text:
User talk:Mike.lifeguard/Archive 17

Why you deleted this contribution?
Why did you deleted the work "Biogeochemical Selectiveness of Cedars Over Metamorphic Rocks of the Escambray Complex, Sancti Spíritus, Cuba"? Please, respond to vallsvg@gmail.com

Cordially,

Ricardo Valls

Vallsvg (talk) 01:16, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
 * See the deletion log. Also replied by email. – Mike.lifeguard  | talk 02:33, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Forgot
Forgot to log in, all those changes being made to sprains, etc were me. --Nugger (talk) 02:02, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, even so they're wrong :P Sprains. – Mike.lifeguard  | talk 02:07, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually this is straight from the ARC as per the new protocols. --Nugger (talk) 02:12, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Got a source? – Mike.lifeguard  | talk 02:12, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Instructors Manual for CPR/AED/First Aid for the Workplace, Schools and the Community. ISBN: 1-58480-340-1 Printed by StayWell. As well as student workbook ISBN: 1-58480-341-X This is how we are teaching first aid now. --Nugger (talk) 02:20, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Ugh, paper :(. What's the publication date on that? And incidentally, that's ARC, right? I don't know of anyone else who does that (including CRC), and offhand I don't recall anything international happening on that front, so I wonder what we want to use... BTW, the book's scope was codified following the FB nom. – Mike.lifeguard  | talk 02:23, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
 * You can also look here under page 5 and Muscle, bone and joint injuries.: www.redcross-pdx.org/news/Guidelines_for_First_Aid.pdf --Nugger (talk) 02:36, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Automating Manufacturing Systems new book.....
Hello Mike,

I am the sole author of the book and it has been available for a couple of years now under the GFDL. I am porting a version of it to Wikibooks. To this end I have added a license notice that should satisfy your needs. So far I have only added a small part to work out the conversion kinks.

http://claymore.engineer.gvsu.edu/~jackh/books/plcs/

Please be patient, I am new to wiki posting - I cannot seem to upload images. Is there something I need to do? Also, does the wiki support some vector formats, SVG would be preferred. Ideally I would like to be able to let others edit the figures without having to manipulate bitmaps.

Hugh jack (talk) 08:10, 15 April 2008 (UTC)Hugh_Jack
 * Sounds good to me! I've removed the notice.
 * You're not able to upload images until your account is four days old, but after that you can do so at Special:Upload. Even better would be uploading images to Commons, since these images are freely licensed. Putting them at Commons allows all projects to use the images, so it's a bigger benefit to us if you would do that. Also, you don't have to wait to upload at Commons, just register an account.
 * SVG is excellent. There are a few things which will not render properly, but they are quite rare. As well, we have some support for TeX markup using $$$$ which is preferred whenever possible for equations. So equations in TeX, diagrams in svg, and only drawings, photos etc. should be raster (png if possible). If you need any help with stuff, come on back! – Mike.lifeguard  | talk 10:50, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Logo discussion, next phase?
I don't want to hassle you about this, although I'm too busy to do it myself. I think that soonish (today maybe, by the end of the week otherwise), we need to move to the next stage of the logo selection process. Here are the list of the top-10 logo families that (in my opinion) seem to have the most support so far. You may want to write up your own list and compare to mine:
 * a, d/r, l, n, s, u, y/z, 1/2/3, 5/6

The tenth position could belong to either o or v, I can't tell which is more popular of the two.

I think for the next stage, we take the top 10, and give each of them a subpage of their own for discussion. Designers have about a month to select a single "best" example of that logo family, and once the "best" one is produced, we put that onto a voting page and we vote on it. To recap (mostly for my benefit):
 * 1) Create sub-pages for each logo family, possibly copy + paste all the logos to that subpage
 * 2) Each subpage must select one "best" logo
 * 3) We put the best logo from each subpage onto the main page no later then May 15th (or so). Proposals which fail to produce a "best" could be disqualified, or we could select one on their behalf.
 * 4) After that, we start the final voting round.

Do you agree with this general course of events? I can start writing up blog entries, or a post to foundation-l or whatever once we know what we're doing. --Whiteknight (Page) (Talk) 17:51, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Both the process and the list look good. For the 10th, I'd say v is in and o is out -- same amount of commenting, but there are some negative comments at o, whereas v is almost exclusively positive. I'm thinking cross-posting a single message to textbook-l and foundation-l is good. Also a post to commons-l to see if we can get some good graphics artists involved. And then blogs if you want... I don't follow any, so I don't know what's what there; I'll let you take care of it. – Mike.lifeguard  | talk 18:30, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Transclusion problems
Hi Mike can you take a look into [|User_talk:Ikarsik] post "Hello again". We are experiencing some transclusion problems, I think I understand the reason of the page not being rendered as expected but you may know better or a way to preserve the linked structure (as in being self generated from a single location) by other means. --Panic (talk) 19:24, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
 * OK, I think the problem is there were too many layers of includes. The size wasn't a problem, but the depth of the transclusion hierarchy was, so I just took what was at /All Chapters and put it at /Print Version. If you're worried about people keeping it up-to-date, then to get it to work, you'll have to reduce the number of layers of transclusion. Also, I removed from /Chapter Fundamentals so it wouldn't appear on the print version (TOC overrides NOTOC), but now /Chapter Fundamentals doesn't have one. Not sure what to do about that... Sorry I can't help more.  – Mike.lifeguard  | talk 19:46, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Translation – A Guide to Better Documents in Another Language
Hello,

This book was not intended as spam; it is based on my experience as a freelance translator. This is items that people who want text translated often are not aware of. Is this a subject that I can publish on WikiBooks? What kind of changes should I make?

Regards,

Per Magnus —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Permag (talk • contribs) 03:44, April 17, 2008.
 * OK, I've undeleted it. I strongly recommend that you avoid talking about a particular product or service on the internet, as that would be promotional. Instead, you should think more broadly about translation as an art and a science, and cover all of that ground in the text. You'll want to talk about why machine translation is so crude, the options (not just one) of getting human translators through the internet, and then move on to teach about translation (not dealing with one or another language, but stuff that's applicable to all languages). I'll keep an eye on development & try to help you along if need be. Good luck! – Mike.lifeguard  | talk 12:34, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, I see what you mean and will update and rearrange the document.

Maybe the title ”Translation” is to specific. It would be better to keep the heading “Translation – A Guide to Better Documents in Another Language” as the name of the book.

Regards,

Per M.

--Permag (talk) 08:47, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

The Ultra-Complete Index
Could you comment on s:WS:PD ; is this appropriate for Wikibooks ? John Vandenberg (talk) 17:09, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

explanation
Why did you delete this content? I'm working to develop this book online but in the meantime need to use other resources so that my students and others are not left hanging in the dark. Please restore the Implementations section. Thanks. Typative (talk) 13:22, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I've restored the page, but please not that Wikibooks is not a link repository. The number of links seems excessive to me. Furthermore, there is no content - not even an outline. Until there is at least an outline of the book you're planning, the page is liable to be deleted again. I'll be watching the page for additions & I look forward to seeing your work progress. – Mike.lifeguard  | talk 13:28, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Hi Mike. This particular list was provided to me by a Wikipedia editor and I apologize for not screening it prior to posting. I will delete all links to what are obvious advertisements and begin working on an outline and content immediately. Thanks for your help. Typative (talk) 17:11, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
 * That sounds like an excellent plan :) – Mike.lifeguard  | talk 03:24, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Images from Zine making/Putting pages together
I saw your comment here regarding the images on the "Putting pages together" section. I made these and I would love to hear your opinion on them before I try to upload them to the commons:Two FourSix -Thereen (talk) 18:33, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
 * They're perfectly useful, and I encourage you to upload them there yourself. Those should be in svg format though. – Mike.lifeguard  | talk 03:24, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

OTRS
Hey Mike, Did you get in...?

Reedy (talk) 21:54, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, I did. – Mike.lifeguard  | talk 03:21, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Logos
Ooops. That will teach me to do things late at night :-S. Oh well I think the ones I liked have survived anyway. I'll have to try and make some more in depth comments when I'm not half asleep! BTW the message at the top of the page needs updating. --AdRiley (talk) 08:14, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Message at the top of which page...? – Mike.lifeguard  | talk 09:35, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Hmmm. The pop-up message thing that you can dismiss. Not sure what it is called or how to change it. But it currently says

"Wikibooks and Wikijunior logo discussions are nearing an end. The top 10 choices will move on to the final around. This is your last chance to give your feedback on all the logos and help make sure your favorite makes it!"--AdRiley (talk) 11:34, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh, sure. I have it hidden... I'll go update the sitenotice now. – Mike.lifeguard  | talk 14:51, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Regarding the scanned pages.
Well, thanks that you let me retain the handwritten scans - I guarantee they're mine. The main purpose of scanning was just lack of time on my part.

The test paper scans
I have already explained on User_talk:Webaware how the test papers are NOT a copyright infringement! I'll put my arguement once more: -

 * The test papers were originally intended for IIT - JEE, an examination at the national level in India. Students were not allowed to take the papers home for reasons not known. [Some tests in India do not even allow students to keep their entry passes/hall tickets with them once the examination is over]. So the papers we have with us are RECREATED based on students' discussions with tutors or among themselves.
 * If ever any book publishes the test papers, it is purely for reference. The actual content that the book publishers own copyright for is the solutions, which - I can assure you - are pathetic, dry and uninteresting.
 * The above point can be emphasized through the fact that  atleast five sources publish the same question papers or have published at some time or the other.These are http://www.fiitjee.com http://www.bansaliitjee.com http://www.narayanadelhi.com http://www.pcmbtoday.com. The first two offer the latest test papers on their site as freebies, solutions included. Arihant Prakashan offers solutions compiled as a reference book. The last one - MTG publications - publish the question papers along with the solutions as and when the tests are taken in their monthly education related journals.

I hope this clears any doubts regarding the copyright status of the IIT JEE Papers. I will, however, cease uploading printed pages. I also assume that it automatically justifies my subsequent submissions of the question papers as text. --Thewinster (talk) 17:14, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure I understand the distinction you're trying make here. When someone writes that stuff down, they create something to which they own the copyright. This is called fixation. It doesn't matter whether it is based on their recollection of discussions with tutors or what have you. Simply the act of writing it down creates the copyright. Furthermore, the fact that they're published online probably means they are copyrighted. Perhaps I'm missing something here, but that seems akin to saying that "I found it through Google - that website wouldn't have posted it if they didn't want it to be freely available." – Mike.lifeguard  | talk 18:57, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Check my edit above in green and then read ahead. The confusion arouse because my last post assumed you read Webaware's talk page. I hope it will be easier to pass on a verdict from here. :D --Thewinster (talk) 09:39, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Consider source 1 - let us say Arihant Prakashan. They publish the question paper sets along with their solutions in the form of a for sale reference book with a clear copyright notice on the solution. Wouldn't they have sued the other four sources for publishing the question papers in their journals or online for free if they had owned the copyrights to the papers? The point in referencing five sources was not that those papers were free but that the question papers are nobody's property - intellectual or otherwise.
 * When someone writes that stuff down, they create something to which they own the copyright. This is called fixation. It doesn't matter whether it is based on their recollection of discussions with tutors or what have you. Simply the act of writing it down creates the copyright. While it is perfectly true, we need to note that the papers are set by Profs at the IITs. How can third party teachers win copyrights over them by just writing them down? This is equivalent to handing over the copyrights of the Bible to some priest who memorised it and wrote it down somewhere. This, I emphasize, is not a joke or a retort - it is a perfect metaphor of the situation.

Bloom Clock bot run, again :)
Heya Mike,

Time for another update... slightly more complicated this time though: let me know if there's a problem.

Following either of 2 categories: v:Category:Bcptop v. 8.3.9 or v:Category:Bcpmiddle v. 7.11.6

The top template is easy: just "grab":

 * version tracking for top template (for robotic use) = 8.3.9

and replace with:

 * Higher taxa =
 * Cookbook link =
 * General information =
 * version tracking for top template (for robotic use) = 8.4.25

The middle template is slightly more complicated (3 replacements):

Grab:
 * New Region 1 =

and replace with
 * Western Bohemia =

Note: Do not replace the whole line. There may already be data entered on some pages!

Grab:
 * New Region 2 =

and replace with
 * Victoria, Australia =

Note: Do not replace the whole line. There is already some data entered on some pages!

Then finally, Grab:
 * version tracking for middle template (for robotic use) = 7.11.6

and replace with:
 * New Region 3 =
 * New Region 4 =
 * New Region 5 =
 * New Region 6 =
 * New Region 7 =
 * New Region 8 =
 * New Region 9 =
 * New Region 10 =
 * New Region 11 =
 * New Region 12 =
 * version tracking for middle template (for robotic use) = 8.4.25

The idea in the future is to just keep assigning new regions whenever a contributor is ready for one, and then robotically change the BCP page text later. You can see how I'm doing that here, if you're interested. We have a very large number of new contributors lately, so will probably need another bot run again in a month or so to re-update the middle template (and possibly add some stuff to the bottom template as well).

Thanks again! -- SB_Johnny | PA! 10:28, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
 * [[Image:Yes check.svg|15px]] Done – Mike.lifeguard  | talk 20:13, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

WB interview
Yes, I am stilling doing yours. I am really busy with exam until next Tuesday. All publications are pushed back 2 weeks (see the schedule). Those dates are not corrected yet, so the earliest for Wikibooks interview to be published is May 12. OhanaUnited  Talk page  17:03, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Yup, noted. – Mike.lifeguard  | talk 17:06, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

The verdict
Just wondering. What was the conclusion of the discussion above? Hoping a positive reply! Thanks --Thewinster (talk) 18:23, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, I'm still convinced you don't have the right to release that content under the GFDL, though who the copyright holder actually is is unclear. Nevertheless, it seems clear to me that someone's rights are being infringed here (probably the students'). – Mike.lifeguard  | talk 20:15, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Awww...!!! Unlucky me! Why? Why does it infringe the students' rights? If we get back at it, the students have no role to play other than recall from memory what somebody else them asked in some question paper. By doing so if they do not infringe anyone's copyrights why is that we are infringing? As a matter of fact even I am a student who has answered that examination. If the invisible student has any copyrights, am I not able to release it under the GFDL? If they do not then we have got to find the copyright owners.

You may be right, there is a copyright but to whom it belongs is unclear. The problem is
 * The IITs set a question paper
 * Nowhere in the examination brochure, question paper, counselling brochure or any web presence of the IITs does anyone mention or claim any copyright over the question papers.

Any doubts whatsoever and I try my best to present you with the relevant details! --Thewinster (talk) 17:36, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, the questions are copyrighted by whoever wrote them in the first place, regardless of whether they're marked as such. If someone copied them (even from memory) that is technically a copyright violation. A scan of said copyright violation is therefore also a copyright violation. I'm not crystal clear on the caselaw, but if you insist, I can look it up. – Mike.lifeguard  | talk 18:09, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

I did say I wont be uploading scans. And thanks for the little offer to look up to the legalese. Defintely yes for that.

By the way, I just got a little query. Many many questions on the question paper are standard ones, say 2+2=? for a first grade student and the likes only that they have altered the presentation a bit. What if we alter the question paper language and the presentation etc.? Can we circumvent this technical copyright violation? I say technical because no one will actually bother to claim copyright on this work! It is for the immense responsibility that wikimedia has to show in its content policy that we have to do censor the QPs I guess.
 * Very simple stuff like that are so feel free to use those!  – Mike.lifeguard  | talk 13:06, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Finally! Well, that 2+2=4 analogy is strictly an analogy. The question papers are of a respectable level, but the thing is - they contain work that is common property. --Thewinster (talk) 18:27, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

My screenshot's probpem...
Some time ago, I've expanded article MediaWiki_Administrator's_Handbook/Spam_and_Spammers and added sreenshots of some captcha plugins.

These screenshots were removed...

Can you please solve the problem with this screenshots?

1. These pluguins are opensource.

2. I've made this screenshots myself

2.1. As an author of these screenshots I wish to share them at any licence that is acceptebe at your site.

What else can I do in order to get these images back to the article?

PS please add copy of the answer, or a link to it to my talk page, so I will be able to receive it.

Shaplov (talk) 09:46, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Restored, fixed & reverted the removals. – Mike.lifeguard  | talk 14:56, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Image uploads
Thanks for the note re "source". I drew the images myself, what does "source" mean in that context? I should put my name? That would be odd since the name is already in the "Author" slot, so what to do? --Mcld (talk) 13:39, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
 * "self-made" would be perfect. – Mike.lifeguard  | talk 21:11, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Proteomics: Corticosteroids
I was trying to make this page for a school prodject. Do you want me to wait untill its complete to post it?
 * You can post it whenever you want (please follow the naming policy), but test edits should be made in the sandbox. – Mike.lifeguard  | talk 01:37, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry but...
I don't want to come across as objecting to every nominations you make, but since you are the one making most of them I will mostly object to yours. In the same subject I pretty much against deletion of content if not directly opposed to policy and even on some stances I will probably push the envelope on what is acceptable and will support most changes that can make Wikibooks more inclusive. On the copyvio I'm strongly against bringing copyvio discussions to the VfD forum, I have prety much explained why I object to it but mostly because delete votes will mostly made without any deep understanding of facts, event and consideration to contributors to the works involved. Ok just to make it clear to you that I'm not blinding objecting to your cleanup work but only to some of your decisions or approaches to some issues. --Panic (talk) 03:12, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
 * is for blatant copyright violations - that is perhaps not the case with Ear piercing. As an aside, I don't see what's wrong with !voting delete based solely on copyright concerns and not "any deep understanding of facts, event and consideration to contributors to the works involved." Copyright violations are a perfectly valid reason to delete, so why would you need anything additional? – Mike.lifeguard  | talk 03:20, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
 * No you misunderstood me, I don't propose anything special at all and I don't view as only to be used to  blatant violation (I particularly don't like the level of "confidence" you seem to imply with the word), it is or it is not (in doubt it is not), any one not being/representing the copyright holder doesn't have the legal obligation of researching and provide prof of ownership, some of us do it as a preemptive measure to protect the legality of the content we use, the project and Wikimedia and mostly only on clear evidence of a copyright violation.
 * As I read and understand the requirements the copyvio tag is a better avenue than bringing to the accusation to a more public forum, simply using the copyvio tag (and we expect everyone does it with the needed considerations and with a good moral ground) permits the parties involved not only to be aware of the problem but also avenues to address the issue.
 * I don't see any way a person would vote keep to a VfD nomination based on a copyvio allegation and don't see it as the best approach to a productive resolution of the problem, the only instance I see for calling outside (of the work/edit) intervention is to help establish the facts and VfD doesn't seem the best place for it. Bringing a copyvio to a VfD discussion is almost guaranteed to make it mush more difficult to the "problematic" contributor to resolve the issue, I think this is avoidable and stream lined by simply using the copyvio that will target only users interested on that specific content and increase the responsibility of the person that tags the work as such. --Panic (talk) 03:43, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

BTW: Have you kept tabs on the Advanced Interactive Media ? Is the restructuring under any timeline VfD discussion here, since it seems to be still evolving as a course and major rewrite and restructuring will still be needed to turn it into a book... --Panic (talk) 04:06, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
 * It is still in progress. – Mike.lifeguard  | talk 18:59, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

re: Delete
14:54, 2 May 2008 Mike.lifeguard (Talk | contribs) deleted "About the author/Jazzmanian"  (Not textbook material Any chance of getting the text from this deleted page from a historical version ? Obviously I must have put the page in the wrong spot, and will try and get it right, but I don't have a local copy of the text anywhere. Thanks. GG (talk) 18:15, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * [[Image:Yes check.svg|15px]] Restored: About the author/Jazzmanian. Please see WB:NP for info on where it should go. – Mike.lifeguard  | talk 18:59, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks - I've got the text local now, so this can be deleted again. I've read the Naming Policy, WB:NP and am no wiser as to where or how to place my 'about the author' info, but I'll keep reading. GG (talk) 20:58, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, if this is supposed to be part of a book you're writing, it should be at Book Name/Authors or something. If it's supposed to be about you, but not connected to any particular book, it should go on your userpage. – Mike.lifeguard  | talk 21:17, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

title: User talk:Mike.lifeguard/Archive 17


text:
Futurebasic/Language/Reference/close folder

= CLOSE FOLDER statement =

Syntax

Description
This statement causes the specified working directory reference number to be removed from the System's list of current working directories.

A working directory reference number is a temporary number which is used to uniquely identify a certain directory (folder) on a certain currently-mounted volume. These numbers are generated by the System software on request; several FB functions (such as the  function) generate and return working directory reference numbers. A folder is considered to be "open" once a working directory reference number has been generated for it.

The System's list of current working directories has a limited amount of space available; executing  may in some cases help prevent the list from becoming full. In addition, a folder cannot be deleted from disk while it remains on the list: you may therefore find it necessary to execute  if you intend to delete a folder.

After  has been executed, the working directory reference number is no longer valid, and can no longer be used to identify that folder.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
Futurebasic/Language/Reference/close lprint

= CLOSE LPRINT statement =

Revised
November, 2006 (FB 4, Revision 4)

Description
After output has been routed to the printer,  informs the Print Manager that the print job is complete. The current page is printed and the print job closed. You should execute a  statement immediately before or after calling.

Example
NEED IMG!!!


text:
Futurebasic/Language/Reference/put preferences

Description
This statement locates the named preferences file and writes the contents of the file from the indicated preferences record. If the file does not exist, it is created. This routine places the file in the preferences folder and works regardless of what system software is in use. The file may contain a folder in the form foldername:fileanme where a colon separates the folder name(s) from the file name.

In order to use any of the PREFERENCE commands you must include the proper header file using the following statement:

The following example shows how to manage a set of preferences using the new PREFERENCE commands. A Boolean value and a text string are saved in the preference file when the "Save Prefs" button is clicked. If you run the program a second time, you will see that modified prefs were properly stored and retrieved.

"Image Was Here"


text:
Futurebasic/Language/Reference/cls

= CLS =

Description
resets the current window's clipping region to encompass the entire window, clears the entire contents of the window to the background pattern and color (usually white), and resets the pen to a position near the upper-left corner (0, 0) of the window. If the window contains controls or edit fields created by FB statements, and the window's "autoClip" attribute is turned on, then  will exclude those areas from the clipping region, and will not erase them.

clears a rectangle as high as the current font, from the current pen position to the right side of the window. This is handy for clearing text from the current line only. The pen position is not affected.

clears the text from the pen position to the right side of the window (as  does), then clears the entire window below the pen position. The pen position is not affected.

"FB Lite" behavior: When you use the "FB Lite" runtime,  switches to the Text Window before executing; therefore it only clears text. If you want to clear the Graphics Window, first switch to the Graphics Window (using a statement like ), then call the Toolbox procedure.

title: Futurebasic/Language/Reference/cls


text:
Futurebasic/Language/Reference/color window

= COLOR WINDOW statement =

Description
This statement does nothing in modern FB, but is retained for backwards compatibility with programs written in FutureBasic II. In modern FB, all windows are opened as color windows.


text:
Futurebasic/Language/Reference/push

Description
These statements put 1, 2 or 4 bytes onto the CPU stack, and adjust the stack pointer by a corresponding amount. is the opposite of.

If you use the first syntax, the data is copied from, which must be a variable. The number of bytes put onto the stack depends on the data type of :

"Image Was Here"

(No other variable types are valid with .)

If you use the second syntax, the data is copied from the memory which begins at, which must be a long integer expression or a   variable. The number of bytes put onto the stack depends on which keyword you use:

"Image Was Here"

In CPU68k compiles,  always adjusts the stack pointer by an even number of bytes. If you use  or   in a CPU68k compile, the stack pointer will be adjusted by 2 bytes, even though only one byte is copied from   or.

is meant for careful use by advanced programmers. Your system can crash if the stack pointer is not adjusted carefully.

title: Futurebasic/Language/Reference/push


text:
Futurebasic/Language/Reference/pstr statement

Which of the following did you need help with? Please click a link to go to the desired page.

PSTR$ Function:

PSTR$ Statement:


text:
Futurebasic/Language/Reference/color

= COLOR statement =

Statement
✔ Appearance ✔  Standard ✔  Console

Syntax
COLOR [=] colorExpr

Description
The  statement sets the current window's foreground color to one of eight old-style "Basic QuickDraw" colors. should equal one of the following:

"FB Lite" behavior: When you use the "FB Lite" runtime,  switches to the Graphics Window before executing; you can't use it to change the foreground color in the Text Window nor on the printer. To change the color of printed output while running FB Lite, use the Toolbox procedure.

Note: The  statement does not change the appearance of anything that's already in the window; the new color will appear the next time you draw text or a QuickDraw shape in the window.

For greater control over the foreground color, use the  statement.

title: Futurebasic/Language/Reference/color


text:
Futurebasic/Language/Reference/pstr function

= PSTR$ =

Description
This function returns the string which is located at the indicated  in memory;   must be a long-integer expression or a   variable.

The data at  should be a string in "Pascal format," which is the string format used by FB string variables and by MacOS Toolbox string parameters. In Pascal format, the first byte is interpreted as a number in the range 0 through 255 which indicates the length of the string's text; this length byte is immediately followed by the text of the string.


text:
Futurebasic/Language/Reference/proc

Syntax
 procAddress& = PROC "label"

Description
This function looks for the indicated  in your program, and returns a memory address which can be used to call the instructions which follow. Typically,  will indicate the beginning of an   procedure which is to be used as a "callback procedure" by a MacOS Toolbox routine.

 In cpu68K compiles,  returns the memory address of the first program instruction that follows the label. This is the same as the address returned by the  function.

in cpuPPC compiles,  returns a "universal procedure pointer." This allows MacOS Toolbox routines in PPC machines to correctly use the referenced  procedure as a callback procedure.

title: Futurebasic/Language/Reference/proc


text:
Futurebasic/Language/Reference/compile

= COMPILE statement =

Statement
✔ Appearance ✔  Standard ✔  Console

Description
While it is possible to place your own compile statements in source code, this is better accomplished by selecting items in the editor's preference window. Placing  statements in source code will void most of the selections made in the editor.

The  statement is used to change the way a program is compiled. The statement is optional: if you use it, it should not appear more than once in your program's source code, except possibly within different branches of a  block. It is a non-executable statement, so you can't change its effect by putting it inside a conditional execution structure such as. However, you can conditionally include or exclude it from the program by putting it inside a  block.

Typically, the  statement is the first statement in the program.

sets the preferred number of ticks to occur between operating system calls.

is a list of one or more symbolic constant names (separated by spaces) chosen from the set described below. can also consist of a single integer constant equal to the sum of the individual symbolic constants.

Description Default

Allocate a pointer in the application heap for variables (applies only when compiling a code resource). Allocate a handle in the application heap. Allocate a handle in the System heap for variables (applies only when compiling a code resource). Allocate a handle in the application heap. Generate information necessary for MacsBug to display your programÕs labels and function names. This is a useful feature for debugging, but makes your compiled code slightly larger. No MacsBug information is generated. Store all string constants found in the program as STR# resources. No STR# resources are created. Generate an error if any variable is encountered before it is explicitly declared with a  statement. No  req'd for non-array, nonrecord vars (implicitly declared by appearance in code). Generate an error if a  statement contains a variable that was previously encountered in the same scope (possibly in a previous   statement). Any  with a previously encountered variable is ignored. Prevents the compiler from removing duplicate strings when creating STR# resources in an application. This only applies if the  flag is also set. Compiler removes duplicate strings. Instructs the compiler to override the options specified in ÒPreferencesÓ dialog when compiling this program (see the next table). The current ÒPreferencesÓ options are used. Add custom CDEF resource (for Geneva 9-point text or window text) to compiled applications. DonÕt add the resource. Add custom MDEF resource (for Geneva 9-point menu text) to compiled application. DonÕt add the resource. Add custom WDEF resource (for windoid-style palettes) to compiled application. DonÕt add the resource. Generates an error if references to Toolbox procedures are not preceded by the  keyword. keyword is optional. In Toolbox procedure references, the  keyword is optional. This is the same as the default. keyword is optional.

Example
The following example tells the compiler to generate program labels and function names for MacsBug, and to require that all variables be explicitly declared. Tickcount is ignored if the code is used in an application.

title: Futurebasic/Language/Reference/compile


text:
User:Yuyu

I'm Jérry~雨雨(Yuyu), a contributor to Wikimedia Projects from Hong Kong, China.

I'm currently a Senior Chief Editor & Sysop in Chinese Wikipedia. I'm also the Deputy President of Wikimedia Hong Kong, the local Wikimedia Chapter in the SAR.

title: User:Yuyu


text:
Futurebasic/Language/Reference/compile long if

= COMPILE LONG IF statement =

Statement
✔ Appearance ✔  Standard ✔  Console

Syntax
COMPILE LONG IF condition   [statementBlock1] [COMPILE XELSE   [statementBlock2]] COMPILE END IF

Description
You can use the  statement to conditionally include or exclude selected lines of code from the compiled version of your program. This is useful if you need to maintain two (or more) slightly different versions of your program;  allows you to maintain them both within the same source file.

If the condition following  is evaluated as "true" or non-zero, then the statements in   are included in the compilation and the statements (if any) in   are ignored by the compiler. If the condition is evaluated as "false" or zero, then the statements in  are ignored by the compiler, and the statements (if any) in   are included in the compilation.

must be in one of the following forms:

 A list of any of the above separated by " " or " ". You may also optionally surround any valid sub-condition with parentheses.

is a "static integer expression." A static integer expression is any valid expression which consists of only:

 integer literal constants;

previously-defined symbolic constant names;

operators (like +, -, *, /, >, =);

parentheses

(In particular, it can't contain variables, nor function references.) If you use this form of, then the condition will be evaluated as "true" if the expression's value is nonzero.

stands for a symbolic constant name. is evaluated as "true" if the indicated constant was previously defined. is evaluated as "true" if the indicated constant was not previously defined.

The condition  is evaluated as "true" if debugging has been activated for the current section of code. The condition  is evaluated as "true" if debugging has not been activated for the current section of code. (See the  statement for more details.)

If you use the keyword  as the condition, it's evaluated as "true" if the current compilation is being compiled into Motorola 680x0 ("68k") machine code. If you use the keyword  as the condition, it's evaluated as "true" if the current compilation is being compiled into PowerPC machine code.

Example
Because  can cause lines (including non-executable lines) to be completely ignored by the compiler, you can use it to control such things as the declaration of variables, program labels, constants, and even entire functions. For example:

Note: blocks can be nested to a depth of 16 levels.


text:
Chess/Sicilian Defense

=Sicilian Defense= Broadly speaking the moves 1. e4 c5 constitute the Sicilian Defence, the most popular response to 1. e4. The Sicilian avoids the more fixed center and gives considerable scope for a variety of variations.

It opening variation have many transpositions.

Overview of main variations

1.e4 c5
 * 2. b4 cxb4 Wing Gambit
 * 2. c3 Nf6 Alapin Variation
 * 2. d4 cxd4 Smith-Morra Gambit
 * 2. f4 d5 Grand Prix Attack
 * 2. Nc3 Nc6 3. g3 Closed Sicilian
 * 2. Nf3 Open Sicilian
 * 2... Nc6 3. Bb5 Rossolimo Variation
 * 2... Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 g6 Accelerated Dragon
 * 2... Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 g6 5. c4 Maróczy Bind
 * 2... Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 e5 Lowentral
 * 2... Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 e5 5. Nb5 d6 Kalashnikov variation
 * 2... Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 e6 see 2...e6 Taimanov
 * 2... Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6
 * 2... Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 e5 Sveshnikov
 * 2... Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 e5 6. Ndb5 d6 Sveshnikov
 * 2... e6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 a6 Kan
 * 2... e6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 a6 5. Nc3 Qc7 Kan
 * 2... e6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 a6 5. Nc3 Nc6, see Taimanov
 * 2... e6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 a6 5. Nc3 d6 Scheveningen
 * 2... e6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nc6 Taimanov
 * 2... e6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 Nc6 Four Knights Variation
 * 2... e6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 d6 as 2...d6 3.d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 e6 Scheveningen
 * 2... d6 3. Bb5+
 * 2... d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3
 * 2... d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 g6 Dragon
 * 2... d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 g6 6. Be3 Bg7 7. f3 O-O
 * 2... d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 Nc6 Classical variation
 * 2... d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 Nc6 6. Bg5 Richer-Rauzer
 * 2... d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 Nc6 6. Bc4 Sozin
 * 2... d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 e5 Sveshnikov
 * 2... d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 e6 Scheveningen
 * 2... d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 e6 6. g4
 * 2... d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 e6 6. Be2 a6
 * 2... d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 e6 6. Be2 Nc6
 * 2... d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 Najdorf
 * 2... d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. Bc4 e6
 * 2... d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. Be2 e5
 * 2... d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. Bg5 e6
 * 2... d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. Bg5 e6 7. f4 Be7
 * 2... d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. Bg5 e6 7. f4 Qb6
 * 2... d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. a4
 * 2... d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. g3
 * 2... d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. f3
 * 2... d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. f4
 * 2... d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. Be3

title: Chess/Sicilian Defense


text:
Talk:Adventist Youth Honors Answer Book/Recreation/Camping Skills III (North American Division)

re "Hold a lighted match near the mantel and turn on the gas valve. The mantel should begin to burn."

I have always thought you needed to burn the mantle before turning on the gas.

This is from one lantern instruction page... "Light bottom of MANTLE evenly. Burn until nothing but white ash remains. Once the mantle has been burned, it is very fragile. Be careful not to touch it with finger or match."

"Burn the mantle as stated on the mantle package." I read in another set of instructions.

Does this vary by mantle ? GG (talk) 19:20, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

 * I dunno! Looks like we got this one wrong! --Jomegat (talk) 19:39, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

 * Wow - you reply quickly ! Isn't this the GREATEST part of having this stuff here in wiki. Find something - fix it - DONE !GG (talk) 19:44, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

 * It's a sign that I'm having trouble concentrating on work today. I really ought to be debugging a project I'm working on, but my brain refuses to start.  Maybe the beautiful weather has something to do with it. --Jomegat (talk) 19:48, 25 April 2008 (UTC)


text:
Chess Opening Theory/1. e4/1...c5/2. Nf3/2...d6/3. d4/3...cxd4/4. Nxd4/4...Nf6/5. Nc3/5...e5

=Open Sicilian 5...e5= a move not often played at top level because of Bb5+ but it is still playable and was even played in round one of the 2024 fide Canidates 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 e5 6. Bb5+ Nbd7 7. Nf5 a6 8. Ba4 b5 9. Bb3 Nc5 10. Bg5 Bxf5 11. exf5 Be7 12. Bxf6 Bxf6 13. O-O e4 14. Nxe4 Nxe4 15. Re1 O-O 16. Rxe4 Bxb2 17. Rb1 Bf6 18. Qd5 Rc8 19. Qb7 Rc5 20. Qxa6 Rxf5 21. Rd1 d5 22. Rb4 Bc3 23. Rxb5 Rxf2 24. Rbxd5 Qh4 25. Qd3 Rf6 26. g3 Qb4 27. Kg2 Bb2 28. Rf5 g6 29. Rxf6 Bxf6 30. Qf3 Qe7 31. a4 Kg7 32. a5 Ra8 33. Rd5 Ra7 34. Rb5 Qd8 35. Rd5 Qc7 36. h4 Rxa5 37. Rxa5 Qxa5 38. Qb7 Qd8 39. Qxf7+ Kh6 40. Kh3 Qe7 41. Qc4 Qe3 (Draw by agreement) .

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 e5


text:
C++ Programming/Software Internationalization/Text Encoding

Text encoding
Text, in particular the characters are used to generate readable text consists on the use of a character encoding scheme that pairs a sequence of characters from a given character set (sometimes referred to as code page) with something else, such as a sequence of natural numbers, octets or electrical pulses, in order to facilitate the use of its digital representation.

A easy to understand example would be Morse code, which encodes letters of the Latin alphabet as series of long and short depressions of a telegraph key; this is similar to how ASCII, encodes letters, numerals, and other symbols, as integers.

Text and data
Probably the most important use for a byte is holding a character code. Characters typed at the keyboard, displayed on the screen, and printed on the printer all have numeric values. To allow it to communicate with the rest of the world, the IBM PC uses a variant of the ASCII character set. There are 128 defined codes in the ASCII character set. IBM uses the remaining 128 possible values for extended character codes including European characters, graphic symbols, Greek letters, and math symbols.

In earlier days of computing, the introduction of coded character sets such as ASCII (1963) and EBCDIC (1964) began the process of standardization. The limitations of such sets soon became apparent, and a number of ad-hoc methods developed to extend them. The need to support multiple writing systems (Languages), including the CJK family of East Asian scripts, required support for a far larger number of characters and demanded a systematic approach to character encoding rather than the previous ad hoc approaches.

What's this about UNICODE?
Unicode is an industry standard whose goal is to provide the means by which text of all forms and languages can be encoded for use by computers. Unicode 6.1 was released in January 2012 and is the current version. It currently comprises over 109,000 characters from 93 scripts. Since Unicode is just a standard that assigns numbers to characters, there also needs to be methods for encoding these numbers as bytes. The three most common character encodings are UTF-8, UTF-16, and UTF-32, of which UTF-8 is by far the most frequently used.

In the Unicode standard, planes are groups of numerical values (code points) that point to specific characters. Unicode code points are logically divided into 17 planes, each with 65,536 (= 216) code points. Planes are identified by the numbers 0 to 16decimal, which corresponds with the possible values 00-10hexadecimal of the first two positions in six position format (hhhhhh). As of version 6.1, six of these planes have assigned code points (characters), and are named.

Plane 0 - Basic Multilingual Plane (BMP) Plane 1 - Supplementary Multilingual Plane (SMP) Plane 2 - Supplementary Ideographic Plane (SIP) Planes 3–13 - Unassigned Plane 14 - Supplementary Special-purpose Plane (SSP) Planes 15–16 - Supplementary Private Use Area (S PUA A/B)

PUA
Currently, about ten percent of the potential space is used. Furthermore, ranges of characters have been tentatively mapped out for every current and ancient writing system (script) the Unicode consortium has been able to identify. While Unicode may eventually need to use another of the spare 11 planes for ideographic characters, other planes remain. Even if previously unknown scripts with tens of thousands of characters are discovered, the limit of 1,114,112 code points is unlikely to be reached in the near future. The Unicode consortium has stated that limit will never be changed.

The odd-looking limit (it is not a power of 2), is not due to UTF-8, which was designed with a limit of 231 code points (32768 planes), and can encode 221 code points (32 planes) even if limited to 4 bytes but is due to the design of UTF-16. In UTF-16 a "surrogate pair" of two 16-bit words is used to encode 220 code points 1 to 16, in addition to the use of single words to encode plane 0.

UTF-8
UTF-8 is a variable-length encoding of Unicode, using from 1 to 4 bytes for each character. It was designed for compatibility with ASCII, and as such, single-byte values represent the same character in UTF-8 as they do in ASCII. Because a UTF-8 stream doesn't contain '\0's, you may use it directly in your existing C++ code without any porting (except when counting the 'actual' number of character in it).

UTF-16
UTF-16 is also variable-length, but works in 16 bit units instead of 8, so each character is represented by either 2 or 4 bytes. This means that it is not compatible with ASCII.

UTF-32
Unlike the previous two encodings, UTF-32 is not variable-length: every character is represented by exactly 32-bits. This makes encoding and decoding easier, because the 4-byte value maps directly to the Unicode code space. The disadvantage is in space efficiency, as each character takes 4 bytes, no matter what it is.


text:
C++ Programming/Software Internationalization

Software Internationalization
Internationalization and localization refer to how computer software is adapted for other locations, nations or cultures. This means specifically those that are non-native to the programmer(s) or the primary user group

In specific, internationalization deals with the process of designing a software application in a way that it can be configured or adapted to work with various languages and regions without heavy changes to the code base. On the other hand localization deals with the process of enabling the configuration or auto adaptation of the software to a specific region, timezone or language by adding locale-specific components and text translation.

Software developers must understand the intricacies of internationalization since they write the actual underlying code. How well they use established services to achieve mission objectives determines the overall success of the project. At a fundamental level, code and feature design affect how a product is translated and customized. Therefore, software developers need to understand key localization concepts.


text:
User talk:217.93.224.41

Join Us!
-- – Mike.lifeguard  | talk 20:47, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

title: User talk:217.93.224.41


text:
Talk:LaTeX/Tips and Tricks

An alternative to converting eps files for use with pdftex or pdflatex, is to have Gnuplot produce SVG files, and then use rasterizer from the Batik project convert them into PDF.

Regarding a new oiint command
Why recommend a home brewed symbol when there is a font that contains the symbol and matches in appearance with the cm fonts? The proposed definition is wrong on many fronts. First, it should use \intop rather than \int. Second it should do subscript correction if intlimits is active (or if the user explicitly types a \limit). For this purpose you could borrow some code from the definition of \iint and \iiiint defined in ams packages. Thirdly, the definition should not use an explicit \displaystyle. The macro may be used in $...$ in which case \int and the proposed \oiint will look different. Fourthly, the whole symbol should be wrapped in a \mathop, otherwise there might be a linebreak between the two ints.

First tip
Thanks for that first tip about LaTeX in Roman font. It's a kludge, but a very flexible one that makes it possible to "personalize" any of the built-in macros. What I needed was a way to stick \ensuremath and \xspace on the \pi symbol so I could use it in text without switching modes, and this did the job nicely.

Spell Checker Preferences
I am fine with people suggesting that hunspell is preferable to ispell or aspell, but then there should be a reason given, not just an argument from dubious authority.

title: Talk:LaTeX/Tips and Tricks


text:
User:V111P

@Wikipedia bg:Потребител:V111P

title: User:V111P


text:
User:Rsommer~enwikibooks/monobook.css

.code .input pre {padding:0; border: none; line-height: 1.5em; margin:0;} .code .result pre {border:0; padding:0.2em; margin: 0.3em; background-color: #DDDDFF;} .code .input pre:before {content: "\003E \0020";}

title: User:Rsommer~enwikibooks/monobook.css


text:
User:ThunderLightning!

Derek Bryan is a professional Hall of Fame Canadian Wrestler (born October 24 1971), in Ottawa, Ontario, Canada He is better known as the Xecutioner. He is also known as the Scorpion King. He currently works for the Corporation of Hardcore Wrestling. He is a 15-time champion in the Corporation of Hardcore Wrestling.

Early Career
Derek Bryan was born in Canada as a Canadian with American Descent. He started wrestling when he was 9 years old. When he was little his family and friends started a wrestling league called the Stars Wrestling Society. The Stars Wrestling Society lasted from 1980-1992. In fact he grew up as a teen with high skills and dreams. His family moved to the United States in 1993. He attended Duke University and got his degree in sports.

Extreme Canadian Championship Wrestling Era
Derek Bryan started in Pro wrestling with ECCW. He won the ECCW Canadian Championship 3 times. He left ECCW in 1993 because of an injury.

New Career Era
Derek Bryan came to the Corporation of Hardcore Wrestling in 1993. He went 12 months undefeated in CHW. Henry Jax finally beat him in 1994. He lost by Disqualifiction by using a chair on his opponent in front of the ref's face.

Revenge Era
After Derek Bryan lost to Henry Jax for the first time ending his streak, he got some revenge at the next event. He destroyed Henry Jax by putting him through a table, hitting him with a ladder and sledgehammer. He also made Henry Jax bleed. Derek Bryan won the match by a Canadian Destroyer. Derek Bryan would get more revenge the next week. He would putt Henry Jax through a table and hit him with a ladder.

In Wrestling

 * Finishing and signature moves
 * Canadian Destroyer (Flip piledriver)
 * Spinning Go To Sleep    (Go To Sleep)
 * Ropevine DDT (Swinging reverse DDT)-done while the opponent's neck is on the top rope
 * Signature moves
 * Canadian Clothesline (Flying clothesline)
 * Fist of Silence     (Diving fist drop)
 * Choke Slam          (Choke  Slam  )
 * Stunner of Fear     (Seated three-quarter facelock jawbreaker)
 * Backcracker         (Backbreaker)
 * Bulldog             (One-handed bulldog)
 * Space Slam        (Scoop Slam)
 * Knight's Slam     ( Superman Slam)
 * Scorpion Spear (Strike Spear)-down while opponent's back is turned
 * Canadian Ship Wreck  (Strike Spear)
 * Super Pounch        (Right Punch)
 * Double Dropkick     (Dropkick)
 * Brain Freeze Breaker (BFB)( Swinging neckbreaker)
 * Sky High Drop          (Running leg drop)

As Scorpion King

 * Finishing and signature moves
 * Scorpion Sting (Swinging fisherman suplex)
 * Scorpion Crusher(Flip Piledriver) to a (Fisherman's Suplex)
 * StingerSlam   (One handed Spinning Choke Slam)-innovated
 * Scorpion Spear (Strike Spear)-down while the opponent's back is turned
 * Signature Moves
 * Vinumbitter   (Legsweep)
 * StingerBite   (Arm twist ropewalk chop)
 * Snake Eyes
 * Stinger Spike (Throat thrust)-done with the two fingers that make a "V" sign from the top rope
 * Scrpikebreaker (Spike knee breaker)-innovated
 * Spikeville!   (Canadian Whip)-(innovated): (he picks up his opponent by the foot then spins his opponent around while performing a clothesline into the top rope)
 * Hangman's DDT (Zip line DDT)
 * Magic Screen DDT(DDT)-down while opponent's shirt his over his head

Championships and Accomplishments
Corporation of Hardcore Wrestling

 * Championships (15x)

 * Heavyweight Championship (6x)-current
 * CHW Championship (3x)-current
 * CHW Video Gaming Championship (3x)-(Last)
 * Soda Drinking Championship (2x)
 * Hardcore Championship (1x)

 * Undefeated at Barely Legal

 * 2008 CHW Hall of Fame Inductee
 * 2008 Canada's Hall of Fame Inductee

ECCW

 * ECCW Canadian Championship (3x)

 * Decade Wrestler of the 1990's

 * Wrestler of the Year (11x) (1992,1995,1997-1998,2000-2005,2007)

 * Finisher of the Year (7x) (1997,1999,2004-2005,2006-2007,2008)

 * CHW MVP (6x) (1992-1993,1999-2000,2006-2007)

 * Accomplishments (23x)

Stars Wrestling Society

 * SWS Championship (2x) (2600 days) (7 years,45 days)
 * Gold Championship (2x) (2300 days (6 years,110 days)

 * SWS Record (4x) (4900 days) (13 years,155 days)
 * SWS MVP (5x) (1980-1981,1986,1988,1991)

Other

A Gold Belt in Wrestling-innovated

Music

 * Theme music
 * Burn In My Light by Mercy Drive – after Derek Bryan moved out of ECCW
 * Line In The Sand by Motörhead – while Derek Bryan was part of the ECCW
 * This Fire Burns by Killswitch Engage – used for 4 weeks, eventually became the theme for Ryan Young

Code of Rules

 * Each Wrestler in the match must get a body check (for possible weapons\jewelry)
 * All Ring Posts padding must be checked for possible weapons
 * All wrestlers in the match must shake hands
 * After all wrestlers shake hands the ref must start the match in the center of the Ring
 * A ref's booth must be placed at least 10 feet away from the ring
 * Each wrestler in the match gets three challenges (for pins and submissions)

Ref Staff
Palmer-Bears (talk) 00

title: User:ThunderLightning!


text:
User:Xixtas/Counting Baby Animals/Four puppies

FOUR Puppies


text:
User:Xixtas/Counting Baby Animals/Five chicks

FIVE Chicks


text: User talk:87.237.231.218

title: User talk:87.237.231.218


text:
User talk:ThunderLightning!

Welcome to Wikibooks, ThunderLightning!! – Mike.lifeguard  | talk 10:22, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

title: User talk:ThunderLightning!


text:
User talk:Linel012

Welcome to Wikibooks, Linel012! – Mike.lifeguard  | talk 10:28, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

title: User talk:Linel012


text:
User:VIGNERON

fr:User:VIGNERON fr:User:VIGNERON

title: User:VIGNERON


text: User talk:Belle S

title: User talk:Belle S


text:
User talk:Kateto~enwikibooks

Welcome to Wikibooks, Kateto! – Mike.lifeguard  | talk 10:35, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Kateto. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Kateto~enwikibooks that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 23:22, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 05:07, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Kateto~enwikibooks


text: User talk:24.10.166.7

title: User talk:24.10.166.7


text:
User talk:Ohayo gozaimasu

Welcome, Ohayo gozaimasu!

Come introduce yourself at the new users page. If you have any questions, you can ask there or contact me personally. Mattb112885 (talk to me) 14:28, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

title: User talk:Ohayo gozaimasu


text:
User talk:Tencho65

Welcome, Tencho65!

Come introduce yourself at the new users page. If you have any questions, you can ask there or contact me personally. Mattb112885 (talk to me) 14:28, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

title: User talk:Tencho65


text:
Radiation Oncology/Toxicity/Aorta

Aorta RT Tolerance

 * Pittsburgh; 2008 PMID 18299113 -- "Tolerance of the aorta using intraoperative iodine-125 interstitial brachytherapy in cancer of the lung." (Trombetta MG, Brachytherapy. 2008 Jan-Mar;7(1):50-4.)
 * Retrospective. 278 patients who underwent intrathoracic I-125 brachythearpy. 29 had I-125 impregnated mesh (nomographically guided geometric array) that contacted >50% aorta. Mean prescribed dose 114 Gy (85-120) at 0.5 cm. Mean aortic volume receiving entire prescribed dose 17.2 cm3, mean surface 34.4 cm2. 5/29 received EBRT mediastinal boost. Median F/U 3.7 years
 * Outcome: 1/29 (3%) fatal hemorrhage from suspected great vessel rupture. Brachytherapy was supplemented with 45 Gy EBRT overlapping the implant volume over aorta. No other patients even minor events, no long term sequelae
 * Conclusion: Intrathoracic I-125 safe, may be used even in close proximity to aora. Tolerance of aorta may >120 Gy over lifetime of the implant. Overlapping EBRT should be avoided

title: Radiation Oncology/Toxicity/Aorta


text:
Radiation Oncology/Toxicity/Spine

Spinal Cord RT Tolerance

Overview

 * Anatomy: Ventral area (typically highest sterotactic dose) is mostly sensory tracts. Most of motor function is carried by lateral corticospinal tracts, located in the postero-lateral portion. Motor nuclei are in the anterior horns
 * Behaves as a serial organ at field lengths >1 cm
 * Stereotactic tolerance: at least 10 Gy to 10% volume (defined as +/- 6 mm above treatment target)
 * Whole cord, single fraction tolerance: 8 Gy in 1 fraction no long-term toxicity from spinal cord compression series; 10 Gy in 1 fraction no toxicity in NSCLC patients
 * Fractionated tolerance: historically 45/25, but 5% NTCP possibly as high as 57-61 Gy in absence of chemotherapy (Schultheiss, 1995). More recent calculations (Schultheiss, 2008) suggest cervical cord D5 to be 59 Gy, and D50 69 Gy. This suggest probability of myelopathy at 45 Gy is 0.03% and at 50 Gy is 0.2%. Thoracic cord could not be fit, but points were to the left of the cervical spine, suggesting higher tolerance
 * In terms of re-irradiation, using BED (a/b=2 Gy) calculations, cumulative spinal dose in range BED 130-150 Gy (65-75 Gy in 2 Gy/fx) if given >6 months apart may be reasonable, if patient accepts higher risk of myelopathy to achieve higher chance of tumor control (Nieder, 2006)

Single fraction

 * Stanford; 2009 (1996-2005) PMID 19165076 -- "Delayed radiation-induced myelopathy after spinal radiosurgery." (Gibbs IC, Neurosurgery. 2009 Feb;64(2 Suppl):A67-72.)
 * Retrospective. 1075 patients, benign or malignant spinal tumors, treated with CyberKnife. DVH reviewed
 * Outcome: radiation-induced myelopathy in 6 patients (0.6%), mean 6 months after SRS. Prior RT in 3 patients. No specific dosimetric factors identified, but half occurred with BED >8 Gy
 * Conclusion: Delayed myelopathy uncommon; recommend limiting volume of spinal cord treated above 8 Gy BED

 * Henry Ford, 2007 PMID 17167762 -- "Partial volume tolerance of the spinal cord and complications of single-dose radiosurgery." (Ryu S, Cancer. 2007 Feb 1;109(3):628-36.)
 * Retrospective. 230 lesions in 177 patients, treated with single fraction 8 - 18 Gy, prescribed to 90% isodose line encompassing target volume. Spinal cord defined 6 mm above and below target volume. Median F/U 6.4 months. 1-year survival 49%
 * Characteristics: Average treated volume 5.9 mL. Average dose to 10% spinal cord volume 9.8 Gy in 18 Gy group. Volume receiving >80% prescribed dose 0.07 mL (1.3% of contoured volume). No difference between cervical, thoracic, or lumbar regions
 * Toxicity: 1 case of radiation-induced cord injury in patients surviving >1 year, 13 months out (16 Gy, 10% dose 9.6 Gy, point dose 14.6 Gy; experienced CR, then further chemo carbo/taxotere, herceptin, zometa, faslodex). RLE weakness 4/5. Symptomatic improvement with dexamethasone
 * Conclusion: Partial volume tolerance is at least 10 Gy to 10% of volume (defined as +/- 6 mm above target)

 * Multi-national, 2005 (1992-2003) PMID 15908648 -- "Evaluation of five radiation schedules and prognostic factors for metastatic spinal cord compression." (Rades D, J Clin Oncol. 2005 May 20;23(15):3366-75.)
 * Retrospective. 1304 patients. Treated with 8/1, 20/5, 30/10, 37.5/15, or 40/20. Median F/U 13 months for surviving patients
 * No late toxicity, acute toxicity didn't exceed Grade I

 * MRC Lung, 1996 (UK) PMID 8814372 -- "Radiation myelopathy: estimates of risk in 1048 patients in three randomized trials of palliative radiotherapy for non-small cell lung cancer. The Medical Research Council Lung Cancer Working Party." (Macbeth FR, Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 1996;8(3):176-81)
 * Retrospective. 1048 patients treated with palliative RT on 3 randomized trials. Seven regimens (10/1, 17/2 in 8 days, 27/6 in 11 days, 30/6 in 11 days, 30/10, 36/12, 39/13)
 * Myelitis: 5 cases (0.5%); estimated cumulative risk at 2 years 2% but wide confidence intervals. 3 in 17/2, 2 in 39/13
 * Alpha/beta: <3 Gy, possibly close to 2 Gy
 * Conclusion: recommend LQED2 <= 48 Gy

Fractionated

 * Multi-national; 2008 (1995-2007) PMID 18642349 -- "Prognostic factors for functional outcome and survival after reirradiation for in-field recurrences of metastatic spinal cord compression." (Rades D, Cancer. 2008 Jul 18. [Epub ahead of print])
 * Retrospective. 124 patients re-irradiated for MSCC in-field recurrence, C-spine excluded. First RT 8/1 or 20/5 or 30/10 or 37.5/15 or 40/20 depending on medical center. All stable/improved after first RT. All motor deficits at time of Re-RT, 69% ambulatory. Second RT 8/1 (38%), 15/5 (23%), 20/5 (24%), 21/7 (2%), 20/10-24/12 (9%). Cummulative BED(a/b=2) 77.5-143 Gy, 92% <=120 Gy. Median F/U 11 months
 * Outcome: Motor function improved 36%, stable 50%, deteriorated 14%. Predictors for motor function: effect of 1st RT, ECOG PS, time-to-motor deficits, visceral mets. Re-RT dose or cumulative BED no impact on function or OS
 * Late toxicity: No radiation myelopathy observed
 * Conclusion: Spinal irradiation appears effective and safe when cumulative BED <120 Gy (a/b=2, corresponds to 60 Gy in 2 Gy/fx). Single fraction reasonable if poor estimated survival

 * City of Hope; 2008 PMID 18243570 -- "The Radiation Dose-Response of the Human Spinal Cord." (Schultheiss TE, Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2008 Feb 1. [Epub ahead of print])
 * Dose modeling. 5 series for cervical spine, 11 series for thoracic spine.
 * Cervical Outcome: cervical cord D50 69.4 Gy (66.4-72.6), slope k=18.8 (very steep), alpha/beta 0.87 Gy. Using this data, probability of myelopathy at 45 Gy is 0.03%, at 50 Gy is 0.2%. D5 is 59.3 Gy. There is a sensitizing effect from HBO
 * Thoracic Outcome: Couldn't obtain good fit to data. However, using same alpha/beta, points generally lie to left of cervical curve, suggesting higher tolerance
 * Conclusion: Cord tolerance calculated (D5 ~59 Gy); using the low alpha/beta, one would expect advantage from decreasing dose/fraction to <2 Gy

 * Munich
 * 2006 PMID 17084560 -- "Update of human spinal cord reirradiation tolerance based on additional data from 38 patients." (Nieder C, Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2006 Dec 1;66(5):1446-9. Epub 2006 Nov 2.)
 * Retrospective/literature analysis. 38 patients re-irradiated to overlapping spinal cord segments (7 Munich, 31 from published literature). Cumulative BED (a/b=2 cervical, a/b=4 thoracic) 102-181.5 Gy (median 110 Gy). Median interval 30 months. Median F/U 8 months
 * Outcome: Risk of radiation myelopathy (scoring based on PMID 15708265): "Low-risk" 3%, "Intermediate risk" 25%, "High risk" 90%
 * Conclusion: Risk of radiation myelopathy small after cumulative BED (a/b=2) <=135.5 Gy if interval >6 months and each course dose BED <=98 Gy. Confirms prior analysis.
 * 2005 PMID 15708265 -- "Proposal of human spinal cord reirradiation dose based on collection of data from 40 patients." (Nieder C, Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2005 Mar 1;61(3):851-5.)
 * Literature analysis. 40 patients re-irradiated. Cumulative BED (a/b=2 cervical, a/b=4 thoracic) 108-205 Gy (median 135 Gy, equivalent to 67 Gy in 2 Gy/fx). Median F/U 20 months
 * Outcome: radiation myelopathy 11/40 (27%) after median 11 months (4-25 months). Myelopathy only in patients if one course >= BED 102 Gy or if retreatment <2 months.
 * Risk score developed: cumulative BED, greatest BED >102 Gy, interval between RT
 * Myelopathy by risk score: "Low risk" 0%, "Intermediate risk" 33%, "High risk" 90%
 * Conclusion: Risk of radiation myelopathy small after cumulative BED (a/b=2) <=135.5 Gy if interval >6 months and each course dose BED <=98 Gy

 * MRC Lung, 1996 (UK) PMID 8814372 -- "Radiation myelopathy: estimates of risk in 1048 patients in three randomized trials of palliative radiotherapy for non-small cell lung cancer. The Medical Research Council Lung Cancer Working Party." (Macbeth FR, Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 1996;8(3):176-81)
 * Please see above in Single Fraction section

 * Fox Chase/MD Anderson, 1995 PMID 7677836 -- "Radiation response of the central nervous system." (Schultheiss TE, Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1995 Mar 30;31(5):1093-112.)
 * Spinal cord: common limit 45/25 is conservative and can be relaxed if it improves tumor control. 5% NTCP probably 57-61 Gy in absence of chemo
 * Brain: necrosis rarely below 60 Gy, imaging changes >50 Gy. Neurocognitive changes lower, especially in children

Radiobiology

 * Nijmegen, 2004 PMID 15380595 -- "Dose-volume effects in rat thoracolumbar spinal cord: an evaluation of NTCP models." (Philippens ME, Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2004 Oct 1;60(2):578-90.)
 * Rat thoracolumbar model. Single dose-response study, 4 fields (4 cm, 1.5 cm, 1.0 cm, 0.5 cm). Endpoints: white-matter and nerve-root necrosis
 * Result: 0.5 cm field length showed steep increase in radiation tolerance. Simple models (eg relative seriality or Lyman) are acceptable
 * Conclusion: Serial behavior valid above 1 cm length for daily use in EBRT, at length below 1cm increased tolerance

title: Radiation Oncology/Toxicity/Spine


text:
Radiation Oncology/Toxicity/Inner Ear

Inner Ear RT Tolerance

 * Gardner Robertson scale is used for hearing evaluation. Non-serviceable hearing is typically >50 dB audiogram and <50% speech discrimination
 * Sensorineural hearing loss begins to occur around 45 Gy, and is significantly increased at ~60 Gy
 * Patients treated with curative doses for H&N can experience damage to all parts of the auditory system, at rate ~30%
 * For single fraction, cochlea/modiolus dose should be kept <5.3 Gy and possibly <4.2 Gy (else increased chance of high frequency hearing loss), ventral cochlear nucleus <= 9 Gy (else increased chance of low frequency loss)

Gardner Robertson Scale

 * Grade I (good-excellent)
 * pure tone audiogram (dB) : 0-30
 * speech discrimination (%) : 70-100
 * Grade II (serviceable)
 * pure tone audiogram (dB) : 31-50
 * speech discrimination (%) : 50-69
 * Grade III (non-serviceable)
 * pure tone audiogram (dB) : 51-90
 * speech discrimination (%) : 5-49
 * Grade IV (poor)
 * pure tone audiogram (dB) : 91-max
 * speech discrimination (%) : 1-4
 * Grade V (none)
 * pure tone audiogram (dB) : not testable
 * speech discrimination (%) : 0
 * If PTA and speech do not correlate, use lower class.

Fractionated

 * Utah; 2009 PMID 18707819 -- "Relative contributions of radiation and cisplatin-based chemotherapy to sensorineural hearing loss in head-and-neck cancer patients." (Hitchcock YJ, Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2009 Mar 1;73(3):779-88. Epub 2008 Aug 15.)
 * Retrospective. 62 H&N patients. RT alone 34%, concurrent cisplatin 40 mg/m2 QW 44%, concurrent cisplatin 100 mg/m2 Q3W 21%, concurrent Erbitux 1%
 * Outcome: RT only: No significant hearing loss <40 Gy. If cisplatin, high frequency SNLH at 10 Gy, significant hearing loss by 40 Gy
 * Conclusion: High-frequency SNHL profoundly damaged in patients with concomitant cisplatin

 * University of Florida; 2007 (1964-2000) PMID 17236969 -- "Ototoxicity after radiotherapy for head and neck tumors." (Bhandare N, Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2007 Feb 1;67(2):469-79.)
 * Retrospective. 325 patients treated for H&N tumors. Median F/U 5.4 years
 * Toxicity: overall 42%; external ear 33%, middle ear 29%, inner ear 27%. Sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) in 15%
 * Predictors for SNHL: age, cochlear dose, chemo-RT. 10-year risk dose <60 Gy 3% vs. >60 Gy 37% (SS). Chemo-RT 30% vs. RT alone 18% (SS). Threshold for SNHL not determined
 * Conclusion: RT toxicity in all parts of auditory system. Median dose for incidence 60-66 Gy
 * Comment (PMID 17674992): 60 Gy probably too high, as prospective studies suggest 32-50 Gy

 * Michigan; 2005 - PMID 15817342 — "Prospective study of inner ear radiation dose and hearing loss in head-and-neck cancer patients." (Pan CC et al. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2005 Apr 1;61(5):1393-402.)
 * Prospective. 35 patients, curative RT for H&N cancers. Baseline auditometry, then 1, 6, 12, 24, and 36 months after RT. Median dose ipsilateral ear 47.4 Gy (14.1-68.8), contralateral ear 4.2 Gy (0.5-31.3 Gy). Follow up 2 years
 * Outcome: Dose >=45 Gy had hearing loss of ~210 dB, mostly in higher frequencies. Model predicts ~19 dB hearing loss at 45 Gy, but depends on age and other factors.
 * Conclusion: High-frequency (>= 2000 Hz) worsens significantly after RT in dose-dependent fashion

Single fraction

 * Pittsburgh; 2009 (2004-2007) PMID 19284227 -- "Predictors of hearing preservation after stereotactic radiosurgery for acoustic neuroma." (Kano H, J Neurosurg. 2009 Mar 13. [Epub ahead of print])
 * Retrospective. 77 patients, serviceable hearing (Gardner-Robertson Class I-II), treated with SRS. Margin dose 12-13 Gy. Median F/U 20 months
 * Outcome: Serviceable hearing preserved in 71% of all patients, in 89% of GR Class I patients
 * Prognostice factors for maintaining hearing: GR Class I, speech discrimination score >= 80%, pure tone average <20 dB, age <60. Significantly better hearing preservation of GR Class if central cochlea dose <4.2 Gy
 * Conclusion: GKS preserves serviceable hearing in majority of patients; a low dose to cochlea enhances hearing preservation

 * UC Irvine; 2008 PMID 19123899 -- "Hearing preservation in vestibular schwannoma stereotactic radiosurgery: what really matters?" (Linskey ME, J Neurosurg. 2008 Dec;109 Suppl:129-36.)
 * Review. Tumor margin delineation to exclude cochlear nerve, dura mater of anterior border of internal auditory canal
 * Tumor dose <= 12 Gy
 * Ventral cochlear nucleus <= 9 Gy; toxicity can lead to loss of low hearing frequencies
 * Modiolus and basal turn of cochlea <5.3 Gy, toxicity can lead to loss of high hearing frequencies
 * Serous otitis media, ossicular or temporal bone osteonecrosis, and chondromalacia not likely to be relevant

Pediatric

 * St. Jude; 2008 (1997-2001) PMID 18395355 -- "Hearing Loss After Radiotherapy for Pediatric Brain Tumors: Effect of Cochlear Dose." (Hua C, Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2008 Apr 3. [Epub ahead of print])
 * Prospective. 78 patients (155 ears) with brain tumors. No platinum-based chemo. Prospective audiograms and/or auditory brainstem response at baseline, and then q6 months
 * Outcome: Hearing loss 14% patients, 11% cochlea. Onset at 3-5 years after RT. Incidence low at 30 Gy, increased at 40-45 Gy. risk greater at high frequencies (6-8 kHz)
 * Conclusion: SNHL is a late effect of conformal RT, and shows dose-response. Cumulative cochlear dose <35 Gy is recommended

title: Radiation Oncology/Toxicity/Inner Ear


text:
Radiation Oncology/Toxicity/Brachial Plexus

Brachial Plexus RT Tolerance

 * Three distinct syndromes
 * Transient neuropathy
 * Classic, delayed, progressive fibrosis - unlikely to occur <60 Gy
 * Acute ischemic plexopathy

 * Dose constraints
 * RTOG 0236 (SBRT): 24/3
 * RTOG 0412 (RT+chemo): 60/30
 * RTOG 0435 (RT+chemo): 60/30
 * RTOG 0522 (RT+chemo): 60/30
 * RTOG 0615 (RT+chemo): 66/33
 * RTOG 0617 (RT+chemo): 66/33

Anatomy

 * For contouring, see also Radiation_Oncology/Anatomy

 * 2010 PMID 20631370 Full text -- "Brachial plexus contouring with CT and MR imaging in radiation therapy planning for head and neck cancer." (Truong MT, Radiographics. 2010 Jul-Aug;30(4):1095-103.)
 * Good images

 * RTOG; 2008 PMID 18448267 -- "Development and Validation of A Standardized Method for Contouring the Brachial Plexus: Preliminary Dosimetric Analysis Among Patients Treated with IMRT for Head-and-Neck Cancer." (Hall WH, Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2008 Dec 1;72(5):1362-7.)
 * Delineation of brachial plexus established; images provided
 * Identify and contour C5, T1, and T2.
 * Identify and contour the subclavian and axillary neurovascular bundle
 * Identify and contour anterior and middle scalene muscles from C5 to insertion onto the first rib
 * To contour the brachial plexus OAR use a 5-mm diameter paint tool
 * Start at the neural foramina from C5 to T1; this should extend from the lateral aspect of the spinal canal to the small space between the anterior and middle scalene muscles
 * For CT slices, where no neural foramen is present, contour only the space between the anterior and middle scalene muscles
 * Continue to contour the space between the anterior and middle scalene muscles; eventually the middle scalene will end in the region of the subclavian neurovascular bundle
 * Contour the brachial plexus as the posterior aspect of the neurovascular bundle inferiorly and laterally to one to two CT slices below the clavicular head.
 * The first and second ribs serve as the medial limit of the OAR contour
 * Validation study; 2012 PMID 21536393 -- "Validating the RTOG-Endorsed Brachial Plexus Contouring Atlas: An Evaluation of Reproducibility Among Patients Treated by Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy for Head-and-Neck Cancer." (Yi SK, Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012 Mar 1;82(3):1060-4.)
 * Conclusion: "The RTOG-endorsed brachial plexus atlas provides a consistent set of guidelines for contouring this OAR with essentially no learning curve. Adoption of these contouring guidelines in the clinical setting is encouraged."

 * Miami, 1996 PMID 8933882 -- "Radiation-induced brachial plexopathy: MR and clinical findings." (Bowen BC, AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 1996 Nov-Dec;17(10):1932-6.)
 * Case report and literature review

Hyperbaric Oxygen

 * UK MRC -- hyperbaric oxygen vs control
 * Randomized, Phase II. 34 patients, radiation-induced brachial plexopathy. Median time to onset 3 years, median time to HBO 11 years. Arm 1) hyperbaric oxygen: 100% oxygen @ 2.4 ATA x 100 minutes x 30 dives vs Arm 2) Control: same number and pressure, but gas mix equivalent to 100% oxygen at surface
 * 2001 PMID 11230889 -- "Double-blind randomized phase II study of hyperbaric oxygen in patients with radiation-induced brachial plexopathy." (Pritchard J, Radiother Oncol. 2001 Mar;58(3):279-86.)
 * Outcome: No difference up to 12 months post-treatment, though some improvement. Two cases with chronic lymphedema reported major and persistent improvement
 * Conclusion: HBO doesn't slow or reverse RIBP


text:
Radiation Oncology/Toxicity/Bladder

Bladder RT Tolerance
 * Also please see Toxicity/Pelvis

Dosimetry

 * Dutch Dose Escalation Trial; 2010 PMID 20056354 -- "Urinary Obstruction in Prostate Cancer Patients From the Dutch Trial (68 Gy vs. 78 Gy): Relationships with Local Dose, Acute Effects, and Baseline Characteristics." (Heemsbergen WD, Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2010 Jan 5. [Epub ahead of print])
 * For full trial results, please see the prostate dose escalation page
 * Subset analysis. 40 patients with urinary obstruction (19 low dose arm and 21 high dose arm). Dose-difference maps
 * Outcome: Early events within 2 years (47%) predicted by baseline complaints and TURP. Late events after 2 years (53%) predicted by bladder surface receiving ≥ 80 Gy and especially with dose to bladder neck in the trigone
 * Conclusion: Late urinary obstruction associated with local dose to trigone

 * MD Anderson, 2007 PMID 17241755 -- "Investigation of bladder dose and volume factors influencing late urinary toxicity after external beam radiotherapy for prostate cancer." (Cheung MR, Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2007 Jan 19; [Epub ahead of print])
 * Retrospective. 128 patients treated to 78 Gy. Endpoint Grade 1+ late GU toxicity within 2 years of treatment
 * Toxicity: Grade 1+ chronic GU toxicity in 15%. No plateau, continued increase with time
 * DVH (dose-bladder volume histogram) data fit better than DWH (dose-bladder wall histogram) to toxicity. Recommend using whole-bladder DVH for clinical treatment planning. Urethra (suggested to be important in late GU toxicity) not contoured
 * Hotspot model (hottest 3%): if <78 Gy then 8 year toxicity 25%, if >=78 Gy then 50%
 * Lyman model: TD50 = 77.6 Gy, n=0.001, m=0.022

 * 1995 PMID 7713787 -- "The response of the urinary bladder, urethra, and ureter to radiation and chemotherapy." (Marks LB, Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1995 Mar 30;31(5):1257-80.)
 * Comprehensive review. From Late Effects of Normal Tissues (LENT) Consensus Conference.

Management

 * Please see the cystitis page

title: Radiation Oncology/Toxicity/Bladder


text:
Radiation Oncology/Toxicity/Testis

Testicular RT Tolerance
 * Also please see Toxicity/Pelvis

 * Spermatogenesis
 * Radiation sensitivity to single fraction diminishes rapidly with progression along maturation pathway
 * Spermatogonia: 0.1-0.2 Gy; spermatocytes 10x less sensitive: 2-3 Gy; spermatids 40x less sensitivie: 4-6 Gy
 * Azoospermia after low doses (<2 Gy) takes 60-70 days due to damage to spermatogonia. After higher doses (>4 Gy), azoospermia develops much faster due to concurrent damage to spermatids
 * Recovery of spermatogenesis is driven by recovery of spermatogonia and is dose-dependent. Sperm recovery after <1 Gy takes 1-1.5 years. After 4-6 Gy, it may take 2-5 years. After 6-8 Gy, permanent azoospermia likely although University of Washington data from TBI show spermatogenesis can recover after 10 Gy single fraction in 20% patients
 * Spermatogenesis more sensitive to fractionated damage than single fraction damage due to long (~16 day) cell cycle of stem cells
 * Fractionated doses 0.7-0.9 Gy lead to oligospermia/azoospermia but with frequent recovery at 1-1.5 years. Permanent azoospermia may occur after fractionated doses as low as 1.2 Gy, and is likely >2 Gy. However, University of Washington data from TBI show spermatogenesis can recover after 12-14 Gy fractionated in ~17% patients
 * Endocrine function
 * Subtle Leydig cell dysfunction can be seen after cumulative 2 Gy in fractionated therapy, although testosterone serum levels are clinically not impaired
 * Testosterone production impaired at 14 Gy in 2 Gy/fx

Effect on Spermatogenesis
Review
 * Manchester, 2005 (UK) PMID 15784814 -- "Spermatogenesis after cancer treatment: damage and recovery." (Howell SJ, J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2005;(34):12-7.)
 * Review. Spermatogonia: 0.2 Gy
 * FSH levels: 0.2 - 0.7 Gy cause transient dose-dependent increase in FSH and decrease in sperm concentration. Normalized in 12-24 months
 * Azoospermia: no threshold dose identified; doses >1.2 Gy reduced likelihood of spermatogenesis recovery

Effect on Testosterone

 * Review: Princess Margaret, 1995 PMID 7792393 -- "Leydig cell function and radiation: a review of the literature." (Izard MA, Radiother Oncol. 1995 Jan;34(1):1-8.)

 * Copenhagen, 2002 (Denmark) PMID 11896102 -- "Effect of graded testicular doses of radiotherapy in patients treated for carcinoma-in-situ in the testis." (Petersen PM, J Clin Oncol. 2002 Mar 15;20(6):1537-43.)
 * Prospective. Dose reduction starting at 20/10 in 2 Gy steps. Results verified by biopsies
 * Remission in all patients at 20, 18, and 16 Gy. One relapse at 14 Gy after 20 months
 * Toxicity: Leydig cell function - stable testosterone decrease for >5 years after RT, at rate ~4%/year. Median time-to-decrease 3 months. No obvious dose-reponse between 14-20 Gy. No impact on serum estradiol or DHT. Need for androgen substitution similar at all RT dose levels; 43% of available patients required androgen substitution for clinical symptoms of androgen insufficiency
 * Conclusion: Androgen production impaired even at 14 Gy

Both

 * National Cancer Institute; 1985 (1977-1981) PMID 3928830 -- "Effects of fractionated irradiation of endocrine aspects of testicular function." (Shapiro E, J Clin Oncol. 1985 Sep;3(9):1232-9.)
 * Retrospective. 27 males with soft tissue sarcoma, treated with surgery + adjuvant RT. Dose 45/25 + 9-18 Gy boost. No adjuvant chemo. Direct TLD measurement in 17 patients, extrapolations in rest. Testicular dose from scatter RT ranged from 0.01 - 25 Gy. Dose groups <0.5 Gy, 0.5-2 Gy, and >2 Gy
 * Serum FSH: peak at 6 months, then rapid decline 6-12 months, then slow decline thereafter. If dose <0.5 Gy, return to baseline, if dose 0.5-2 Gy or >2 Gy, not complete recovery and dose dependent
 * Serum LH: peak at 6 months, then decline 6-18 months, then further gradual decline. Statistically significant elevation from baseline only if dose >2 Gy
 * Serum testosterone: No significant change
 * Conclusion: Subtle Lyedig cell dysfunction may occur at fractionated doses >2 Gy

 * University of Washington
 * 1983 (1970-1980) PMID 6412404 -- "Late effects on gonadal function of cyclophosphamide, total-body irradiation, and marrow transplantation." (Sanders JE, Transplantation. 1983 Sep;36(3):252-5.)
 * Retrospective. 137 patients, bone marrow transplant, survival >1 year after transplant, after puberty. 72 men conditioned either with chemotherapy (n=31) or chemo+TBI (n=41). TBI 9.2-17.5 Gy
 * Outcome:
 * Chemo conditioning: normal LH 97%, normal FSH 65%, spermatogenesis 67%
 * Chemo + TBI conditioning: normal LH 88%, normal FSH 24%, spermatogenesis 6%. All men had gonadal failure for 5 years after TBI, 2/7 patients followed >5 years recovered spermatogenesis. 1 patient fathered 4 normal children
 * Conclusion: Cyclophosphamide doesn't prevent normal gonadal function in most men; TBI does in majority of patients
 * 1996 (1971-1992) PMID 8639928 -- "Pregnancies following high-dose cyclophosphamide with or without high-dose busulfan or total-body irradiation and bone marrow transplantation." (Sanders JE, Blood. 1996 Apr 1;87(7):3045-52.)
 * Retrospective. 618 postpubertal men, treated with BMT. TBI in 75%. TBI 10/1, 12/6, 14/7, or 15.75/7 fractions
 * Outcome: recovery of testicular function for TBI men 17% (CY 61%, BUCY 17%, TBI-10 20%, TBI-12 16%, TBI-14 18%). Partners of 35 male patients (CY 80%, BUCY 6%, TBI 14%) became pregnant, resulting in 82% live births (4 spontaneous and 7 elective abortions). Pregnancy rate for male TBI patients 5/618 (0.8%). Abortion rate comparable to general population. Partners of TBI patients didn't seem to have high risk pregnancies
 * Conclusion: Testicular recovery after TBI ~17%, pregnancy rate for partners ~1%

 * Swedish Hospital Seattle, 1974 (1963-1973) PMID 4428015 -- "Effect of graded doses of ionizing radiation on the human testis." (Rowley MJ, Radiat Res. 1974 Sep;59(3):665-78.)
 * Prospective. 67 volunteers, health 25 - 52 year old. Single dose escalation to human subject testis 0.8 Gy to 6 Gy, contralateral testis served as control
 * Gonadotropins: plasma FSH slightly elevated at 0.2 Gy, highly elevated at 0.75 Gy; plasma LH elevated at 0.75 Gy. Plasma testosterone no significant change
 * Spermatogenesis: At 0.5 Gy, marked oligospermia; At 0.8 Gy total azoospermia; at 2-3 Gy, recovery took ~30 months; at 4-6 Gy, recoverey took >5 years; at 6-8 Gy irreversible azoospermia. At 6 Gy, histologic recovery of germinal cells took place ~1.5 years before sperm were produced

title: Radiation Oncology/Toxicity/Testis