecil, the 1st Earl. All were known as "Lord Salisbury". Your suggestion is a recipe for chaos. john 23:30, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
* For others who are best known by their name rather than their title, their biography should be titled with that name (for example Jackie Fisher, which is currently in the wrong spot for completely different reasons). And I think this applies to Benjamin Disraeli as well. Just a look at what links to that article should be a sign: currently over a hundred, as opposed to fourteen that link to any variation of "Beaconsfield". Naturally in cases like this the full name with the title should be in bold in the first line of the article.
* For persons whose main claim to fame is the title, the way things are presently being done is just fine, and those articles should be left where they are. This probably constitutes the bulk of the articles in question. - Hephaestos 23:06, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
* Firstly, I absolutely disagree with the idea that we should in each and every case have to make a subjective judgement as to whether an individual's title is his "claim to fame." I would be willing, as I have earlier indicated, to compromise on the matter of whether titles ought to be used, but as you can see my criteria are a little stricter than yours. Most encyclopedias tend to favour the position that, for example, the earldom of Beaconsfield deserves a mention.
* Secondly, you keep repeatedly pointing out that Duke of Wellington is a disambiguation page, when it is no such thing. Does it to you seem impossible to have a page on a title? Can we not have Prince of Wales, Princess of Wales, Holy Roman Emperor, and so on? Would you propose that each of these be redirects, or at least that the first two be, because we all know who the most famous holders of those titles are?
* Thirdly, when there are several peers with the same title but are still famous, one would have to make an extremely subjective and perhaps controversial judgement call as to which deserves the title, and as to which deserves to have some sort of disambiguating remark: for instance, two Earls Grey have been famous, the second and the fourth. Are we to decide, well, the second was more famous, so he should be at Lord Grey, while the fourth was less famous, so he should be at Albert Henry George Grey, 4th Earl Grey?
* Fourthly, you are being terribly inconsistent. You suggest that we have Lord Nelson because he is thus known commonly, but you at the same time point out that "For persons whose main claim to fame is the title, the way things are presently being done is just fine". Now, which is preferable to you? Lord Nelson, being known as Lord Nelson often, would have a "claim to fame" thaat would include the title. Then, however, in a seemingly contradictory manner, we are to follow the present convention, and at the same time follow your suggestion that the article be at Lord Nelson. -- Lord Emsworth 23:27, Jan 6, 2004 (UTC)~
* Yep, technically Bill Clinton is not the actual name of the person who is legally named William Clinton, and I'll bet Tony Blair's legal documents say Anthony Charles Lynton Blair. It's a judgment call as to what is the most familiar name. When I see a Horatio Nelson, 1st Viscount Nelson I have to stop and think - is this the Nelson, or some obscure guy whose only claim to fame is the title? But, the excessive article titles are very educational for Americans - a good reminder of the reflexive bowing and scraping that still goes on in Europe. :-) Stan 21:58, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
* In most cases, I would not call the article titles "excessive". -- Lord Emsworth 22:18, Jan 6, 2004 (UTC)
* Stan, why is Horatio Nelson, 1st Viscount Nelson any more confusing than just Horatio Nelson would be? Either way one has to stop and think about it, since he's generally called "Lord Nelson", which is, I think, inappropriate as an article title.
* After 20 years of studying naval history, the first phrase that pops to my mind when thinking of Nelson is "Admiral Nelson", then "Lord Nelson", and after that "Horatio Nelson". So to me "Horatio Nelson" is the first unambiguous identifier for the person I'm thinking of. I've read two bios of him, but still couldn't say from memory whether he's Viscount or Marquess or Baron (Yeah, I know, senility is setting in.) So the additional titling bits look like a disambiguator, and when I see disambiguator I think "OK, must be somebody obscure, because there's a qualifier attached to a familiar name." It's sort of like an article titled Bill Clinton (Southern politician) .... for a moment you were wondering if it's about the US president or somebody else, eh? Stan 01:36, 7 Jan 2004 (UTC)
* Well, I can assure you that "Viscount Nelson" is not a disambiguator. If your second thought is "Lord Nelson", then you would probably conclude that the reference to the Viscounty might be related to the title "Lord Nelson". There is a difference between "Southern politician" and "Viscount Nelson". The former is a description, and could perhaps be regarded as a disambiguation. However, the latter is not a description: it is a title, it is a name. -- Lord Emsworth 02:12, Jan 7, 2004 (UTC)
* You're missing my point, which is that the titles look like disambiguators to people who are not familiar with the minutiae of the peerage, which is going to be almost every reader. I was describing my mental workings, faults and all. Stan 04:19, 7 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Adding my opinion: I think that articles on well known people whose title is seldom mentioned should have their articles at their commonly used names. That is where most people will commonly look first; IMO uniformity of titling should not come at expense of usefullness. I feel this is particularly so with people who were already well known before gaining peerage, such as Bertrand Russell. -- Infrogmation 22:55, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
To get back to general thoughts, I tend to think that in most cases Name, Peerage Title, ought to be the format for such articles. I do think that there should be exceptions, in particular, for people who are almost never called by their peerage title. 20th century Prime Ministers who were made Earls upon retirement, or Bertrand Russell, or Lord North, or Robert Walpole, are pretty much never known by their peerage titles. I think it's fairly clear-cut to say that such people should not have articles at their peerage title. But then we come to more confusing issues. What about Arthur Balfour? For the vast majority of his career, he was simply Mr. Balfour, but he did serve as Lord President and Leader of the House of Lords as the Earl of Balfour in the 20s. I think it could be argued that this was merely a post-script to his career, but this takes to dangerous places. What about Disraeli or Russell, who served as PM first as commoners, and later as peers? What about the 1st Earl of Ripon, who is probably best known by a peerage title, Viscount Goderich, by which he was only known for 6 years, but under which he served as Prime Minister, but who continued to serve in various governments for decades thereafter as "Lord Ripon"? Even more strongly, the 1st Marquess of Lansdowne is best known to history as 2nd Earl of Shelburne, but this was not his highest title. What to do? What about people who generally aren't very well known at all, like Michael Hicks-Beach, 1st Earl St Aldwyn, or Thomas Spring Rice, 1st Baron Monteagle? Both are probably better known by their pre-peerage name, but how are we to make the determination? Or what about the 8th Duke of Devonshire, who led the Liberal Party as Marquess of Hartington, a title entirely lost from the article title. There's no simple answer for this, and no simple way to determine what the "most common" name is. Most paper encyclopedias always include the peerage titles, so far as I can tell, but they have some difficulty deciding where to alphabetize them. Thus you have Disraeli, Benjamin, 1st Earl of Beaconsfield, but Salisbury, Robert Gascoyne-Cecil, 3rd Marquess of...Fortunately, we don't have this problem, since we don't have to alphabetize. Leaving the only real issues as those people who are known by two completely different peerage titles, as Ripon, or Devonshire, or Lansdowne (Goderich, Hartington, and Shelburne). Alas, no easy answers, but doing as Hephaestos suggests would only lead to mass confusion. john 23:30, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
* If what I'm suggesting will lead to mass confusion, don't use it. Probably I'm just not making clear exactly what I'm suggesting (or just being ignored; for example I never said that an article couldn't do double-duty as a disambiguation page). In many cases I think the best route would be to go with the consensus on the article's talk page, which was pretty much ignored with Bertrand Russell, and somewhat silly in the case of Benjamin Disraeli (anyone who's wrestled with the purple prose of the 1911 Britannica should guess that 1898 Pears Cyclopaedia is probably not a good role model). - Hephaestos 00:39, 7 Jan 2004 (UTC)
* The number of internationally familiar peers is really small, probably less than 20, so those are the only ones whose titles could be problematic. Stan 01:36, 7 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Well I'm sorry, but there is a simple solution. And that is: everyone who ever held a peerage at anyh time in their life gets that peerage added to the heading of their article, since that was their name. Thus Ripon is George Robinson, 1st Marquess of Ripon, and Hicks-Beach is Michael Hicks-Beach, 1st Earl St Aldwyn. Why is this difficult? It is clear, it is logical, it is consistent, it is accurate. It makes the articles no harder to find for readers. The only complication is for people who were known for most of their career by a courtesy title, such as Hartington, who appears as Spencer Compton Cavendish, 8th Duke of Devonshire. Obviously in these cases there must be a redirect from Marquess of Hartington. But even this should not be too taxing for the average reader. I honestly do not see why there is such a fuss about this. I think Hephaeston is just being obstinate for the sake of it, and because as an American he thinks all these titles are silly anyway. Adam 00:49, 7 Jan 2004 (UTC)
* I will thank you to stop putting words in my mouth. - Hephaestos 01:12, 7 Jan 2004 (UTC)
* I'm not putting words in your mouth, I'm imputing motives. Feel free to deny my imputations. Adam 01:25, 7 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Well, there's also the complication for people known most of their career by a title lesser title than the one they ultimately receive (e.g. Shelburne/Lansdowne), but yeah, I basically agree with you. Certainly I think Hephaestos is being unnecessarily obstinate. My main point was actually against him - he seems to think it's easy to determine what the "most usual" name is, and that we should do that. I was pointing out that it's not too simple, and mostly arguing for just using the highest title. But Frederick North, 2nd Earl of Guilford still sits ill with me. john 00:57, 7 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Provided there is a redirect from Lord North I don't see a problem. One of the purposes of an encyclopaedia is to teach people things. I didn't know that North was Earl of Guilford (as opposed to Guildford), but now I do. Other readers will equally be enlightened. Adam 01:22, 7 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Hmm...I've usually seen Guildford - the spelling seems to be unstable on that one. john 01:24, 7 Jan 2004 (UTC)
A lot of English placename spellings were unstable in the 18th century. Google gives 500 "Earl of Guilford" and 200 "Earl of Guildford". Adam 01:32, 7 Jan 2004 (UTC)
* It all may seem simple to Adam, but for average readers, peer titles are mystifying, complicated, and misleading. It can't be a good sign when editors knowledgeable about Wikipedia are unsure what the rules should be, as witness some of the preceding discussion - the poor readers will be completely in the dark as to why familiar names connect to unfamiliar ones. (I should move Tony Blair to his proper name, just to watch the fireworks, heh-heh.) Stan 01:36, 7 Jan 2004 (UTC)
With respect, that is totally incorrect. If a reader wants to read about (for example) Lord North, they will search for "Lord North" and will be redirected to Frederick North, 2nd Earl of Guilford, where they will learn about the relationship between his name and his title. The analogy with Blair is totally bogus. Adam 01:42, 7 Jan 2004 (UTC)
The difference between the Blair case and the North case is the difference between a personal name and a title. Personal names should given in the form by which the person is publicly known. Blair has always been Tony Blair not Anthony Blair, and therefore his article should call him Tony. The same rule applies to peers. If, for example, Anthony Eden had been publicly known all his life as Tony Eden, then I would argue that his article be called Tony Eden, 1st Earl of Avon. This a quite different question to the use or non-use of titles in headings. Adam 02:19, 7 Jan 2004 (UTC)
* Lord Avon was Robert Anthony Eden, but the personal name was always rendered Anthony Eden, and he was so called. Thus, we should have Anthony Eden, 1st Earl of Avon, not Robert Anthony Eden, 1st Earl of Avon. Lord Emsworth 02:47, Jan 7, 2004 (UTC)
It is probably "Guilford". See Burke's -. -- Lord Emsworth 02:01, Jan 7, 2004 (UTC)
By showing me my mistaken understandings, y'all are actually helping make my basic point, which is that if a semi-knowledgeable person with some experience here is getting it wrong, then the less-knowledgeable are going to have even more trouble! This segues into another reason not to get too elaborate with the titles attached to familiar names - how are you going to prevent the hordes of new users from hacking up the articles? You have to have rationales that random non-expert editors can understand and support, otherwise the text is going to be moving back and forth between different article titles forever. Stan 04:01, 7 Jan 2004 (UTC)
* Clearly Mr Shebs exaggerates the problems relating to the movement of articles, suggesting that such a problem will continue "forever." I disagree that articles will be moving back and forth for eternity. Rather, they will move once to the highest title, and forever stay there, as they ought to. It is rather your proposal which would force back-and-forth movements: for instance, Lord John Russell will constantly shuffle between Lord John Russell and John Russell, 1st Earl Russell, as people will go on and on arguing about which name is more common or about which is more correct, and so on. -- Lord Emsworth 11:29, Jan 7, 2004 (UTC)
This discussion has attracted my attention partly because I have had occasion to link to articles on peers and royal persons, and partly because I find titles of nobility and royalty interesting for their own sake. Some of the questions that have been raised here -- how to determine the form of name by which a person (noble, royal, or neither) is generally known, whether to include a title of nobility or term of honor in the heading, which to choose if he or she has been known by more than one, how to formulate it, what to do when a title is added, changed, or dropped, what cross-references to make, etc. -- have been faced by librarians as well. They have the additional task of deciding whether to enter the person under title or surname, something which, as John noted, is not an issue for Wikipedia, since all names are entered in direct order and there is no filing sequence to take into account.
The cataloging code currently in force is the 2002 revision of AACR2 (Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules, 2nd edition), the joint property of the national library associations of the United States, the United Kingdom, and Canada (and not a public-domain resource, incidentally!). Would it be helpful if I summarized the relevant portions? It is not that I want to impose AACR2 on the Wikipedia, or that I think it is the perfect solution even to the problems of library catalogs. I merely wonder whether a look at how another group dedicated to organizing the world of knowledge is handling the situation might provide food for thought and go some way toward reconciling the opposing views expressed above. Actually, I think that your evolving policy is approaching AACR2. One thing that your system provides that AACR2 does not is the grouping of all individuals who have held a title, together with the history of the title and various details (e.g., Duke of Wellington). In my opinion, that is a great feature. The links to immediate predecessors and successors at the bottom of pages on individual holders of titles are another good idea, I think.
A place to see AACR2 being applied is Library of Congress Authorities, a creation of the Library of Congress and numerous cooperating libraries, including the British Library. Although it might make a useful reference source, I have hesitated to add it to the list of public domain resources. It has many shortcomings, most of which will become evident as soon as one begins to search it, and all of which I could explain without defending them.
-- Flauto Dolce 04:15, 7 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Another way to gain some understanding is to do user testing; find family, friends or colleagues at different levels of knowledge/experience, give them a question to answer using WP ("when was Lord North born", "where is Nelson's Pillar", etc), then just stand there and watch them click around. It can be very illuminating to see where people get stuck, or ask you to rescue them, or just say "screw it" and type the question into Google. :-) Stan 04:26, 7 Jan 2004 (UTC)
* Stan, I'm not sure what exactly you're getting at. For Nelson, I don't see how including the peerage title would make it particularly difficult in any particular way. I do think that it's unfortunate that with some people, the name they're best known by will not be found as the main title on Wikipedia, or, at least, that one of the names they are frequently known by will not be there - but I think that redirects, judicious bolding in the first paragraph, and so forth, can minimize the problems. Lord North, for instance, redirects to Frederick North, 2nd Earl of Guilford, as do Frederick North, Lord North, Frederick, Lord North, and Frederick North. On the article in question, that he is commonly referred to as Lord North is prominently displayed in the first line. I'm not sure why this is so extraordinarily confusing. I don't see any particular need to put it at Guilford, but I'm not sure who it will confuse. john 05:09, 7 Jan 2004 (UTC)
* You could very well be right, and a user test would vindicate that. But if the naming is confusing, you'll see users doing things like going to the article, saying "no, this must be the wrong place", hitting the back link and looking for a different article. Stan 15:10, 7 Jan 2004 (UTC)
* A further comment: I don't think this is very elaborate, and I think that adopting a "everybody at their highest peerage title" rule would make naming of such articles much, much simpler, as Adam points out. There would be no need to weigh what somebody was "best known" as. All one needs to do is put in the name and slap on the highest peerage title. If this is clearly written out on the naming convention, it would, I think, eliminate a great deal of confusion. That's not to say it's the best solution, necessarily, just that it would be incredibly simple. john 05:09, 7 Jan 2004 (UTC)
* I look forward to seeing it spelled out - right now, faced with about a dozen British admirals for which I've recently acquired a good source book, I am completely unsure how to determine the correct article title (what's "highest"? do I say "1st Viscount" or "Viscount" or "Lord"? does it depend on 18th c. vs 19th c. vs 20th c.?) Stan 15:10, 7 Jan 2004 (UTC)
* Firstly, the order of titles is simple: Duke, Marquess, Earl, Viscount, Baron. If the individual is a viscount, you say "1st Viscount" or "2nd Viscount". If he is a baron, you say "1st Baron", etc. You are trying to imply that the naming is far more complicated than it actually is. -- Lord Emsworth 20:02, Jan 7, 2004 (UTC)
I absolutely oppose any suggestion that the Duke of Wellington hold the page about the first duke. The page (like all peerage title pages) is about the title; it is not a disambiguation page. If nothing else it would be unfair to Arthur Valerian Wellesley, 8th Duke of Wellington the current duke. The current sset up is unambiguous and educational. Why change it?Mintguy 13:46, 7 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Heaven forfend we should be unfair to Dukes. Adam 14:02, 7 Jan 2004 (UTC)
* Well yeah, don't want to be thrown in the dungeon! Or worse, snubbed at official events. :-) Stan 15:10, 7 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Well, I think Mintguy's (unfortunately phrased?) point is that the Duke of Wellington is the 8th Duke, technically. It would thus be incorrect to have a pge on the 1st Duke at "Duke of Wellington," which ought, by rights, to refer to the current Duke if it's not a general page. As far as Stan's question, I'm with Emsworth - the order of peerage titles is not especially difficult, and this very page we are discussing will presumably have style guidelines as to how to name pages what with the numbering, and so forth. At any rate Stan, if you don't want to deal with it when writing pages, you can always put it under their common name, and somebody else will move it to the proper place. john 21:31, 7 Jan 2004 (UTC)
* All that I know about peerage titles is what I've read here, and there is some pretty arcane discussion above! Existing articles add to the confusion too, since for instance some seem to have the ordinal and some don't. And isn't there a distinction between "real" peerages and "life" peerages? I've typed Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom about 500 times, so I can handle anything :-), just need to know how to implement the rules. And yes, some will undoubtedly have to be left for a more knowledgeable person to move! Stan 21:38, 7 Jan 2004 (UTC)
* I can tell you, Stan, that life peerages are just as real as "real" (I think you mean hereditary) peerages. Yes, there is a distinction that is here made. The convention on the life peers is quite clear - never indicate the title. The convention, however, on hereditary peers is at present wholly ambiguous, for which reason we are trying to clarify it. Incidentally, typing out the entire phrase Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom may not be necessary as often as you say it is: Elizabeth II will probably suffice in most cases. -- Lord Emsworth 21:56, Jan 7, 2004 (UTC)
* In terms of ordinals, I think we've agreed to a convention where all actually held peerages require an ordinal, with the exception of ambiguous medieval/early modern cases where assigning a number becomes difficult. (numbering the Earls of Arundel, for instance, is a nasty, nasty task, although we can probably figure it out). Courtesy titles, not being actual titles held by somebody, don't get numbered. In addition to the five peerage titles, "Lord" is to be used for Scottish Lords of Parliament and courtesy barons...yeah, relatively complicated, but as Lord E says, there's not been any real convention, and this should make things better. john 22:59, 7 Jan 2004 (UTC)
* I think a pre-condition for not having Duke of Wellington be an article about the famous one that _most links will link to_, is that he be listed with a link in the top paragraph. This goes for Lord Lucan, Lord Byron, etc. Certainly we don't want an unannotated list of all Dukes of Wellington and give the user no idea which one they probably clicked a link for... Morwen 23:05, Jan 7, 2004 (UTC) (corrected)
* There is indeed a link for the 1st Duke in the first paragraph of Duke of Wellington. Lord Wellington does not exist (although Wellington would have been commonly called this from 1809 to 1814). Lord Byron currently redirects to George Gordon Byron, 6th Baron Byron. As to Lord Lucan, the vanished Earl's ancestor who fought in the Crimean War is also quite famous... john 23:18, 7 Jan 2004 (UTC)
* Yes, there is a link for the 1st duke _now_. There wasn't before I made there be one. These disambiguation pages need to be friendly. Morwen 23:20, Jan 7, 2004 (UTC)
* If you do not mind, could you not refer to Duke of Wellington as a disambiguation page, since it is not one? -- Lord Emsworth 23:31, Jan 7, 2004 (UTC)
* My apologies. If you go there, and click 'what links here'. How many of those links do you think are referring to the actual title rather than the first holder? A handful, i wonld think. Morwen 23:50, Jan 7, 2004 (UTC)
* I have changed, I believe, all links to the page Duke of Wellington to links to the page Arthur Wellesley, 1st Duke of Wellington where the latter is the one to whom the article refers. However, I have not touched talk pages. This still leaves more than a "handful" of articles that relate to the title rather than the holder. -- Lord Emsworth 00:06, Jan 8, 2004 (UTC)
Voting
I think that soon, we ought to have a vote on the proposal. I suggest two options for the voting:
Option One: A single poll, with four choices:
* Use the peerage titles in all cases.
* Use the peerage titles, except when the individual was almost always known by the commoner title, and perhaps certain other criteria are fulfilled
* Use the commoner title, except when the individual was almost always known by the peerage title, etc.
* Use the commoner title, except when disambiguation is necessary
Option Two: Use two separate polls. First poll: Second poll, if the first choice is successful in the previous poll:
* Use the peerage title in all cases or except when certain criteria are fulfilled.
* Use the commoner title unless disambiguation is necessary.
* Use the peerage title in all cases.
* Use the peerage title except when criteria X, etc, are fulfilled.
I would prefer the latter option.
-- Clarence Threepwood, 9th Earl of Emsworth
Are we now voting on the form for a vote? Either way seems okay with me. john 23:19, 8 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Yes, we are trying to frame the questions approrpriately. We must also determine voting qualifications if any (eg, a minumum of 20 posts, like the votes for deletion pages), and a deadline. -- Lord Emsworth
Okay. i think I'd probably prefer a single vote, but it doesn't really matter. I trust that any voting arrangement come up with will be fine. john 00:42, 9 Jan 2004 (UTC)
* Agreed, pretty much (one round is simpler); though multiple rounds has the added advantage of greater gradation given what is probably going to be a relatively small number of votes (as this is rather a specialised topic)...
* As for dates, the standard length of time is a week, having been posted to the Village Pump, Requests for Comment, Votes, Ongoing Votes, and the talk pages of all those who have written on this page; having voting qualificatins as on VfD sounds fine; to achieve quorum, I think that we should requre at least 25 votes to be cast; I assume that it is intended to use a simple majority system (rather than double, or STV, or ... ;-)); other than that, I can't really think of anything, or at least not right now.
* Thoughts?
* James F. (talk) 01:01, 9 Jan 2004 (UTC)
I think that separating the polls would be better because it would reduce tactical voting. Something similar could be accomplished if a preferential voting system were used for the first option, but then the voting would become much more complex. As far as the deadlines &c are concerned, I think that the poll should close within five days. -- Lord Emsworth 00:54, Jan 9, 2004 (UTC)
* There is the possibility of tactical voting, but the problem with non-elementary voting systems is that, as most people don't understand them, nor wish to, they can feel somewhat isolated and/or removed from the process, and suspiscion of 'voting rigging' &c. is that bit easier to come by.
* James F. (talk) 01:01, 9 Jan 2004 (UTC)
* So I think that the two-step method would work well, for the reasons that have been already mentioned, and also those that Jdforrester (James F.) has brought up. Furthermore, since there will only be two options in each case if the two-step method is used, no special voting system will be necessary: a simple majority system would be in use. The only disagreement I have is that a quorum of twenty-five votes is rather high, since, as you suggest, this is a specialised topic. -- Lord Emsworth
... and therefore only people who know what they're talking about should be allowed to vote :) Adam 01:38, 9 Jan 2004 (UTC)
* I move the inclusion of a £10 compounder franchise for the purposes of the vote...Mackensen 02:00, 9 Jan 2004 (UTC)
* So long as I get to be member for Old Sarum. Adam 02:11, 9 Jan 2004 (UTC) | WIKI |
Page:BraceNegative1905.djvu/8
78 in the article referred to for measuring the velocity of light can be readily adapted to the problem before us. The first depends on the Faraday "effect," the second on the Kerr electrostatic "effect". The second method, in conjunction with a half-shade elliptical polarizer which I devised several years ago, has given preliminary results indicating a superiority over those described above, quite beyond my expectations, in the arrangement as originally planned for determining the velocity of light a number of years ago.
In fig. 1, k, k' are two condensers containing, say, the dielectric, carbon disulphide or nitrobenzol, giving the Kerr "effect," and placed with their azimuths so as to give a "crossed" system. p, c, a and p', c', a' are the polarizer, elliptical half-shade compensator, and analyser of the two respective optical systems placed in juxtaposition. g is the spark-gap and in a half-silvered mirror system for sending identical beams in opposite directions through the optical systems p' k k' c' a' and p k' k c a.
A and A' represent the azimuths of the various elements as seen from the one side or the other. Thus at $$A, p_{1}$$ and $$a_{1}$$ are the azimuths of the polarizer and analyser, k and k' the traces of the | WIKI |
New AngelList data set sheds light on the signaling risks of seed-stage investments – TechCrunch
One of the big, ongoing debates in VC and founder circles concerns whether to accept money from top-tier, later-stage venture capitalists during a seed round. Even as their funds reach monstrous sizes, more and more top funds are investing in the earliest stages of a startup’s life, intensifying the question for founders of so-called “signaling risk”: if a later-stage investor in your seed round doesn’t actually do your later-stage rounds, does that negatively signal to other potential investors that they should walk away from your company? The paradox of 2020 VC is that the largest funds are doing the smallest rounds It’s a perennial debate largely because it’s hard to build a quality data set to definitively answer the question. But now, we might have some data that finally sheds light on this signaling risk. AngelList’s data science team collected information from its Venture portfolio (which includes approximately $1.8 billion assets under management according to the company) to look at how signaling risk has changed over time according to the cohort performance of startups in their portfolio. The essential question was, “Does having a top-10 investor in your seed round improve or hurt your chances of a follow-on round 18 months later, compared to seed rounds without such an investor?” Their work produced this chart: Two quick and important notes. First, AngelList processed its own data (given the need to protect confidentiality, I wasn’t given direct access to their data set for analysis). Second, AngelList supplied notes on its methodology, which I have attached at the end unedited for those curious how the data set and chart were constructed. The short summary of the data is that in the 2015 and 2016 cohorts, having a top-10 VC investor in your seed round appeared to improve a startup’s chances to raise a follow-on equity round, particularly in 2016. However, that benefit seemed to reverse itself in the 2017 cohort, and the negative effect was magnified in the 2018 cohort. The typical caveat emptor applies: correlations are not causations. That said, we know signaling is a real mechanism for VCs to make an investment decision, so there is at least some form of causal path here in the data. My analysis (and it should be noted this isn’t endorsed by AngelList) is that top-10 investors like Sequoia or a16z have radically expanded their seed investment programs over the past two years in pursuit of more and more cap table access. As VCs scour the universe looking for the next great startup, those firms with the deepest pockets are choosing to invest in any round rather than to try to time their investment into a later round that would more properly fit into the thesis of their massive funds. VCs are just tired So for startups in the 2015 and 2016 cohorts, there was real selectivity (or at least, more selectivity) when it came to getting an investment from a top investor. Those startups may not have gone through the full due diligence process typical of a Series A investment, but they were typically well-vetted, and that sent a strong positive signal to other investors in later rounds. Perhaps most importantly, and this is based on my own anecdotal data here, but most Series A and later firms that participated in a seed round in those years ended up getting toward the kind of equity ownership they normally target (let’s say 20% as a typical example). So the signaling risk was fairly mute, since if an investor already has their ownership locked in, it’s understandable they wouldn’t necessarily lead the next venture rounds of a company. All that has changed in the last two years though. Large funds increasingly slosh money through the ecosystem, whether directly as a firm, through seed funds managed by GPs, through scout networks, or indirectly by investing in other seed funds. The exclusivity of these sorts of investments has markedly declined as the capital flood has flowed through the Valley. Plus, these firms now write ever-smaller checks, and may even join party rounds as well, which means that their ownership post-seed is not nearly as high as it once was. If a top firm does part of your seed and owns 3%, there really is a legitimate question as to why they wouldn’t fund your Series A if they were indeed excited about your prospects and also had information rights to keep track of your startup’s development. I’ve talked quite extensively about how there are now six stages of seed investing in 2020, and that founders should more carefully identify which stage they truly are in and reach out judiciously to the investors who actually fit those micro-stages. 6 strategic stages of seed fundraising in 2020 I think this AngelList data would seem to indicate that big-firm investors can be complicated at the seed stage these days. I’ve generally argued that signaling risk is a relative myth these days, given the competition for deals, but AngelList’s data would seem to indicate that the signaling risk may be more important than I expected. We looked at all of the AngelList Venture seed deals (investments by syndicates and funds tagged as “Pre-Seed”, “Seed”, or “Seed+”) that closed in the given year-cohort. Then we looked at whether, after 18 months, those investments had been marked up and had not exited. We believe that is the best proxy in our data for “was an active Series A company”, because the AngelList valuation methodology is to only update valuations on priced equity rounds; companies that raised again with SAFEs would not trigger a markup, even if those SAFEs are at a higher cap. For 2018 deals, we did not consider deals after August 2018 because deals at the end of that year have not had 18 months to season. After segmenting by year cohort, we further segmented based on whether those deals had the participation of a Top 10 Seed investor. That set of investors was not based on AngelList data but instead used an external data source for which Seed investors have surfaced the most “unicorn” deals. We use the loosest definition of participation: a deal where one of these firms led the seed deal, one of these firms co-led the seed deal, one of these firms wrote a 50k check while a different firm wrote a 500k check, or one or more of these firms participated in a “party round” would all be counted as having the participation of a Top 10 investor. And adding one more note here that the top-10 investors included in the sample were ultimately Sequoia, a16z, YC, SV Angel, First Round Capital, NEA, Bessemer, Accel, Lightspeed and USV. | NEWS-MULTISOURCE |
Wang Feng
Wang Feng may refer to:
* Wang Feng (diver) (born 1979), Chinese diver
* Wang Feng (canoeist) (born 1985), female Chinese flatwater canoer
* Wang Feng (politician) (1910–1998), Secretary of the Communist Party of China Xinjiang Committee, and Chairman of Xinjiang
* Wang Feng (singer) (born 1971), Chinese singer-songwriter
* Wang Feng (mnemonist) (born 1990), 2010 and 2011 World Memory Champion
* Wang Feng (footballer) (born 1956), Chinese footballer
* Feng Wang (physicist), American physicist | WIKI |
Why Do You Need A Multimeter At Home?
When a novice hears of the term multimeter, he or she is likely to think that it must be some device used by industrial professionals. True. But would you believe if you were told that you can use the same device within your home as well? Yes. A basic multimeter can be an important tool that can be used for domestic purposes as well.
What is a multimeter?
A multimeter is an important tool while working with electric devices as a whole. You may wonder why would you need to deal with such professional devices at home. Though one may not require a professional, high-quality multimeter for domestic usage, a multimeter is an essential and handy tool to have in your home tool box. Everyone needs a multimeter at home. At home, one can use a multimeter while working with electronic devices and electric circuits in your home.
Also commonly known as a Volt-o-meter, a multimeter is an important tool that can deliver accurate readings very quickly and is hence considered as a reliable tool for all electrical related findings and calculations. The multimeter is generally used to measure the several different attributes of an electric circuit such as resistance, voltage and current.
One can come across two types of multimeters on the market, namely,
• Analog multimeter
• Digital multimeter
While an analog multimeter uses a pointer to display the readings, an electronic or digital multimeter uses a display screen for showing the readings. While choosing a multimeter for home, one can choose the traditional analog multimeter or choose the basic digital multimeter that is easily available at a very affordable price.
Uses of a multimeter at home
You can use a multimeter at home to predict electrical defects in your home circuits and even for your automobiles. You can use the multimeter at home when the power gets disconnected suddenly or when you experience low voltage.
Industrially, engineers use the multimeter to find the following readings,
1. Check completeness of electric circuits
2. Assessing the voltage from a power source
3. Finding faults in an electric circuit
4. Test for continuity
A multimeter can be used at home to perform some of the following actions:
1. Checking batteries for home, bikes and cars
2. Checking fuses
3. Check the voltage & power supply (both AC and DC)
4. Measure the resistance strength
5. Checking bulbs and lighting fittings
6. Measure the DC current for home electric wirings
7. Checking wires and cables for short circuits
Buying your home multimeter
One must always invest in a good-quality multimeter for home. It need not be a very high end model that costs a lot of money. The basic multimeter for beginners or hobbyists can easily be used at home. This device is very reasonably priced and hence easily affordable by one and all. There are several options available on the market. One can choose from the standard models of most reputable brands in the trade.
Enable registration in settings - general | ESSENTIALAI-STEM |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.