text:
Talk:Telescope Making

Today I laid out the 'bones' of the book on Telescope Making. My focus for the book is to impart the basic techniques to build a Newtonian reflector. I have a target audience in mind of people who might like to try this hobby but are frightened by the complexity and the cost. Throughout the book I will be documenting my building of a scope using scrounged parts and commonly available materials. The primary mirror is a Pyrex pie pan, used to make pies, and purchased for 99 cents at a second hand store.

A possible shelving for the book could be in Do It Yourself, or maybe in the Wikijunior section. I do plan on focusing the writing towards young adults, maybe between the Cub Scout range and the teen looking for a science project.

I would like to invite anyone with experience, maybe some pictures of a project, to contribute.

I think a question section could be good too, so invite those also.

--Vorblesnak 18:12, 3 November 2006 (UTC)vorblesnak

I got the basics of the Refracting Telescope page typed in. I am thinking at the end of the reflecting project I should do a section on making and repairing refracting telescopes. Many folks may be interested in buying that cheap Tasco at Goodwill for $10 and fiddling with it.

I have a heading on the second page of, "Contents". I don't know if that will stand or not. I am leaving it right now so that I can keep track of the book sequence; add or remove as is necessary.

I am still up in the air on final format. One long sequence OR! a nested web page design. I see arguments and discussions for both.

--Vorblesnak 18:22, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Bit more done. I got down to Optical design. I need to find out some stuff from someone. How to do the links properly. Importing and embedding images.

--69.59.200.230 21:01, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

I am working on some of the illustrations and diagrams I want to use for the book. Much of the text for the section on Optics, located in the design section, hinge on these illustrations. Hence, slow going right now. I should be able to finish the optics section in a doay or two. Long weekend ahead.

Lord what a task. I am still not even sure it is right. I got the basics of the optics page up, pics and all. I need to find out how to list the scope werks as the author.

--Vorblesnak 21:18, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Finished the section on the design of the optics. On to the hands on section. I will need to get materials and keep an accurate cost list. --Vorblesnak 05:11, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Adding   { { PD-self } }   to a page will insert the open license. Remove the spaces after you paste it narnal!

--Vorblesnak 00:05, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

After 4 months of grinding and messing with glass I am finally ready to write the next chapter or so. Posted today, I have tried to stay within the editing constraints setup by the admin.

--Vorblesnak 21:10, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Added some links to the page, did some editing of the verbage. Tried to gather my thoughts. I believe I will do the tube and focuser pages next, then come back to the optics.

--Vorblesnak 01:31, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Some interest from the world at last. An editor wants to take a crack at making the book more readable. I will post some of the other chapters and see if we can't put this tome to bed. Mirror grinding next ..

Vorblesnak (talk) 06:26, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Dave C has taken up the challenge of editing. I hope to move our discussions here so that anyone can share and learn form the experience. First edits went into the page. What follows is an email from Dave and my reply ..

> Today I went over the intro of the book. It's still mostly yours and I > hope it still "sounds like you." I felt the need of defining the basic > term focal length, which you used without defining, and had to cobble > up a couple of diagrams to add to your "sagitta" diagram.

We need to discuss audience and process. I wrote the book for 10 to 12 year olds and I wrote it as an introductory text. It really leaves a great deal unsaid. It is a hands on text. But as you have noticed there are some things that need to be expanded on. I thought about that and decided in the spirit of the web I would link to other pages that brought the detail focus to those loose ends. At the end of each section is a little piece called ... Links to new terms and topics for this page: This is the repository for those detail pages. I have been using Wikipedia for many of those links but other sources exist.

I see what you are saying about loose ends and undefined terms but I am not sure I want those in the text. I see the text as a hands on, wind in your hair, flying along scope making treatise. If you need more detail the links are there, follow them. If you just want to make a scope do what the book says and you will. The first image actually covers the elements of mirror design, including focal length, but I like the color in your images. I think the text could be reworked with hyperlinks so the links to "bird scopes" is in the text and at the end in the new terms.

I also think the style may be too loose, to much verbiage. Trying to strike a balance between verbose and laconic I think I come across as trite, too folksy. I want to hold their interest but not scare them off with the physics.

What do you think?

We should take this to discussion on the book's web page.

David Davis Toledo, OR 97391

> Thanks,

> Dave C. Vorblesnak (talk) 15:47, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

OK, I cut the paragraph on f-number as interesting but irrelevant, and I made the diagrams uniform size and centered.

(I would like to put a frame around them but I can't find a combination of diagram keywords that both sets the size at 400px and puts the frame. Any use of the |frame| keyword seems to ignore the |400px| keyword and goes to full width. I don't want to downsize and re-upload the images either... but I digress.)

Now, I get & sympathize with wanting a "hands on, wind in your hair, flying along treatise" but you have to realize, you aren't going to be there to back it up. Maybe if you were giving a hands-on scope class you could get by with a few xerox sheets plus your own dynamic teaching style :-) But this is the internet, you gotta picture some kid in Bangladesh or Sasketchawan trying to follow it. What is not in the book, will not be available. Yeah we want to do links, but I think every technical term you use, needs to be defined at least informally.

When I asked about the "bird" versus "planet" versus "galaxy" scope I was thinking you were getting ready to explain how well-lit targets (birds, mountains) can get by with a smaller mirror but need a shorter focal length (your point about seeing feather detail only), while dimmer targets (galaxies) need a bigger mirror and a longer F, with planets and the moon in between. But I guess that also would "interesting but irrelevant"??? Given that you are going for a pie dish mirror, mirror size is pre-set. But focal length is still open to choice.

I'm thinking of moving your reflecting-sphere discussion up to this more theoretical section ahead of "Thinking About Your Telescope" -- comment? fernly|Talk 16:38, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Scratch that -- dumb idea. fernly|Talk 16:51, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Too many "mounts" -- mount the mirrors in a mirror mounting but the scope is held by a scope mount... I'm going to try to reduce the number of use of mount/mounting to avoid ambiguity. Are you OK with speaking of a "bracket" to hold the mirror(s) and confine "mount" to the frame that holds the tube? fernly|Talk 17:03, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Also I would like to use "magnification" instead of "bigger image" even tho it is a longer word. Reason is, "bigger" confuses me! To me, a "bigger" image is a WIDER field of view (you see more, more==bigger). But a long-focal-length image actually shows you a SMALLER piece of the sky (the bird feather detail again). But it would be just as confusing to say it's "smaller" hence, more magnified. Or think of another word... fernly|Talk 17:09, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

David, can you explain this sentence to me? "The [short focal length] image is a bit smaller but that is rarely an issue when looking through the eyepiece." It seems to raise a problem and leave it hanging. Can I delete it? fernly|Talk 17:25, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

In the Sagitta calculation, you first had "say you want a three foot telescope" but later you actually work out a 48-inch focal length, so I am changing the first example to 4 feet. fernly|Talk 18:31, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Finally (for today) I'm looking ahead and seeing a lot of dense prose in the "making" section, with no images. We Need Photos!!! Surely you've taken some pictures of mirror making? I don't want only to rely on external links. If you don't already have suitable pics, I hope you can arrange to make some soon. Run a class or recruit a single kid and do it and take pics??? Cheers fernly|Talk 18:52, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Fernly said .. "Yeah we want to do links, but I think every technical term you use, needs to be defined at least informally."

When you are right, you are right. I agree completely. But looking at other countries, do they even have pie plates? We should probably think about that and explore possible substitutes. Further down you make the point ..

"Given that you are going for a pie dish mirror, mirror size is pre-set. But focal length is still open to choice." This bears on a couple of points in the book. I was going to have them use the existing curve with no modification. Adjusting focal length was not going to be part of the process. However, if they are using the bottom of a jug or some other short focus curve then we need to examine adjusting the focal length.

Vorblesnak (talk) 19:56, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Fernly wrote: "Too many "mounts" -- mount the mirrors in a mirror mounting but the scope is held by a scope mount... I'm going to try to reduce the number of use of mount/mounting to avoid ambiguity. Are you OK with speaking of a "bracket" to hold the mirror(s) and confine "mount" to the frame that holds the tube?"

Mirrors are held in cells. The cells are mounted in tubes using brackets. The telescope tube is mounted in a bearing assembly that allows it to be moved and pointed. There is just alot of mounting in telescope making! That does not mean we cannot tinker with the lexicon. Thesaurus time .. MOUNT .. affix, frame .. Synonyms: emplace, exhibit, fit, install, place, position, prepare, produce, put in place, put on, set up, show, stage hmmmmmmmm

Mirrors are held in cells. The cells are put in place in a telescope tube or truss assembly and held in position with brackets. The entire telescope tube is put on a mount that allows it to be easily pointed in any direction. How about that, work with that.

Vorblesnak (talk) 20:50, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Fernly wrote: "Also I would like to use "magnification" instead of "bigger image" even tho it is a longer word. Reason is, "bigger" confuses me! To me, a "bigger" image is a WIDER field of view (you see more, more==bigger). But a long-focal-length image actually shows you a SMALLER piece of the sky (the bird feather detail again). But it would be just as confusing to say it's "smaller" hence, more magnified. Or think of another word..."

If I understand where you are in the book we are talking optics. The main difference between two mirrors of the same diameter but different focal lengths is the physical size of the image. It isn't magnification. The Airy Disk, the actual focused image, is larger and deeper on a long focal length than it is on a short focal length. A longer focal length means you have more data to work with so you can magnify the image a bit more, you could be a bit sloppy on your figuring and not affect the image. Conversely you must figure a short fl mirror very precisely because it will affect the image. Of course there is more to it than that but your larger field of view is the apparent field of view. The true angular field of view may not be that different between the two scopes. The apparent field of view is set by the eyepiece. So should we talk about that in the book? Airy's equations aren't that complex. Or maybe just use this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airy_disk

Vorblesnak (talk) 20:50, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Fernly wrote: "Also I would like to use "magnification"... Ok, now I see it, in the section on Technical Terms. I belabored the physics above so you can look there for arguments. It is not really about magnification but your sentence does read smoother. And beginners do use the two terms interchangeably. I'd let it stand. If the book catches on there may be discussions about it but it is nice clean copy and I like it.

Vorblesnak (talk) 21:07, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

I posted the section on grinding. It is un-checked, un-edited but it is rewritten. I need to find the piece on polishing and figuring rewrite it and post it. I will do that in the next day or so. Both pieces need some illustrations and those I cannot find. I may have to redo them. Bear with me, I'll get them there.

Vorblesnak (talk) 05:32, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

I really wish you had not embedded so much text in your images. First off, Da Rules say there should be an alt= in every image to explain it and that's too much text to copy into the alt=. But also, text in a .png can't be edited or moved around. So, would you consider re-doing those diagrams to remove the text from them? Or I can do it. The words that apply directly to the image then go into the image caption, and the rest gets integrated into the preceding and following paragraph.

I have pulled this link out of the section I just edited, as the word is not referenced there. I'll put it back in after wherever it actually shows up, if it does.

Further on photos -- I don't know if you ever thought about using them, but they would be really, really useful. Worth >>1000 words to explain what a "tool" is, how grinding is done. Just get somebody, preferably someone of an age to be in the target audience, out to your garage actually doing this, and take a digital camera and shoot a bunch of pics. Cheers, fernly|Talk 19:46, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Photos do not print well, line drawing do, hence my predilection for line drawings. Sorry the images irritate, I try to make them stand on their own. I take it from your last posting the labels with arrows would be allowed but not the explanatory text. I will remove it.

69.59.200.230 (talk) 17:27, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Oh yeah, callouts with arrows, excellent.

As to photos: color pics may be a problem, if somebody just looks at a wiki page and clicks the print button on the browser. But wikibooks supports "printer-friendly" editions (see the Chess book on the home page) which is actually PDF. We can make color pics look great in a PDF, we have it incorporate the 300dpi version, not some little 512-pixel-wide, 72dpi thumbnail in the online version. That aside, I have more than once used photoshop to take a color pic and make it into a higher-contrast b&w so that the key features stand out, even printed newspaper-style. That's the middle ground between photos and diagrams. Neither you nor me are illustrators who can make a nice drawing showing hands doing grinding. Maybe your network includes a technical illustrator? If not, pictures. fernly|Talk 21:24, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Vignetting is found in the text associated with the drawing on sizing the tube.

69.59.200.230 (talk) 17:30, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Aha! that's why I couldn't find it with a search (another reason not to put text in a png!).

I've made some significant changes in the "Mirror Materials" section. First off I found the US Mint page on coin dimensions, and they are metric, so I had to recast the whole sagitta-depth thing in millimeters. Also the pyrex dish I got from our kitchen is a nominal 10-inch, its bottom is exactly 8-inch. So I think the reader is about equally likely to find a nominal 9-inch (7-inch bottom) or 10-inch (8-inch bottom) so I wrote to accomodate that possibility.

When I "ran the numbers" as directed on my dish I got a 56-inch focal length, based on its measured depth (just short of a nickel, or 1.9mm)

However, now when I hold my dish at a shallow angle to the light I can see the bottom is not a smooth curve. It's more like this:

--\____...____/--

There's a steepish curve in the outer 1-inch and then a shallower, almost flat curve across the bottom. The "..." is the raised lettering. So chances are by the time the curve is smooth, it will be deeper than 1.9mm hence a shorter F than 56 inches. Comment?

fernly|Talk 21:24, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

OK, keep in mind the section was written as a general guideline to help folks find materials. The coins may be in mm sizes but I took a pair of calipers to a hand full of change. The idea was to give them some basic tools to use to make decisions. You may have a couple of coins in your pocket and they can be used in this way to approximately guess at the sagitta.

Yes, you will see some irregularities in the pressed shape of the plate bottom. And if you remember I cautioned against using a plate with a big hump in the middle. Look for one with a more homogeneous curve. But those flaws are why on a regular pie plate you end up with about a 7.5 inch mirror, +/- a 1/4 inch or so. As the grind progresses the area inside the foot, that raised rim, is what gets worked. Right there you lose 1/4 to 1/2 inch of diameter. And as you scrub the writing out and remove the casting artifacts from the glass the curve is deepened. It also depends on the tool used. A cast tool of close diameter will yield a deeper curve. An over sized tool will flatten the curve. A ring will act more like a same diameter.

Keep the verbiage casual and simple. You get too deep into splitting hairs about coin size and you will confuse them or scare them off.

Vorblesnak (talk) 17:01, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

So I cleaned up the three images in the area of secondary mirror sizing. I remembered I had added the text to the images because I wanted the text adjacent to the image, to the right or the left of the image, and could not get the XML to do that. There must be a command for that. The appropriate text is now above or below the image. Hope fully you know how to get the text where I would like it.

Vorblesnak (talk) 18:02, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

OK I used two-cell tables to put the text beside the 3 images. I'm not totally happy with how it looks but it isn't bad. Oh, and shall we do the ROC drawing earlier same way? Thanks for making that change, and thanks for the pictures you sent. fernly|Talk 19:35, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

"We cannot use tempered glass as it shatters when ground" aghhhh! We must tell people a reliable way to identify such glass! Otherwise it would be like saying "go pick mushrooms to eat, and oh by the way don't pick any death caps..." Is the rather cryptic sentence about polarized glasses the method of identifying tempered glass?

I sense an experience has occurred. Care to share?

No, you cannot use tempered glass .. yes the cryptic sentence about polarized sun glasses does refer to that. Polarized sunglasses will reveal a dark areas or zones or spots in tempered glass, or glass with strain entrained in the glass. Get a pair and go look at the side windows of your car. You will see a pattern of dark spots in the glass. That is strain, that is bad. Don't grind that.

The classic method of identifying tempered glass is to use two polarizing lenses, one one each side of the glass. Light shines through the back lens, through the glass and is viewed through the front lens. Tempering is revealed as the front lens is rotated. It shows up as a series of dark zones.

Now the interesting thing is, pie plates use to be fine annealed pyrex, hence my choice to push those for mirror blanks. However I have discovered pyrex is now just a marketing term and the bakeware is probably not made by Corning and is probably not true pyrex, though it may be a hardened borosilicate. So the caveat about tempered glass should be at the start of the finding your mirror section not buried in the other parts section. I originally felt safe about pie plates, now I am not certain. Old scratched up pie plates are very probably pyrex and can be handled without concern. New stuff?? Lokk for strain.

Here is a link to a good page on strain ... http://www.public.asu.edu/~aomdw/GSI/Glass_Strain.html

Here is a topical page on tempered glass ... http://www.cuttingedgesandcarving.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=4492&pid=36710&mode=threaded&start=

Vorblesnak (talk) 01:33, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

I moved the tempered-glass discussion up in the glass-finding section and gave it a heading. I think the experience of seeing spots in a car window thru polaroid shades is common enough it should be understandable.

I edited the tool-making section. I moved some things around for more logical order; you had the grinding surface preceding the casting/shaping of the base, and I thought making the base should come first. I added some more cautions on breaking up a pie plate for glass (I could just see some enthusiastic 12-year-old with a hammer and no eye protection..)

The paragraph about your friend with the bubbling pitch lap seems a bit of a digression, consider deleting it or saving it for some later section ("troubleshooting"?). Also I didn't understand the remark in it, the cure for a wet tool was to soak it? Seemed counter-intuitive...

I installed one of your pictures. When I look at them closely they were not really in sharp focus. I sharpened the one as much as I could in photoshop, but if you should happen to be standing around the shop with a digicam in your hand you might have another go at it. Also, I didn't have much info for the caption. What's the casting material of the one on the right and the big one in the back? Plaster? What's that big one for, it looks like 15-inch or bigger, wow. 21:35, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Good work on the tempered glass and the warning about breaking up the pie plate ..

"The paragraph about your friend with the bubbling pitch lap seems a bit ..." Not enough development of the argument for it to make sense. The classic cast tool was called a tile tool. The original idea was to lay tiles on the glass and cast dental plaster for the body of the tool. The dental plaster wraps around the tiles and binds them. The problem with these tools is they are thirsty. They absorb water from the grinding wet and dry out the process, at least until you slake their thirst. The common fix is to soak the tool before using it. This works fine if you are grinding, a very wet process. However all that stored moisture causes the pitch to fall off when you cast the lap on the tool for polishing. Some folks combat this by using a different backer for the pitch lap. I said screw that. I cast the backer and then glue glass on for a grinding surface. No water absorbtion and the pitch sticks to a fully dry tool.

re: the pictures. I am not a photographer, but I know one and I am on his schedule. The picture was to show finished laps, one under construction and materials. The casting material is rapid setting grout. IT is ready to use in one hour. You can cast the backer from anything that will pour and harden, I don't like plaster. Dental plaster is OK. Concrete works fine, The big tool is for the mirror that is under it. A 22 inch 7 segment tessellated blank. That is a proof for a 2 meter project this winter.

Vorblesnak (talk) 02:53, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

OK I have edited all the available text to my satisfaction at least. I am going to be travelling for a few weeks but will check in periodically when I have a good wi-fi connection and some time to kill. Meantime you can be writing! Filling in the sections that currently have a heading only.

I would like to say how much I am enjoying this book as I read it closely. It is chock-full of solid practical advice, as you intend. I think when it is filled out it will be an impressive resource and will inspire lots of telescope making.

THINGS TO THINK HARD ABOUT:

One, what really to do with links. There is not a consistent method of placing links. Take John Dobson. I stuck in a link to his Wikipedia page at the end of the first section where you quote him. But he's quoted several other places. The reader might remember there was a link but would have a hard time finding it. So I repeated it along with links to Bartels and Oiton whom you refer to, after the intro to grinding.

On the one hand, my instinct is to do inline links, just make a hyperlink out of anything like Dobson, or the U.S. Mint -- as you would do in a web page. But that apparently is not the wikibooks style. OR-- put all the links in one single =Links= topic at the end, and liberally use "(see Links)" throughout the text. Right now there are little blobs of links at the ends of topics which is kind of the worst of both worlds.

TWO, the outline! Now that all the headings are ==wiki-style== they show up in the TOC, which is rather impressively long. No doubt the book should be split into chapters but I'm not sure we are ready. The problem that keeps bugging me, tho I have no solution yet, is that logically speaking, almost everything is a sub-topic of "Project 1: The Newtonian Reflector." Only the last main topic, "The Telescope Mount," is really generic to almost any kind of amateur scope. Much of the mirror-making part is also generic, I suppose. But all the secondary-mounting part is Newtonian.

I guess the main issue here is, do you intend to write a "Project 2: The some-other-kind-of-scope"? (and BTW, I put in a vote here for a Schiefspiegler if you do) Because if so, then you need to think about how to pull out the mirror-making text that would be generic. Then we can have an intro, a generic chapter on mirror-making, a generic chapter on scope mounts, and a specific chapter on each "Project".

THREE, missing, even as empty headings: (1) how to grind a flat mirror (2) how to silver a mirror. Insert those headings where you think they should go.

Cheers, DC fernly|Talk 22:09, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

A quick perusal later I find just a couple of simple errors that I will touch up. Nice job on the edit. I will write. Lets see if I can button this up by Christmas.

A schief? Hmmm. I spoke to a man the other day that learned from Oscar Knab. I wonder if I can find him.

Vorblesnak (talk) 17:01, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Dave, I sent you two chapters for editing. Not sure if you got them. Should I just post them here?

Vorblesnak (talk)

Refracting and catadioptric telescopes
Should there be a section about making refractors, or about making catadioptric telescopes (those with both lenses and mirrors)? --Whoop whoop pull up Bitching Betty 19:45, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

 * Refractors and catadioptrics seems like reasonable topics to cover (or plan to cover). The question is how best to expand the outline for them.  At the moment, apparently all the content after the first section is "Project 1".  --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 03:05, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Copyvio
Hello, I am vorblesnak. You may contact me a  I am not sure what the alleged copy write violation is since I built this page and most of the content from scratch. Perhaps someone could contact me at the above email and let me know what the issue is.

 * I have no reason to doubt that you may be vorblesnak, but you should use your registered account to address the issue.
 * The issue is about the copyright notice you added (see bottom of diff). It prevents the use of the content for commercial uses this restriction is not compatible with Wikibook's licenses.
 * I will try to contact you via email. --Panic (discuss • contribs) 02:54, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Question re Cc Violation
I, user id fernly, am Dave Cortesi who edited/rewrote much of this text in consultation with the original author. Just checking in to the book for the first time in a long time, and was dismayed to see the big (c) violation notice. I am not aware of any (c) material in it. Please say specifically what you "believe" to constitute a copyright violation. If I can't justify it I'll delete it.

 * You can remove the notice after the issue regarding this copyright restriction is lifted "Permission is granted to reproduce and distribute these files for non-profit, personal use." as it is incompatible with Wikibooks copyright license. I couldn't contact the poster in the above thread to resolve the issue, if you have better information please share here and feel free to act of it. --Panic (discuss • contribs) 06:40, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:Telescope Making


text:
Template:E-government

 E-government Preface — Introduction — Definition — The Goals of E-Government — E-Government and Human Development — The Challenges of E-Government — The Importance of a National Strategic Framework for E-Government — Making E-Government Happen — Further Reading — Notes — Acknowledgements — About the Author

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

title: Template:E-government


text:
Template:ICT in Education

 ICT in Education Preface — Introduction — Definition of Terms — The Promise of ICTs in Education — The Uses of ICTs in Education — Issues in the Use of ICTs in Education — Key Challenges in Integrating ICTs in Education — For Further Reading — Notes — About the Author

title: Template:ICT in Education


text:
X Window Programming/Qt

Introduction
Qt is a cross-platform application development framework, widely used for the development of graphical user interface programs, and, since the release of Qt 4, also used for developing non-GUI programs such as console tools and servers. Qt is most notably used in KDE, Qtopia and OPIE. It is produced by the Norwegian company Trolltech, formerly Quasar Technologies and was later bought by Nokia. Trolltech insiders pronounce Qt as "cute".

Qt uses standard C++, but extends the language by providing an additional pre-processor that converts Qt's extensions into pure C++. Qt can also be used by programmers using other languages; bindings exist for Python (PyQt), Ruby, PHP, C, Perl, Pascal, and Java (Jambi). It runs on all major platforms, and has extensive internationalization support. Non-GUI features include SQL database access, XML parsing, thread management, and a unified cross-platform API for file handling.

Varieties
Qt is released by Trolltech on the following platforms:

 * Qt/X11 — Qt for X Window System
 * Qt/Mac — Qt for Apple MacOS X
 * Qt/Windows — Qt for Microsoft Windows
 * Qt/Embedded — Qt for embedded platforms (PDA, Smartphone, ...)
 * Qt/Jambi — Qt for Java platform Development.

There are four editions of Qt available on each of these platforms, namely:

 * Qt Console — edition for non-GUI development.
 * Qt Desktop Light — entry level GUI edition, stripped of network and database support.
 * Qt Desktop  — complete edition.
 * Qt Open Source Edition — complete edition for open source developers.

The first three editions are released under a commercial license which permits closed source development; while the Open Source edition is available under the GPL license, and the LGPL (starting with version 4.5) and additionally under the Q Public License (QPL) for the Qt/X11 version.

In case of the X11 platform, the QPL allows the final application to be licensed under various open source licenses, such as the LGPL or the Artistic license. For the Windows and Mac OS X platforms, the GPL is the only Open Source license available so the applications developed with it must be GPL as well.

All editions support a wide range of compilers, including the GCC C++ compiler. Official support for the Visual Studio suite is, however, restricted to the commercial Qt/Windows edition. The Q../Free project has released several patches which add support for Microsoft Visual Studio and Borland C++ Builder to the open-source version of Qt/Windows.

Current
Trolltech released Qt 4 on June 28, 2005 and introduced five new technologies in the framework:

 * Tulip A set of template container classes.
 * Interview A model/view architecture for item views.
 * Arthur A 2D painting framework.
 * Scribe A Unicode text renderer with a public API for performing low-level text layout.
 * MainWindow A modern action-based main window, toolbar, menu, and docking architecture.

Qt 4 is dual-licensed under GPL and proprietary licenses on all supported platforms including Windows (while Qt/Windows 3.3 is only released under a proprietary license).

Qt 4.1, released on December 19, 2005, introduced integrated SVG Tiny support, a PDF backend to Qt's printing system, and a few other features.

Qt 4.2, released on October 4, 2006, introduced native CSS support for widget styling, as well as the QGraphicsView framework for efficient rendering of thousands of 2D objects onscreen, to replace Qt 3.x's QCanvas class.

History
Haavard Nord and Eirik Chambe-Eng (the original developers of Qt and the CEO and President of Trolltech respectively) began development of "Qt" in 1991, three years before the company was incorporated as Quasar Technologies, then changed the name to Troll Tech, and then to Trolltech.

The toolkit was called Qt because the letter Q looked beautiful in Haavard's Emacs font, and T was inspired by Xt, the X toolkit.

Controversy erupted around 1998 when it became clear that KDE was going to become one of the leading desktop environments for GNU/Linux. As KDE was based on Qt, many people in the open source and free software movements were worried that an essential piece of one of their major operating systems would be proprietary.

This gave rise to two efforts: the Harmony toolkit which sought to duplicate the Qt Toolkit under a free software license and the GNOME desktop that was meant to supplant KDE entirely. The GNOME Desktop uses the GTK+ toolkit which was written for the GIMP, and mainly uses the C programming language.

Until version 1.45, source code for Qt was released under the FreeQt license — which was viewed as not compliant to the open source principle by the Open Source Initiative and Free Software Foundation because while the source was available it did not allow the redistribution of modified versions. With the release of version 2.0 of the toolkit, the license was changed to the QPL, a free software license but one regarded by the Free Software Foundation as incompatible with the GPL. Compromises were sought between KDE and Trolltech wherein Qt would not be able to fall under a more restrictive license than the QPL, even if Trolltech was bought out or went bankrupt. This led to the creation of the KDE Free Qt foundation, which guarantees that Qt would fall under a BSD license should no open source version of Qt be released during 12 months.

The first versions of Qt had only two flavors: Qt/X11 for Unix and Qt/Windows for the Windows platform. The Windows platform was only available under the commercial license. In the end of 2001, Trolltech released Qt 3.0 which added support for the Mac OS X platform. The Mac OS X support was available only in the commercial license, until June 2003, where Trolltech released the version 3.2 with Mac OS X support available under the GPL license.

In 2002 members of the KDE on Cygwin project began porting the GPL licensed Qt/X11 code base to Windows. This was in response to Trolltech's refusal to license Qt/Windows under the GPL on the grounds that Windows was not an open-source platform. The project achieved reasonable success although it never reached production quality. Qt/Windows 4 was released under the GPL by Trolltech in June 2005. Qt4 now supports the same set of platforms in the Open Source editions as in the commercial edition.

Design
The innovation of Qt when it was first released relied on a few key concepts.

Complete abstraction of the GUI
Qt uses its own paint engine and controls. This makes the work of porting to other platforms easier because very few classes in Qt depended really on the target platform. Qt used to emulate the native look of its intended platforms, which occasionally led to slight discrepancies where that emulation wasn't perfect. This, however, no longer applies because the latest versions of Qt use the native styles API of the different platforms to draw the Qt controls.

Meta Object Compiler
Known as the moc, this is a tool that one must run on the sources of a Qt program prior to compiling it. The tool will generate "Meta Information" about the classes used in the program. This meta information is used by Qt to provide programming features not available in C++: introspection and the signals and slots|signal/slot system.

The use of an additional tool has been criticised by part of the C++ community, stating that Qt programming is making a mockery of C++. In particular, the choice of an implementation based on macros has been criticized for its absence of type safety. Some people confused the macros with new C++ keywords, and criticized the pollution of the namespace. This is viewed by Trolltech as a necessary trade-off to provide introspection and dynamically generated slots or signals. Further, when Qt 1.x was released, consistency between compiler template implementations could not be relied upon.

The use of moc allows for a very flexible signal/slot messaging system, so that multiple signals can connect to multiple slots, to other signals, or to slots on different threads, in a "callback safe" manner.

Examples

 * Mandel is an interactive, multiplatform and multilingual program  by Wolf Jung for drawing the Mandelbrot set and Julia sets, and for illustrating and researching their mathematical properties. It's graphical user interface is based on Qt. It is available on Linux, Unix, Windows, and Mac. The source code is available under the GNU General Public License.

title: X Window Programming/Qt


text: Category:Book:Internet Governance

title: Category:Book:Internet Governance


text:
Template:Internet Governance

 Internet Governance

Foreword — Preface — Introduction — Background and Key Concepts — Issues and Actors — Internet Governance and Development — Models and Concepts — Conclusion: Best Practices and Looking Forward — Works Cited and Suggestions for Further Reading — Appendix 1: Selected Organizations Involved in Internet Governance — Appendix 2: Additional Background — Notes — About the Author — APDIP /Templates

title: Template:Internet Governance


text:
Talk:Linguistics/Morphology

Added infix / circumfix to affix topics:

Infix - Tagalog /sulat/ --> /sumulat/ "one who wrote" Circumfix - indonesian "raja" = king; "kerajaan" = kingdom

--RMann 18:44, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

title: Talk:Linguistics/Morphology


text:
User talk:HDBot

I have given you the bot flag temporarily, so that you can tag the unlicensed images. If you would like to keep your bot flag after this job is done, you are going to need to go through a regular WB:RFA vote. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 18:58, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

 * I don't understand the bot flag business, can you explain, pls? marz 21:58, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

title: User talk:HDBot


text:
WebObjects/Testing/Load Testing WO Apps with JMeter

It is possible to use the JavaPlaybackManager to load test your WO apps, but you will likely be frustrated by bugs and lack of features. A much more robust and feature-full utility is Apache Jakarta's JMeter

WebObjects, being less well-known, is not fully supported out-of-the-box, so we will need a bit of help with:
 * URL-stored session IDs
 * instance IDs

Happily, these two critical pieces of information can be retrieved in a single step by adding a Regular Expression Extractor to the first HTTP Request node that hits your application. Use a regular expression like this:

/cgi-bin/WebObjects/MyApp.woa/([-0-9]+)/wo/([^/]+)

And a template like this:

$1$$2$

Set Match No. to 1 and Default Value to "" (blank). Then, set the Reference Name to whatever name you want to use, for example, "sessionid". The instance number will then be available to future test steps as ${sessionid_g1} and the session ID as ${sessionid_g2}. Your second HTTP Request, for example, might have a URL of:

/cgi-bin/WebObjects/MyApp.woa/${sessionid_g1}/wo/${sessionid_g2}/0.0.13.3


text:
User talk:169.204.229.74

Please do not replace Wikibooks pages with blank content. Blank pages are harmful to Wikibooks because they have a tendency to confuse readers. If it is a duplicate article, please redirect it to an appropriate existing page. If the page has been vandalised, please revert it to the last legitimate version. If you feel that the content of a page is inappropriate, please edit the page and replace it with appropriate content. If you believe there is no hope for the page, please see the deletion policy for how to proceed. If page is no longer useful, insert delete to its top. Thanks for contributing to Wikibooks! -- Herby talk thyme 19:35, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

title: User talk:169.204.229.74


text:
User:Mateo1983

About Me
Hi, my name is Matthew. I signed up here at Wikibooks to help with adding to and cleaning up articles, particularly in the areas of Calculus, Differential Equations, and Physics with Calculus.

title: User:Mateo1983


text:
Cookbook:Magic Brownies

A magic brownie is a brownie that has been infused with cannabis. Eating the brownie results in a cannabis high one to a few hours after consumption—as a result, care should be taken not to eat too many of them to avoid adverse effects.

Ingredients

 * 4 g cannabis, ground
 * 60 g (½ stick/2.1 oz) butter
 * 300 g (3½ cups/11 oz) chocolate chips
 * 180 ml (¾ cup/160 g/5.6 oz) white granulated sugar
 * 2 standard eggs
 * 5 ml (1 teaspoon) vanilla extract
 * 1 pinch of salt
 * Grated lemon zest
 * 250 g (1¾ cups/8.8 oz) self-raising flour

Procedure

 * 1) Melt the butter in a small saucepan, and stir in the cannabis. Cook slowly over a low temperature for 2–3 hours. Do not allow to boil or exceed 200 °F (93°C).
 * 2) If desired, strain the butter to remove the cannabis solids.
 * 3) Melt the chocolate chips in the microwave or over a double boiler. Combine the melted chocolate and infused butter, stirring until smooth.
 * 4) Stir in the sugar, and allow the mixture to cool if needed.
 * 5) Stir in the eggs, vanilla, salt, and lemon zest until smooth.
 * 6) Fold in the flour just until combined.
 * 7) Transfer the batter to a greased and/or parchment-lined pan.
 * 8) Bake at 360°F/180°C for about 20–25 minutes or until a toothpick inserted in the center comes out without any batter on it.

Notes, tips, and variations

 * Try using brown cane sugar instead of white sugar.
 * Melt some chocolate and mix with a little sugar, vanilla, lemon, and a little more weed. Drizzle on the freshly cooked brownies for a little added flavour and high. This creates a nicer tasting brownie with more of a kick.
 * Try adding a few crushed up biscuits before baking for a more varied taste.

title: Cookbook:Magic Brownies


text:
Template:Haskell/Elementary Haskell

Recursion Lists II (map) Lists III (folds, comprehensions) Type declarations Pattern matching Control structures More on functions Higher-order functions Using GHCi effectively

title: Template:Haskell/Elementary Haskell


text:
Template:Haskell/Intermediate Haskell

Modules Standalone programs Indentation More on datatypes Other data structures Classes and types The Functor class

title: Template:Haskell/Intermediate Haskell


text:
English as an Additional Language/Relative clauses

Relative clauses are used to expand sentences and provide extra information.

 * I live with my mother.
 * I live with my mother, who's very strict.

The second sentence is a relative clause. It uses a relative pronoun (who) to provide extra information about the object of the sentence (mother). In English you have a choice of relative pronouns to use. The following section lists the most common relative pronouns.

Who (or that)
Who is used to refer to people.

Which (or that)
Which is used to refer to object (including animals).

Where
Where is used to refer to places.

Whose
Who is used with people when you are referring to an object which is owned / possessed by that person.

When
When is used to refer to times and occasions.


text:
English as an Additional Language/Plural forms of nouns

Generally, making plurals (more than 1 of something) is very easy in English.

Plural Formation
For almost all nouns we form the plural by adding s.

 * I have an apple
 * I have 5 apples.

For nouns which end with the letter y we form the plural by removing the y and adding ies.

 * I have a fly
 * I have 5 flies.

For nouns which end with the letter s (dress), ch (beach), x (box), sh (bush) or z (quiz), we form the plural by adding es.

 * I have a bus.
 * I have 5 buses.

Irregular Noun Plural Formation
There are also a small number of nouns which are irregular. The first word in the following list is the singular form and the second word is the plural form:

 * child - children
 * man - men
 * woman - women
 * foot - feet
 * tooth - teeth
 * goose - geese
 * mouse - mice
 * fish - fish
 * sheep - sheep
 * deer - deer
 * advice - advice
 * information - information
 * data - data

As you can see, with some words there is no change to form the plural. The plural form and the singular form are exactly the same.


text:
Talk:Java Programming/JavaBeans/Introduction to JavaBeans

Please click on the "+" sign on the top to include a new question regarding this topic and your question will be answered by one of the authors on this book.


text:
Wikijunior talk:The Elements/Bose-Einstein condensates

Not needed/too complicated
Bose-Einstein Condensates are far to advanced and complicated to be easily explained in a children's book. If we explain this we should explain Super-solids and super-liquids, which would turn this book more about physics and states of matter rather than about elements. N1person 00:17, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Not convinced, yet.
I disagree, I'm not totally convinced. You could quite possibly be right, but The original author included B-E condensates as one of the five states of matter. So I created and extrapolated it. Perhaps you could contribute to the project and rectify it? Cheers --Read-write-services 04:16, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Too complicated, too esoteric
I think that for 8-12 year olds, this is more than a bit too advanced. I see no reason to include this, because it would be very difficult for children to relate to. —Preceding unsigned comment added by FerrousWolf (discuss • contribs) 03:38, 14 February 2007

Not appropriate for this age level
The reading level and concept load of this is too high for this age level. Suggest dropping it from this book. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kfasimpaur (discuss • contribs) 22:59, 18 May 2007

 * I agree. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.150.225.214 (discuss • contribs) 17:45, 29 October 2007

 * Perhaps just mentioning that there are other states of matter and talking about how they differ from the "big 4" states in an article called something like "other states of matter" might be a good idea. -- xixtas  talk 14:55, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

 * Perhaps a compromise may be in order, a section on the main page about states of matter that briefly mentions other parts of matter, but does not go too deep into detail. The topic of Bose-Einstein Condensates is much too convoluted and esoteric for the target age group to understand. Given that there's nothing within the book's page nor any pages in the book link back to it via hyperlink, I propose that the page be deleted. RoofToilet1107 (discuss • contribs) 00:55, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

 * You've noted the related fragments of discussion at 1, 2?
 * I think the current text in the book is pretty good; it doesn't say the four phases are the only ones, just the main ones, so, no lying on that point, and the discussion seems to me to hang together pretty well. I don't see where a mention of other phases would fit in without just confusing things.  Do you have thoughts on how to weave it in?  (I don't think deletion is really called for, btw; I'd recommend either a history merge, or simply a hatnote on the page explaining its status.)  --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 04:49, 8 April 2017 (UTC)


text:
Adventist Youth Honors Answer Book/First aid/Spider bites

Spiders in the United States are generally harmless, with several exceptions. The most notable are the black widow and brown recluse spiders. Their bites are serious but rarely fatal.

Bites by non-poisonous spiders should be treated the same as insect bites. Bites by poisonous spiders should be treated as follows:
 * 1) Place ice over the bite to reduce pain.
 * 2) Hospitalize victims who are under 16 or over 65 for observation.
 * 3) Be prepared to give antivenin in severe cases.

|


text:
Adventist Youth Honors Answer Book/First aid/Kneecap splint

Carefully straighten  the  injured  limb. Immobilize the fracture by placing a padded board under the  injured  limb. The board  should  be  at least 4 inches wide and should reach from the but- tock  to  the  heel. Place extra  padding  under  the knee and just above the heel, as shown in the illustration. Use strips  of  bandage  to  fasten  the  leg  to the board in four places: (1) just below the knee; (2) just above the knee; (3) at the ankle; and (4) at  the  thigh. DO NOT  COVER  THE  KNEE ITSELF. Swelling is likely to occur very rapidly, and any  bandage  or  tie  fastened  over  the  knee would quickly become too tight. Treat the victim for shock  and  evacuate  as  soon  as  possible.

|


text:
Harmonica/Playing with Amp

Generation of the tone
Just like why rockers would want an electrical guitar and Marshall amps, the reason why most people want to play play through the amplifier is the tonal quality. Using the same analogy, people would be searching all over the place for said tone: wanting a certain microphone, with a certain amp, and when they found out it still sounded different from the idol that they like, they are trying to figure out ways to customize it in order to achieve that sound...

Let's wait for a second there. What is "that sound"?

Surprisingly, the composition of a sound come mainly from a player themselves; in fact, according to some players, it's 95.5% of his sound. A player is the one that decided which notes to play (intonation), when to play such note (timing), and any other techniques such as vibrato and tremolo. Amplification and effect units may change the notes, but it just change whatever notes you play. If you already sound bad, the effect units and amplifier will only make it even worse!

Obviously, a badly tuned instrument is going to sound bad. However, even if you have a fine tuned instrument, if you are coughing and hacking into the harmonica, you are gonna sound bad, while a poorly tuned instrument can be temporary rescued with sufficient knowledge (though player should still get it in tuned ASAP!)

Well, that would be it for acoustic playing; however, for those that want to play it loudly, or simply want the tone, that will note be enough.

Do you actually need amplifier?
But before you go on, you have to ask yourself: do you actually need that certain setup — Bullet mic and Fender Blues Junior, for example. Obviously, if you are playing live, or practicing for playing live, you will need a microphone and some kind of amplification. However, that doesn't mean you have to get a certain microphone with certain amplifier — if at all! With research, it is found out that Little Walter, who is the basis of the typical "Chicago Blues sound" (and what many harmonicist want to copy), didn't really care what amplifier he used or even what microphone he used... since the main purpose is  to be able to play loud. At one gig, he may have used a JT-30 hooked into a P.A. amplifier. At another, he may have used a custom made (meaning you cannot buy it no matter what). During an interview, Walter also stated that he liked one "just as good as a P.A. system". Also, there is no evidence that Little Walter used any effect units (which was not even available during Walter's time), and he himself said he didn't know how those effects got onto his records. As for the microphones? During tours, he ended up playing and singing with whatever was available in the venue. Though while he did use the JT-30 bullet microphone (or a biscuit microphone, which has the same element), at one time he brought his own microphone, he used a Shure 777-x, a small, marker-sized microphone.

So what this all basically sums up to is that to simply play live, you simply play loud. Anything that can amplify the sound loudly over the room is basically good enough to play live. Stating you need bullet mic and Blues Junior is like saying you must dress up in some certain ways to perform (Okay, maybe metal, but we are talking about Little Walter's sound, not Black Sabbath). What makes Little Walter one of the best is the fact that he could create music, by himself — not whatever equipment he have.

As for recording, you do not need a good effect unit or amplifier, either, especially if you are using your computer. Many modern computer audio workstations, including Audacity, have numerous effects to produce the sound you want. For recording, it would be far better to ground the equipment and use a mic that can capture clean sounds.

On the other hand, if you truly want to deliver a certain sound that is to be your hallmark (e.g.: Metal Harmonica), read on.

Microphone
Based on the above analysis, the microphone would be the most important aspect, next to the tone and then instrument. Afterall, a P.A. amplifier is supposed to be very clean, thus any distortion would be likely from the microphone.

Type of Microphones
There are three ways to sort the type of microphones: the capturing element, impedance, and by design.

Element classifications

 * dynamic
 * capacitor
 * ribbon

Impedance
Okay, there are just two kinds: high impedance, and low impedance.

Shape classification

 * Standard and pen
 * Bullet The standard harmonica microphone, it can easily double as a vocal microphone.
 * Ball
 * mini/lapel While they may have different shapes, they are all basically really small, no larger than a finger joint. Due to the smaller nature, its element isn't as good, and thus will provide lots of distortion, which could be good or bad depend on situations.
 * Coverall clip-on For chromatic harmonica, coverall would be the best choice, since your hands do not need to support the microphone, while its cup-shape that covers the entire opening is able to capture all the sounds. Unfortunately, due to the decline needs of chromatic in North America, it's hard to find an overall microphone. However, over at Taiwan, they have manufactured a coverall design that clips over any 16-holes chromatics. Keep in mind that due to this, it can only be used by harmonica in most case.

How to hold the microphone
Obviously, for coverall, you just need to clip onto the harmonica, and that's that.

For mini/lapel microphones, all you have to do is to slip the head between two fingers, and hold them there. Some will actually have ergonomic holders, such as the Harmonica Honker, but otherwise the principle is the same for all of them.

For standard, pen, bullet, and ball, you need to hold that big thingamajig, and then cup it. Place two fingers around the mic to create an air pocket.

Amplifier
Although it is a simple matter to walk into the first music shop you see and pick out a guitar amplifier ("amp") at random, you will probably be unsatisfied with the results of this method. If you take a couple of mintues to figure out what you are shopping for, you will be able to make a purchase that you will enjoy for years to come.

Size and Wattage
Determine the size of the amp you will need. Amps are rated by wattage rather than physical size (although high-wattage amps do tend to be physically larger). By wattage, there are essentially three main categories of guitar amplifiers (combos, heads, and rack-mounted amplifiers), with several subcategories:

Combo Amps
Combo (combination) amps combine the amplifier electronics with one or more speakers in a one-piece package. They are the alternative to "heads," which contain only the electronics, and are attached to separate speaker packages (known as "cabinets" or "cabs"). Because it is a one-piece unit, the combo design is generally preferred for smaller, lower-wattage amps. The following are the most common varieties of combo amp:

 * Micro/Headphone amps: 1-10 watts. These are tiny, ultra-portable amps which are useful for practice on the go (or when others are trying to sleep), and is usually best for using with a headphone. They don't pack enough volume to be used in most "jam" situations (where you must be heard above other musicians). As a rule, their sound quality tends to be poor (when compared to larger amps). The Marshall MS-2 is an example of a super-portable (1 watt) micro amp which has received good reviews.

 * Practice amps: 10-30 watts. Practice amps are also suited for the bedroom/living room environment, although the loudest of them may be used for small gigs (performances), especially if a microphone is used to run them through the venue's PA system. As with micro amps, practice amps tend to compare unfavorably to larger units in terms of sound quality, although as they approach the 30 watt level, a few models offer increasingly competitive sound. As a general rule, the best practice amps have at least a 10-inch speaker. This is the smallest speaker size which is generally considered a "real speaker." If you don't have a 10-inch (or larger) speaker, don't try to use the amp outside the bedroom. The embarrassment you save will be your own. These usually cost around 60 to 150 dollars. For most beginners, a 15 watt amp will be more than enough for your bedroom and small gigs.
 * "Busking" amps: In essence, they are practice amps that have a battery attached. Naturally, that means they are gonna be more expensive. 15 watts on average, but Pignose Hog 30 can go to 30 watts. They will usually provide 6 to 10 hours in one charge. Also, make sure they can take AC power in too when needed. Do note that they are actually quite weak, especially considering that any automobile's noise easily drowns it out. On the other hand, rock and metal music is not exactly busking music, either — soft and light music that add to the atmosphere (usually a park or something) is usually preferred, and thus, the watt amounts is usually enough.

 * Full-size 1x12 combos: With 50 or more watts of power and one 12 inch speaker, the 1x12 amp offers the smallest package which is considered suitable as a stand-alone amplifier for small gigs. In better models, sound quality begins to approach levels acceptable to professional musicians. Quality is always important, but perhaps even more so in the case of the 1x12 combo - with a good one, you'll prove the doubters wrong, but with one of the many duds, you won't be taken seriously. The 1x12 is not a big amp, and if you want to bring it to a serious audition or gig without enduring a storm of eye-rolling and chuckling, it had better stand out from the crowd. These cost about 180 to 450 dollars.

 * 2x12 combos are similar to 1x12 combos, but they add a second 12-inch speaker. The 2x12 design is considerably heavier and bulkier than the 1x12, but it is still a favorite choice of working musicians for performances at small to medium-sized venues. The addition of a second speaker allows for certain stereo effects, and two speakers simply move more air than one (allowing more "presence" in your sound). The 2x12 amp is small enough to be used in the living room, light enough to be lugged around by someone without major back problems, and yet formidable enough to be taken seriously at rehearsals, auditions, and even on stage. If you have to buy a single amp for practice, rehearsals, and club gigs, a 2x12 is a good choice. You'll occasionally slip and set the volume knob a bit too high (annihilating your unfortunate neighbors), and you'll be tempted to gripe about lugging 50-80 pounds worth of amp all over the place, but it will all be worthwhile when you avoid being "The Guy Who Showed Up to the Audition or Gig With a Practice Amp." That guy usually becomes an "inside story" for the band to tell other musicians when everybody needs a laugh. These cost about 180 to 450 dollars.

There are other types of combos, but these are the mainstays. Having discussed them, we are ready to move on to heads and stacks.

Heads, Cabinets, and Stacks
A head is an amplifier without speakers. A cabinet ("cab") is a stand-alone speaker enclosure, which can be connected to a head. A stack is a head and a set of cabinets connected together, ready for use. Stacks are generally preferred for gigs rather than practice, although there's no rule against having an enormous stack in your living room - if your family allows it. Fair warning: in most cases, they won't. Stacks are physically bulky, very heavy, and devastatingly LOUD. These are the tools of musicians who either play arenas and stadiums on a regular basis - or at least dream of doing so.

When purchasing the two, make sure of the ohmage of the cabinet match with the power rating for the head at that ohmage. Make sure the cabs RMS rating is about the same as the head's power output at the ohmage of the cab. A head can be solid-state or tube, the latter being less durable, but sounds better and is more expensive. A good solid-state head costs 200 to 600 dollars and a good tube head costs 500 to 1400 dollars. A cab in a half stack should be a 1x15, a 2x12, a 4x10 or a 6x10. These typically range from 250 to 650 dollars.

 * Heads are all roughly the same size physically, but they come in a variety of wattages. "Small" heads pack 50-100 watts. Full-power heads are generally 100 watts or more. There are also super heads, boasting a tinnitus-inducing 200-400 watts of power. For performances at small to medium-size venues, a small head is more than enough. The smaller heads are often connected to a single 4x12 cabinet (which contains four 12 inch speakers, as the name suggests). This type of setup is known as a "half stack," and it is a favorite of working musicians. The half stack offers plenty of volume, the presence of four speakers, and the "credibility" associated with stacks.

 * The full stack is the dream of many a guitarist. This is usually a 100 watt head connected to two 4x12 cabinets, although other wattages are sometimes employed. The cabinets are stacked vertically (one on top of the other), giving the setup its distinctive name. A full stack is as tall as a grown man, making for quite an impressive sight. The sound is equally impressive. If you set one of these up in your living room and play it to its full capabilities, you will be evicted from the neighborhood (unless you are an isolated hermit). A full stack can handle all but the very largest of venues. Guitarists who are truly sadistic (in a sonic sense), such as some heavy metal players, may run one of the 200-400 watt super heads through a full stack. With any full stack (and especially the "hot rod" setups), you will require ear protection to play at higher volumes without sustaining potentially serious ear damage.

Stacks are great for playing big venues (and for impressing your friends), but if you aren't a working or touring musician, they can be "overkill" for most situations. Lugging around full-size 4x12 speaker cabinets is hard work, fit only for "roadies" who are getting paid to do it. Showing up to an audition with a full stack and a hand truck to set it up can be almost as bad as showing up with a practice amp. If you lug in a stack, you'd better have the skills to justify it, or (once again), you'll become another "inside story" for the band to chuckle about after rehearsal - "The Newbie Guy Who Brought a Full Stack to the Audition."

In anycase, for harmonica players, anything that is bigger than combo is overkill.

Rack-Mounted Products
Many musicians use "racks," usually a reinforced metal box with removable panels on the front and back. The front side of the rack, when open, has two verticale rows of threaded screw holes on the sides. Rack sizes have been standardized for years—they are made to fit ALL rack-moutable units, including recording gear, PA amplifiers, vocal processors, chromatic tuners, DJ gear, etc. in addition to guitar amps. Rack-mounted products have a sturdy metal face plate strong enough to support the entire product; they are a standard width, a standard maximum depth, and are usually much shorter than they are tall or deep. The face plate is wider than the rest of the unit and has screw holes on each corner, spaced to line up with the screw holes on the front of any rack. To attach gear to the rack, lay your rack on its backside, place the unit in the rack so that the unit dangles down into the rack, its entire weight supported by the face plate, line it up with the screw holes, and fasten it at each corner with properly-sized screws. The smallest rack products are the shortest, covering only two screw holes—these are said to take up "one rack space." A larger product that covers up four screw holes on your rack takes up "two rack spaces," and so on. To figure out how many spaces a rack has, count the screw holes on one side and divide it by two.

A rack-mounted guitar amplifier rig is similar to heads in that they have separate amplifier components that are plugged into external speaker cabinets. But nearly all rack-mounted amplifiers are broken down into two further categories—the pre-amp and the power amp. Both heads and combos have these separate components as well—racks merely separate them out into two units. Most major amplifier manufacturers, including Marshall, Carvin, Mesa-Boogie, and Peavey make rack-mountable amp rigs.

 * The Pre-Amp shapes the signal entering your amplifier into a tone. In its basic form, a pre-amp defines the levels of treble, bass, and middle in your tone.  However, functions such as gain, presence, and contour have become standard features of modern guitar amplifiers, and rack-mountable pre-amps usually have many more functions indeed—they are essentially effects processors.  Footpedal multi-effects processors are also pre-amps.  Plug your guitar into the pre-amp.  Most rack pre-amps only take up one rack space.
 * The Power Amp is connected to the pre-amp by a speaker cable. It takes the signal the pre-amp shaped and gives it volume.  Like heads, power amps are available in different sizes, from a minimum of 50 watts to monster 200-400W power amps.  100W or larger power amps will take up two rack spaces.  The power amp plugs into the speaker cab like on a head.  However, as many power amps as you want can be connected in a daisy chain or to different pre-amp outputs to boost the power of the signal, as well as possibly blend the tonal influences of two different power amps.

Disadvantages of Rack Rigs. As you can probably tell, racks are frequently very complicated rigs. A novice guitarrist may find them perplexing. They are also heavier and bulkier than heads—and add onto that the bulk and heft of the rack itself. Since you need to buy multiple products and accessories, the price for a new rack rig can be (but isn't always) higher than that of a head.

Advantages of Rack Rigs. On the other hand, using a rack allows you to mix and match products by different manufacturers and find a tone that is distinctly "yours," not the boutique design concept of some engineer at Marshall or Fender. And if you have a reasonably good mind for engineering or basic spatial sequencing (i.e. lining things up in order), even complicated digital pre-amps can be surprisingly user-friendly, providing a more easy-to-understand interface than a row of inscrutable knobs on the front of a head or combo. If you are already a DJ, vocalist, or recording artist, or want to become any one of these, many valuable products are available that can be mounted right on the same rack with your amplifier.

Also, big racks frequently have caster wheels, making them very easy to roll around, and having a rack can also simplify pre-gig or -practise setup. Instead of having to plug in all your components from scratch, your components can already be plugged in and ready to go as soon as you wheel your rack onto the stage or into the studio and remove the front and back panels. A rack-mountable power conditioner (essentially a rack-mounted power strip with surge protection) can be invaluable to this end as most rack units are independently powered—simply plug all your products into the conditioner, then whenever you arrive at a gig or practice, plug in the one master power cable from the conditioner, plug in your speaker cab and guitar, switch everything on, and you're ready to rock. If you have pedals, microphones, etc., you can usually fit them into the rack as well, making it your all-purpose, highly-portable gig box (provided that it's on wheels).

Finally, racks are uncommon, and will attract attention. People will be impressed if you wheel a rack rig into rehearsal or performance, but beware—they will expect you to be a seasoned guitarrist, or at least be able to effectively USE your rack. Don't bring your rack anywhere unless you know how to get those pre-amps and processors to do exactly what you want them to do. Such professionals asU2's The Edge and Nirvana's Kurt Cobain have favored rack rigs.

MIDI. Many rack-mounted pre-amps are digital and use MIDI (Musical Instrument Digital Interface) technology. This allows pre-amp settings to be saved in the pre-amp's digital memory to be recalled again later at the push of a button. These buttons can be on the faceplate of the unit, but MIDI pedalboards can be utilized to access those pre-set channels by stepping on footpedal buttons, to prevent a guitarrist from having to go to his rack and search out the right setting in the dark between each song.

Selecting the Right Sound
In order to get the most from a guitar amplifier, you need to understand how different types of amps suit different styles of music. For the most part, amps are not "one size fits all." Although there are all sorts of amps, they can be classified in two broad categories - "vintage" and "high gain."

Tone Wars
Vintage amps produce (or reproduce) the classic sounds of early amplifiers. For the jazz, blues, or blues-rock guitarist, the vintage sound is still widely considered the best tone available. Vintage amps can be actual antiques, or they can be modern amps that replicate the sound of antique amps. The sound of Fender, Vox, Marshall, and similar amplifiers from the 50's, 60's and early 70's is the foundation of the vintage tone. When you think "vintage," you think Hendrix, Led Zeppelin, Eric Clapton, Deep Purple, etc. These are the sounds that started it all.

High-gain amps produce a sound with greater distortion than that of vintage amps. Although there is some debate about the evolution of high-gain amps, many believe that a large part of their history is owed to Eddie Van Halen, who took apart his vintage-style Marshall head and played around with the electronics, allowing him to get far more gain (the source of the classic rock/metal distortion sound). With his landmark "Eruption" solo in 1977, Van Halen introduced the roaring, face-melting sound of super high gain to the guitar community. At around the same time, the emergence of heavy metal bands added another dimension to the high-gain phenomena. For hard rock and heavy metal music from the early 80's and beyond, vintage amps are overshadowed by their modern high-gain counterparts.

If you want to play jazz, blues, blues-rock (in the style of Led Zeppelin) or very early heavy metal (in the style of Black Sabbath), a vintage amp may be your best choice. If you want to play hard rock, 80's metal, and "shred" guitar (in the style of the countless 80's "guitar heroes"), you will probably want to go with a high-gain model. Note that many newer amps can provide both high-gain and vintage sounds, although some purists feel that the only vintage amps worth playing are the actual antique amplifiers themselves. "Amp modeling" technnology (which allows one amp to simulate the sound of many different amps) is a relatively recent development which has both fans and critics. If you don't plan to specialize exclusively in vintage-style music, a modeling amp can be very useful, although if you're a purist, nothing beats walking in with a real Fender Twin Reverb, an ancient Marshall "Plexi" head, or something similar.

Tube vs Solid State
In the vintage days, all amplifiers used vacuum tubes to accomplish the actual amplification. Nowadays, many amps use transistors instead, sparking a long-standing debate about which is better. The consensus is that for almost all types of music, the sound of tubes is noticeably superior. However, tubes have several drawbacks:

 * Tubes can be expensive, depending the tubes used. Expect to replace them after 4 or more years of use, depending on their quality and how loud/often they are used.
 * Tubes are somewhat unreliable. They can and do go out at random times, crippling the amp. This can be alleviated by using good quality tubes.
 * Tubes (and the associated design factors) add considerable weight to the amplifier. Back problems caused by skinny guitar players lugging around big 2x12 tube combos are an insurance company's nightmare.
 * Tube amps are, generally speaking, more pricey than solid-state amps. You will almost certainly pay more for this ancient technology than you will pay for modern solid-state (transistor) electronics. There are tube amps, however, like the Fender Blues Jr., that go for roughly $300; the Fender Hot Rod Deluxe (which is an extremely loud, 40 Watt, 1x12 amp), goes for about $550-$600. A Vox AC-30 2x12" reissue, on the other hand, will set you back no less than $1200; and a Marshall head + half stack can be well over $2000.

If you can afford a tube amp, you should strongly consider buying one. In almost all cases, the sound is noticeably better. One possible exception to this is for heavy metal players. Many metal guitarists find that the harsher sound of transistors suits their style of music. Given the reliability, weight, and price advantages of solid-state amps, even the professional-level heavy metal guitarist may not require a tube amp. Pantera's Darrell Abbott used solid-state amps, as do many other notable heavy metal musicians.

Your amp will have two different kinds of tubes—pre-amp tubes and power-amp tubes (a few combos and heads mix and match between tube and solid-state pre-amps and power amps). Many modern guitarists have forgotten that the original rock 'n' roll "crunch" or distortion was created when guitarrists like Pete Townsend turned their amps' volume up to 7 or 8, causing the power tubes to overdrive. A pre-amp perameter called "Gain" has been added to most amps to simulate that overdriven distortion. But unless you're into the tinny thrash-metal sound, no artificial gain setting can compare to the sweet, distorted tone of overdriven power tubes turned up to 7. The problem is, most guitarrists, especially new ones, go whole hog for a 100W amp, which cannot be turned up to 7 or 8 in a small club without blowing the doors off. They turn their amps down to four or five, turn the gain up to ten, and never know what they are missing that they could get froma 50W amp turned to 7 with the gain down to 5. Angus Young of AC/DC plays live with both a 100W tube head turned up to 6 for his rhythm parts, and a 50W tube head cranked up to 10 for comparable volume but extra overdrive that he switched to for his solos.

Amp Modeler, Effect Unit, Modeling Amp
However, there is one more way to go loud while getting that particular tone, and that is to use a Amp Modeler: using embeded electronics, these modelers provide a very good approximation of a tube amp, and if you are going to hook up to a P.A. system most of the time, these may provide a much better alternative, as they are usually cheaper: The Behringer V-Amp 2, for example, is less than $100 dollars.

There are two kinds: one is an analog modeller, which is commonly used in modeling amp (Amplifier that actually tries its best to emulate a certain tone instead of just amping it), and digital computer modeling, such as Line6's POD 2.0. The benefit of using amp modeler is that it allows you to use such effects even in recording, as well as a more easy to maintain equipment — true tube, afterall, is a nightmare to maintain.

What amp modelers and effect units does not do, however, is provide the volume; for those, you will need to hook it up to a powerful amplifier, or a loud P.A. system.

Another solution is to use modeling amp with onboard effects, which is basically a combination of a very clean power amplifier with the tone modeling unit producing all the tone. Some may consider this as the Swiss-army knife of amplifier. The best of these amps can reproduce the sound of many other units with passable accuracy, and you have instant access to those cool effects that make even crappy guitarists sound good - delay, chorus, flanger, reverb, etc. With enough effects, your little old grandmother can sound like a rock star. Okay, that's an exaggeration, but if guys like me can sound good, you can too.

Tips

 * When shopping for an amp, price should not be your only consideration. Some lower-priced amps offer admirable sound, while you may find some costly amps unsuitable for your needs. To judge quality, read user reviews on various guitar websites. However, be aware that many equipment vendors publish only good reviews (to ensure product sales). Do your research and make an informed decision.
 * If you purchase a tube amp, try not to abuse it physically. In general, transistor (solid-state) units are designed to take loads of punishment, but tube amps are much more delicate. If your brand new (very expensive) Soldano tube head falls down a flight of stairs, you are probably in deep trouble - while the same thing happening to a solid-state combo will probably result in nothing more than a momentary panic and some laughs (after the fact). In short, do not kick, hurl, slam, pummel, or viciously bludgeon a tube amp - and try to discourage others from doing so. If you're wondering why such a warning is necessary, you probably haven't spent much time with rock musicians.
 * Unless you are playing heavy metal, it is generally better to buy a smaller amp with good tone than it is to buy a big loud amp that sounds cheesy. You will never regret having a nice tone, but you will always regret bad tone.  If you play with a band, you will likely find that you never need that much volume anyway unless you are playing an arena, and if you are reading this I don't see any arenas in your near future.  Buy a small tube amp with a nice sound.  Some music stores will try to sell loud amps with loads of effects to beginners.  Don't fall for that.  Don't fall for all of the "cool" effects; effects get old after a while.  Use your ears and pick an amp whose tone you absolutely love, and don't part with your money until you find that amp.
 * For most beginners, a 15 watt amp will be more than enough for your bedroom and small gigs.

Warnings

 * Buying a large combo or (especially) a stack for the purpose of wailing in your living room at all hours can lead to divorce at the minimum, and may even results in a court order for "disrupting the peace". So can spending $2000 on an amplifier without telling the wife (because you know she's going to say no). As a general rule, guitar equipment is to be treated as if family members had a restraining order against it. It doesn't matter if people pay good money to have you assault their eardrums with your frenzied solos every weekend, nobody at home is going to want to hear it (Not even the Osbornes). Whatever type of amp you buy, headphones are a must for home practice. Similarly, if you plan to install an enormous Marshall stack in your garage for rehearsals, make sure it's a detached garage. The Mrs. doesn't want to have Black Sabbath's "War Pigs" rattling windows and knocking pictures off the walls while she is entertaining her Saturday bridge club.

title: Harmonica/Playing with Amp


text:
Adventist Youth Honors Answer Book/First aid/Ankle splint

The figure-eight  bandage  is used  for dressings  of  the  ankle,  as  well  as  for  supporting a sprain. While keeping the foot at a right angle, start a 3-inch bandage around the instep for several turns to anchor it. Carry the bandage upward over the instep and around behind the ankle, forward, and again across the instep and down under the arch, thus completing one  figure-eight. Continue  the   figure-eight   turns, overlapping  one-third  to  one-half  the  width  of  the bandage and with an occasional turn around the ankle, until the compress is secured or until adequate support is obtained.

/Overlapping requirements


text:
Adventist Youth Honors Answer Book/First aid/Head injury

Head wounds must be treated with particular care, since there is always the possibility of brain damage. The general treatment for head wounds is the  same  as  that  for  other  fresh  wounds. However, certain  special  precautions  must  be observed  if  you  are  giving  first  aid  to  a  person who has suffered a head wound.

 * 1) NEVER GIVE ANY MEDICINE.
 * 2) Keep the victim lying flat, with the head at the level of the body. Do not raise the feet if the face is flushed.  If the victim is having trouble breathing, you may raise the head  slightly.
 * 3) If the wound is at the back of the head, turn the victim on his or her side.
 * 4) Watch closely for vomiting and position the head to avoid getting vomit or saliva into the lungs.
 * 5) Do not use direct pressure to control bleeding if the skull is depressed or obviously fractured.

|


text:
Operations Strategy/Preface

What does the book aim?
The aim of this book is to provide readers with significant knowledge about the concept of strategy sphering around processes or the day-to-day operations a company undergoes to provide its clients with a product or service, be it a profit generating or a non-profit generating organization. With case studies and analysis of current business trends, the book provides the reader with an activity-based approach to management and related trends.

The content of this book tends to:
 * Be inspired by business studies oriented graduate school level coursework and books. References are provided where necessary.
 * Be practical and contains issue dealt with in original scenarios. It contains examples of actual operations in various companies and researches by students at various universities.
 * Deal with the more broader subject of Functional and Manufacturing strategy at times to illustrate the boundary within which Operations strategy resides.

Whom is this book meant for?
This book is currently undergoing development and at this phase serves no good a purpose. But, at the turn of its completion, the book promises to be helpful for business school students at any level. This book is set at a slightly higher level for most undergraduate students. Though, as more books come into the WikiBooks portal, recommended prerequisites will be linked to this page.

title: Operations Strategy/Preface


text:
Operations Strategy/Acknowledgments and Contributions

Authors working on this book should include their details on this page.


text:
Operations Strategy/Overview

Introduction
To look at what operations strategy is, we would break the word into the two separate forming words: operations and strategy. Both these words act as antitheses to the other, see Slack and Lewis(2002). Where operations deals with the functions and procedures involved in the day-to-day processes of manufacturing goods and products, strategy deals with the direction and scope of an organisation over a long period of time on how they deliver to their clients. It turns out that the name itself holds information about the broad subject that tends to bind together routine process management, i.e., operations managements with a foresight of things forming up way ahead in the future.

In this chapter, we will focus on providing the reader with a proper definition of operations strategy and the difference between operations strategy and operations management. Furthermore, we will also shed light on how the market tends to stear the strategic focus of operations. At the end of this chapter, the user would have significant knowledge of:
 * What operations strategy is?
 * What the difference between operations strategy and operations management is?
 * How markets govern the strategic focus of operations?
 * How operations strategy helps a market mature and evolve?

Topics we'd be covering

 * Operations strategy: working on a definition
 * Difference between operations strategy and operations management
 * Approaches towards operations strategy

title: Operations Strategy/Overview


text:
Operations Strategy/What is operations strategy?/Operations strategy

Operations strategy
Companies and organizations making products and delivering, be it for profit or not for profit, rely on a handful of processes to get their products manufactured properly and delivered on time. Each of the process acts as an operation for the company. To the company this is essential. That is why managers find operations management more appealing. We begin this section by looking at what operations actually are. Operations strategy is to provide an overall direction that serves the framework for carrying out all the organization's functions.

Understanding operations
Have you ever imagined a car without a gear or the steering wheel? Whilst, what remains of an utmost importance to you is to drive the locomotive from one location to another for whatever purpose you wish, but can only be made possible with each and every part of the car working together and attached.

Organisations behave in the same manner. The company has an ultimate goal of delivering goods to a client, but the processes of designing, manufacturing, analyzing and then finally being delivered are the driving forces for the company's success. All these chunks of works processes that collectively define a bigger purpose, the operations for that particular organisation. The more effective these processes or operations would be, the more productive and profitable the business would be.

 Note: Goods, the ultimate by-product of a company, can be a product or a service. Take for instance, a car manufacturing company. For it, all operations would lead to the development and enhancement of a car, a product, something physical. But, to a therapist, the service he/she provides to their clients is the much needed result or required output. 1-	Corporate Strategy: -	Environmental scanning. -	Developing core competencies. -	Developing core processes. -	Global strategies. 2-	Market Analysis. 3-	Operations Strategy: -	Operations strategy implements corporate strategy.

A formal definition
According to Slack and Lewis, operations strategy holds the following definition: Operations strategy is the total pattern of decisions which shape the long-term capabilities of any type of operations and their contribution to the overall strategy.Operations strategy is the tool that helps to define the methods of producing goods or a service offered to the customer

In this section that follows, we'd be performing a surgery of the given definition in order to know what operations strategy actually means.


text:
Common Lisp/Basic topics/Lists

 * This module is far from finished. Improvements are welcome.

Lists in common lisp are built up from pairs called cons cells. Each cell has two parts, historically named car (for the first part) and cdr (for the remainder).

Lists are implemented with cons cells by having the cdr of the first cell point to another cons cell.

The empty list is also known as nil, it's written representation is either the literal nil or the empty list:.

You can create a list by using cons to construct a new cons cell with a left and right hand part:

Keep in mind that it is possible to create a cons cell which is not a list:

This is called a dotted list. To be a proper list, the final cdr in the chain of cons cells must point to the empty list (nil). You can also create a list with the function list:

which is equivalent to:

You can access the members of a list with the functions car (or first) and cdr (or rest):

Common Lisp also defines the functions second, third and fourth (on up to tenth). Note that second is not the same as cdr or rest. cdr and rest both return the remaining list after the first element, while second returns the second item in the list:

Lists are sequences, so functions that operate on sequences also operate on lists:

The function nth also allows you to retrieve selected items from a list:

Note that the first item in a list is the 0th. Common Lisp also has several forms (functions and macros) for operating on the contents of lists. mapcar can be used to process each element of a list one at a time to build up a new list:

In that example, we were mapping over a single list so we used a unary function (a function of one argument). The #' is a special way to pass a function as an argument into a function. We will talk more about it in the next chapter. It is also possible to map over more than one list - the function must then take the same number of arguments as there are lists:

title: Common Lisp/Basic topics/Lists


text:
Template:Haskell/Monads

Prologue: IO, an applicative functor Understanding monads MaybeList notation IOState Alternative and MonadPlus Monad transformers

title: Template:Haskell/Monads


text:
Template:Haskell/Advanced Haskell

Monoids Applicative functors Foldable Traversable Arrow tutorial Understanding arrows Continuation passing style Zippers Lenses Comonads Value recursion (MonadFix) Effectful streaming Mutable objects Concurrency Template Haskell Type Families

title: Template:Haskell/Advanced Haskell


text:
Template:Haskell/Fun with Types

Polymorphism Existentially quantified types Advanced type classes Phantom types Generalised algebraic data-types (GADT) Datatype algebra Type constructors & Kinds

title: Template:Haskell/Fun with Types


text:
User talk:139.132.1.1

Please do not replace Wikibooks pages with blank content. Blank pages are harmful to Wikibooks because they have a tendency to confuse readers. If it is a duplicate article, please redirect it to an appropriate existing page. If the page has been vandalised, please revert it to the last legitimate version. If you feel that the content of a page is inappropriate, please edit the page and replace it with appropriate content. If you believe there is no hope for the page, please see the deletion policy for how to proceed. If page is no longer useful, insert delete to its top. Thanks for contributing to Wikibooks! -- Herby talk thyme 07:59, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

title: User talk:139.132.1.1


text:
Wikijunior talk:Life/Structure plan

Discussion of structure plan for Wikijunior:Life

title: Wikijunior talk:Life/Structure plan


text:
Kapampangan/Numbers To One Hundred

Part A: Description
In this section, we will learn how to count to one hundred. As you will see, a mixture of numbers from old Kapampangan and words originating from Spanish are used. This is because, for a very long time in Pampanga, anything that involved complex transactions was handled in Spanish, rather than in Kapampangan.

Part D: Summary
You now know how to count up to one hundred. Also you have learned the following new words and phrases:

title: Kapampangan/Numbers To One Hundred


text:
Talk:Aspies Book/Resources

Is it a book?
Herbythyme stated "Not sure - this is solely a collection of external links on Aspies, maybe useful but should it be in Wikibooks?"

For me it seems to be a book, since my thoughts of what a book is, is a page with various sorts of information which also expresses personal belief or ideas.

Since it says "Aspies Book/Resources". It could be left as a book containing just resources, for the current moment, and later be expanded in greater descriptions regarding the links. Logictheo 11:42, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

 * Well, as a book it's no good, actually. But as a chapter of a book it's fine :). -- SB_Johnny | talk 12:56, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

title: Talk:Aspies Book/Resources


text:
Kapampangan/Days Of The Week

Part A: Description
The days of the week were all imported from Spanish. However some consonants did not exist in Kapampangan, and the closest equivalent consonant is used as it is always the case in such situations.

These should be easy to remember if you have studied Spanish.

Part B: Application
First of all, learn the whole list of days by heart. Make sure you can recite them to yourself, without looking at this page.

Here are a few sentences using the days in Kapampangan. You can see how the article or the plural is used, depending on the context.

...

...

...

The rule for using the article or not are...

Plurals are not / are appropriate for days ...

Part C: Exercises
Translate the following English sentences in Kapampangan.

She will visit us on Sunday.

Friday was a sunny day.

Shall we picnic on Saturday afternoon?

See you next Friday.

I hate Mondays.

Solutions

Part D: Summary
You now know how to use all the days of the week in Kapampangan. Also you have learned the following new words and phrases:

Continue to ../Months/

title: Kapampangan/Days Of The Week


text:
Kapampangan/Months

Part A: Description
The months, like the days of the week, were also all borrowed from Spanish, with adaptations of some consonants and vowels.

These should be easy to remember if you have studied Spanish.

Part B: Application
First of all, learn the whole list of months by heart. Make sure you can recite them to yourself, without looking at this page.

Here are a few sentences using the months in Kapampangan. You can see how the article is used, depending on the context.

...

...

...

The rule for using the article or not are...

Part C: Exercises
Translate the following English sentences in Kapampangan.

She will move to Manilla in May.

December is the coldest month.

In June, it rains.

Solutions

Part D: Summary
You now know how to use all the months in Kapampangan. Also you have learned the following new words and phrases:

Continue to ../Days Of The Week/

title: Kapampangan/Months


text:
User:Fys

I'm mainly active on Wikiquote and the English Wikipedia.

title: User:Fys