text:
John B. Anderson

John Bayard Anderson (February 15, 1922 – December 3, 2017) was an American lawyer and politician who served in the United States House of Representatives, representing Illinois's 16th congressional district from 1961 to 1981. A member of the Republican Party, he also served as the Chairman of the House Republican Conference from 1969 until 1979. In 1980, he ran an independent campaign for president, receiving 6.6% of the popular vote.

Born in Rockford, Illinois, Anderson practiced law after serving in the Army during World War II. After a stint in the United States Foreign Service, he won election as the State's Attorney for Winnebago County, Illinois. He won election to the House of Representatives in 1960 in a strongly Republican district. Initially one of the most conservative members of the House, Anderson's views moderated during the 1960s, particularly regarding social issues. He became chairman of the House Republican Conference in 1969 and remained in that position until 1979. He strongly criticized the Vietnam War as well as President Richard Nixon's actions during the Watergate scandal. Anderson entered the 1980 Republican presidential primaries, introducing his signature campaign proposal of raising the gas tax while cutting social security taxes.

He established himself as a contender for the nomination in the early primaries, but eventually dropped out of the Republican race, choosing to pursue an independent campaign for president. In the election, he finished third behind Republican nominee Ronald Reagan and Democratic President Jimmy Carter. He won support among Democrats who became disillusioned with Carter, as well as Rockefeller Republicans, independents, liberal intellectuals, and college students. After the election, he resumed his legal career and helped found FairVote, an organization that advocates for electoral reform, including an instant-runoff voting system. He also won a lawsuit against the state of Ohio, Anderson v. Celebrezze, in which the Supreme Court struck down early filing deadlines for independent candidates. Anderson served as a visiting professor at numerous universities and was on the boards of several organizations. He endorsed Green Party candidate Ralph Nader in 2000.

Early life and career
Anderson was born in Rockford, Illinois, where he grew up, the son of Mabel Edna (née Ring) and E. Albin Anderson. His father was a Swedish immigrant, as were his maternal grandparents. In his youth, he worked in his family's grocery store. He graduated as the valedictorian of his class (1939) at Rockford Central High School. He graduated from the University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign in 1942, and started law school, but his education was interrupted by World War II. He enlisted in the Army in 1943, and served as a staff sergeant in the U.S. Field Artillery in France and Germany until the end of the war, receiving four service stars. After the war, Anderson returned to complete his education, earning a Juris Doctor (J.D.) from the University of Illinois College of Law in 1946.

Anderson was admitted to the Illinois bar the same year, and practiced law in Rockford. Soon after, he moved east to attend Harvard Law School, obtaining a Master of Laws (LL.M.) in 1949. His LL.M. thesis was entitled, "A historical prologue to federal jurisdiction." While at Harvard, he served on the faculty of Northeastern University School of Law in Boston. In another brief return to Rockford, Anderson practiced at the law firm Large, Reno & Zahm (now Reno & Zahm LLP). Thereafter, Anderson joined the Foreign Service. From 1952 to 1955, he served in Berlin, as the Economic Reporting Officer in the Eastern Affairs Division, as an adviser on the staff of the United States High Commissioner for Germany. At the end of his tour, he left the foreign service and once again returned to the practice of law in Rockford.

Early political career

Soon after his return, Anderson was approached about running for public office. In 1956, Anderson was elected State's Attorney in Winnebago County, Illinois, first winning a four-person race in the April primary by 1,330 votes and then the general election in November by 11,456 votes. After serving for one term, he was ready to leave that office when the local congressman, 28-year incumbent Leo E. Allen, announced his retirement. Anderson joined the Republican primary for Allen's 16th District seat—the real contest in this then-solidly Republican district based in Rockford and stretching across the state's northwest corner. He won a five-way primary in April (by 5,900 votes) in April and then the general election in November (by 45,000 votes). He served in the United States House of Representatives for ten terms, from 1961 to 1981.

Initially, Anderson was among the most conservative members of the Republican caucus. Three times (in 1961, 1963, and 1965) in his early terms as a Congressman, Anderson introduced a constitutional amendment to attempt to "recognize the law and authority of Jesus Christ" over the United States. The bills died quietly, but later came back to haunt Anderson in his presidential candidacy. Anderson voted in favor of the Civil Rights Acts of 1964 and 1968,   as well as the 24th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

Initially supportive of Barry Goldwater's candidacy for president in 1964 and believing Goldwater to be a "honest, sincere man", Anderson came to believe that most of his ideas would not work on a national scale, and described Lyndon B. Johnson's victory over Goldwater in the 1964 election as a vote for moderation, believing that the Republican Party needed to go in a moderate direction. Other factors such as attending the funerals of Andrew Goodman, Michael Schwerner and James Chaney, as well as the street riots happening in America at that point, led to Anderson shift from the right to the left on social issues, although his fiscal positions largely remained conservative. The riots led Anderson to vote in favor of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968. In 1964, he won appointment to a seat on the powerful Rules Committee. In 1969, he became Chairman of the House Republican Conference, the number three position in the House Republican hierarchy in what was (at that time) the minority party. Anderson increasingly found himself at odds with conservatives in his home district and other members of the House. He was not always a faithful supporter of the Republican agenda, despite his high rank in the Republican caucus. He was very critical of the Vietnam War, and was a very controversial critic of Richard Nixon during Watergate. In 1974, despite his criticism of Nixon, the strong anti-Republican tide in that year's election held him to 55 percent of the vote, what would be the lowest percentage of his career. Anderson described Nixon as a "man of great duplicity".

His spot as the chairman of the House Republican Committee was challenged three times after his election and, when Gerald Ford was defeated in the 1976 presidential campaign, Anderson lost a key ally in Washington. In 1970 and 1972, Anderson had a Democratic challenger in Rockford Professor John E. Devine. In both years, Anderson defeated Devine by a wide margin. In late 1977, a fundamentalist television minister from Rockford, Don Lyon, announced that he would challenge Anderson in the Republican primary. It was a contentious campaign, where Lyon, with his experience before the camera, proved to be a formidable candidate. Lyon raised a great deal of money, won backing from many conservatives in the community and party, and put quite a scare into the Anderson team. Though Anderson was a leader in the House and the campaign commanded national attention, Anderson won the primary by 16% of the vote. Anderson was aided in this campaign by strong newspaper endorsements and crossover support from independents and Democrats.

Early campaign

In 1978, Anderson formed a presidential campaign exploratory committee, finding little public or media interest. In late April 1979, Anderson made the decision to enter the Republican primary, joining a field that included Ronald Reagan, Bob Dole, John Connally, Howard Baker, George H. W. Bush, and the perennial candidate Harold Stassen. Within the last weeks of 1979, Anderson introduced his signature campaign proposal, advocating that a 50-cent a gallon gas tax be enacted with a corresponding 50% reduction in social security taxes. Anderson built state campaigns in four targeted states—New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Illinois, and Wisconsin. He won some political support among Republicans, picking up endorsements along the way that helped legitimize him in the race. He began to build support among media elites, who appreciated his articulateness, straightforward manner, moderate positions, and his refusal to walk down the conservative path that all of the other Republicans were traveling.

He often referred to his candidacy as "a campaign of ideas." He supported tax credits for businesses' research-and-development budgets, which he believed would increase American productivity; he also supported increasing funding for research at universities. He supported lowering interest rates, antitrust action, conservation, environmental protection and limit oil companies from absorbing small businesses through legislation. He opposed Ronald Reagan's proposal to cut taxes broadly, which he feared would increase the national debt and the inflation rate (which was very high at the time of the campaign), believing it to be "Coolidge-era economics". He also supported a tax on gasoline to reduce dependence on foreign oil. He supported the Equal Rights Amendment, gay rights and abortion rights generally; he also touted his perfect record of having supported all civil rights legislation since 1960. He opposed the requirement for registration for the military draft, which Jimmy Carter had reinstated. This made him appealing to many liberal college students who were dissatisfied with Carter. However, he also voiced support for a strong, flexible military and support for NATO against the USSR, as well as several other positions associated with Republicans, including deregulation of some industries such as natural gas and oil prices, and a balanced budget to be achieved mainly by reductions in government spending.

Republican primary
On January 5, 1980, in the Republican candidates' debate in Des Moines, Iowa, unlike the other candidates, Anderson said lowering taxes, increasing defense spending, and balancing the budget were an impossible combination. In a stirring summation, Anderson invoked his father's immigration to the United States and said that Americans would have to make sacrifices "for a better tomorrow." For the next week, Anderson's name and face were all over the national news programs, in newspapers, and in national news magazines. Anderson spent less than $2000 in Iowa, but he finished with 4.3% of the vote. The television networks were covering the event, portraying Anderson to a national audience as a man of character and principle. When the voters in New Hampshire went to the polls, Anderson again exceeded the expectations, finishing fourth with just under 10% of the vote.

Anderson was declared the winner in both Massachusetts and Vermont by the Associated Press, but the following morning ended up losing both primaries by a slim margin. In Massachusetts, he lost to George Bush by 0.3% and in Vermont he lost to Reagan by 690 votes. Anderson arrived in Illinois following the New England primaries and had a lead in the state polls, but his Illinois campaign struggled despite endorsements from the state's two largest newspapers. Reagan defeated him, 48% to 37%. Anderson carried Chicago and Rockford, the state's two largest cities at the time, but he lost in the more conservative southern section of the state. The next week, there was a primary in Connecticut, which (while Anderson was on the ballot) his team had chosen not to campaign actively in. He finished third in Connecticut with 22% of the vote, and it seemed to most observers like any other loss, whether Anderson said he was competing or not. Next was Wisconsin, and this was thought to be Anderson's best chance for victory, but he again finished third, winning 27% of the vote.

Independent campaign

The Republican platform failed to endorse the Equal Rights Amendment or support extension of time for its ratification. Anderson was a strong supporter of both. Pollsters were finding that Anderson was much more popular across the country with all voters than he was in the Republican primary states. Without any campaigning, he was running at 22% nationally in a three-way race. Anderson's personal aide and confidant, Tom Wartowski, encouraged him to remain in the Republican Party. Anderson faced a huge number of obstacles as a non-major party candidate: having to qualify for 51 ballots (which the major parties appeared on automatically), having to raise money to run a campaign (the major parties received close to $30 million in government money for their campaigns), having to win national coverage, having to build a campaign overnight, and having to find a suitable running mate among them. He built a new campaign team, qualified for every ballot, raised a great deal of money, and rose in the polls to as high as 26% in one Gallup poll.

However, in the summer of 1980, he had an overseas campaign tour to show his foreign policy credentials and it took a drubbing on national television. The major parties, particularly the Republicans, basked in the spotlight of their national conventions where Anderson was left out of the coverage. Anderson made an appearance with Ted Kennedy and it, too, was a huge error. By the third week of August he was in the 13–15% range in the polls. A critical issue for Anderson was appearing in the fall presidential debates after the League of Women Voters invited him to appear due to popular interest in his candidacy, although he was only polling 12% at that time. In late August, he named Patrick Lucey, the former two-term Democratic Governor of Wisconsin and Ambassador to Mexico as his running mate. Late in August, Anderson released a 317-page comprehensive platform, under the banner of the National Unity Party, that was very well received. In early September, a court challenge to Federal Election Campaign Act was successful and Anderson qualified for post-election public funding. Also, Anderson submitted his petitions for his fifty-first ballot. Then, the League ruled that the polls showed that he had met the qualification threshold and said he would appear in the debates.

Fall campaign

Carter said that he would not appear on stage with Anderson, and sat out the debate, which hurt the President in the eyes of voters. Reagan and Anderson had a debate in Baltimore on September 21, 1980. Anderson did well, and polls showed he won a modest debate victory over Reagan, but Reagan, who had been portrayed by Carter throughout the campaign as something of a warmonger, was seen as a reasonable candidate who carried himself well in the debate. The debate was Anderson's big opportunity as he needed a break-out performance, but what he got was a modest victory. In the following weeks, Anderson slowly faded out of the picture with his support dropping from 16% to 10–12% in the first half of October. By the end of the month, Reagan debated Carter alone, but CNN attempted to let Anderson participate in the 2nd debate by tape delay. Daniel Schorr asked Anderson the questions from the Carter-Reagan debate, and then CNN interspersed Anderson's live answers with tape delayed responses from Carter and Reagan.

Anderson's support continued to fade down to 5%, although rose up to 8% just before election day. Although Reagan would win a sizable victory, the polls showed the two major party candidates closer (Gallup's final poll was 47–44–8 going into the election and it was clear that many would-be Anderson supporters had been pulled away by Carter and Reagan. In the end, Anderson finished with 6.6% of the vote. Most of Anderson's support came from those Liberal Republicans who were suspicious of, or even hostile to, Reagan's conservative record. Many prominent intellectuals, including All in the Family creator Norman Lear, and the editors of the liberal magazine The New Republic, also endorsed the Anderson campaign. Cartoonist Garry Trudeau's Doonesbury ran several strips sympathetic to the Anderson campaign. Former First Lady Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis, actor Paul Newman and historian Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr. were also reported to be Anderson supporters.

Although the Carter campaign feared Anderson could be a spoiler, Anderson's campaign turned out to be "simply another option" for frustrated voters who had already decided not to back Carter for another term. Polls found that around 37% of Anderson voters favored Reagan as their second choice over Carter. Anderson did not carry a single precinct in the country. Anderson's finish was still the best showing for a third-party candidate since George Wallace's 14 percent in 1968 and stands as the seventh-best for any such candidate since the Civil War (trailing James B. Weaver's 8.5 percent in 1892, Theodore Roosevelt's 27 percent in 1912, Robert La Follette's 17 percent in 1924, Wallace, and Ross Perot's 19 percent and 8 percent in 1992 and 1996, respectively). He pursued Ohio's refusal to provide ballot access to the U.S. Supreme Court and won 5–4 in Anderson v. Celebrezze. His inability to make headway against the de facto two-party system as an independent in that election would later lead him to become an advocate for instant-runoff voting, helping to found FairVote in 1992.

Later career

By the end of the campaign, much of Anderson's support came from college students. He capitalized on that by becoming a visiting professor at a series of universities: Stanford University, University of Southern California, Duke University, University of Illinois College of Law, Brandeis University, Bryn Mawr College, Oregon State University, University of Massachusetts Amherst, and Nova Southeastern University and delivered the lecture at the 1988 Waldo Family Lecture Series on International Relations at Old Dominion University. In 1984, Anderson endorsed Walter Mondale over Ronald Reagan in the presidential election. He was chair of FairVote from 1996 to 2008, after helping to found the organization in 1992, and continued to serve on its board until 2014. He also served as president of the World Federalist Association and on the advisory board of Public Campaign and the Electronic Privacy Information Center, and was of counsel to the Washington, D.C.-based law firm of Greenberg & Lieberman, LLC.

He was the first executive director of the Council for the National Interest, founded in 1989 by former Congressmen Paul Findley (R-IL) and Pete McCloskey (R-CA) to promote American interests in the Middle East. In the 2000 U.S. presidential election, he was briefly considered as possible candidate for the Reform Party nomination, but instead endorsed Ralph Nader, who was nominated by the Green Party. In January 2008, Anderson indicated strong support for the candidacy of a fellow Illinoisan, Democratic contender Barack Obama. In 2012, he played a role in the creation of the Justice Party, a progressive, social-democratic party organized to support the candidacy of former Salt Lake City mayor Rocky Anderson (no relation) for the 2012 U.S. presidential election. On August 6, 2014, he endorsed the campaign for the United Nations Parliamentary Assembly (UNPA), one of only six persons who served in the United States Congress ever to do so.

Death
Anderson died in Washington, D.C., on December 3, 2017, at the age of 95. He was interred at Arlington National Cemetery on June 22, 2018.

title: John B. Anderson


text:
Wolf Messing

Wolf Grigoryevich (Gershkovich) Messing (Во́льф Григо́рьевич (Ге́ршикович) Ме́ссинг, Wolf Grigoriewicz Messing, וולף מסינג) (10 September 1899 – 8 November 1974) was a self-proclaimed psychic, telepath and stage hypnotist.

Early life
Messing was born in the village of Góra Kalwaria, 25 km southeast of Warsaw, at a time when Poland was a territory of the Russian Empire. He claimed that his psychic abilities developed in his early life.

Career
By the time he was a teenager, he was performing for the public as a psychic entertainer. Wolf Messing would become widely popular when he started displaying his abilities in a circus in Berlin. One day in Vienna while he was on a tour two great scientists met with him Later it was Albert Einstein and Sigmund Freud who wanted to test his abilities. Messing said to Freud: "Make a wish, and your wish is my command." Then he came to Einstein and pulled three hairs out of his moustache. "Is this what you wished for?" he asked, turning to Freud. "Yes," Freud replied. Messing would travel a lot and his fame attracted many people who wanted to visit him such as Gandhi, Marilyn Monroe, and Polish President Piłsudski. When the Weimar Republic got replaced by the new Nazi government with Adolf Hitler in charge Messing made his famous prophecy "If Hitler goes to war against the East, his death awaits him." When the Fuhrer learned of Messing's prophecy, he became enraged and announced a 200,000 Reichsmarks bounty on Messing's head. When the nazis captured Warsaw Messing was arrested by the Gestapo, Messing was able to escape the Gestapo by using his psychic abilities by making the guards lock themselves up in a cell, afterwards he escaped nazi occupied Poland to the Soviet Union. There he would meet Stalin who was also curious about his abilities.

According to Messing, he was able to broadcast mental suggestions in order to alter people's perceptions.

In the interview with P. Oreshkin, Messing said:"... It's not mind-reading, it's like the 'reading of muscles'... When a human thinks hard about something, the brain cells transmit impulses to all muscles of the body. Their movements, invisible to the eye, I can easily feel... Often I'm performing mental tasks without direct contact with the inductor. The pointer to me here is the breathing frequency of inductor, the beating of his heart, voice timbre, his walking nature etc."

Death
Messing died in a hospital, on 8 November 1974, two months after his 75th birthday. He had successfully undergone surgery on the Femoral and External Iliac arteries, but afterward, for some unknown reason, developed kidney failure and pulmonary edema. He was buried at the Vostryakovskoje Jewish cemetery in Moscow.

His life story is depicted in the Russian television miniseries Wolf Messing: Who Saw through Time (2009).

Appearances in fiction
Wolf Messing is a major character in Steve Englehart's series of Max August novels, beginning with The Point Man in 1980, and continuing through The Long Man and The Plain Man.

In the hit video strategy game, Command and Conquer: Red Alert 2 as well as its expansion, Yuri's Revenge, the main character of Yuri was heavily influenced in the likeness of Wolf Messing.

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

title: Wolf Messing


text:
Nature (journal)

Nature is a British weekly scientific journal founded and based in London, England. As a multidisciplinary publication, Nature features peer-reviewed research from a variety of academic disciplines, mainly in science and technology. It has core editorial offices across the United States, continental Europe, and Asia under the international scientific publishing company Springer Nature. Nature was one of the world's most cited scientific journals by the Science Edition of the 2022 Journal Citation Reports (with an ascribed impact factor of 50.5), making it one of the world's most-read and most prestigious academic journals. , it claimed an online readership of about three million unique readers per month.

Founded in autumn 1869, Nature was first circulated by Norman Lockyer and Alexander MacMillan as a public forum for scientific innovations. The mid-20th century facilitated an editorial expansion for the journal; Nature redoubled its efforts in explanatory and scientific journalism. The late 1980s and early 1990s saw the creation of a network of editorial offices outside of Britain and the establishment of ten new supplementary, speciality publications (e.g. Nature Materials). Since the late 2000s, dedicated editorial and current affairs columns are created weekly, and electoral endorsements are featured. The primary source of the journal remains, as established at its founding, research scientists; editing standards are primarily concerned with technical readability. Each issue also features articles that are of general interest to the scientific community, namely business, funding, scientific ethics, and research breakthroughs. There are also sections on books, arts, and short science fiction stories. The main research published in Nature consists mostly of papers (articles or letters) in lightly edited form. They are highly technical and dense, but, due to imposed text limits, they are typically summaries of larger work. Innovations or breakthroughs in any scientific or technological field are featured in the journal as either letters or news articles. The papers that have been published in this journal are internationally acclaimed for maintaining high research standards. Conversely, due to the journal's exposure, it has at various times been a subject of controversy for its handling of academic dishonesty, the scientific method, and news coverage. Fewer than 8% of submitted papers are accepted for publication. In 2007, Nature (together with Science) received the Prince of Asturias Award for Communications and Humanity.

Nature mostly publishes research articles. Spotlight articles are not research papers but mostly news or magazine style papers and hence do not count towards impact factor nor receive similar recognition as research articles. Some spotlight articles are also paid by partners or sponsors.

Background
The huge progress in science and mathematics during the 19th century was recorded in journals written mostly in German or French, as well as in English. Britain underwent enormous technological and industrial changes and advances particularly in the latter half of the 19th century. The most respected scientific journals of this time were the refereed journals of the Royal Society, which had published many of the great works from Isaac Newton and Michael Faraday to Charles Darwin. In addition, the number of popular science periodicals doubled from the 1850s to the 1860s. According to the editors of these popular science magazines, the publications were designed to serve as "organs of science", in essence, a means of connecting the public to the scientific world.

Nature, first created in 1869, was not the first magazine of its kind in Britain. One journal to precede Nature was Recreative Science: A Record and Remembrancer of Intellectual Observation, which, created in 1859, began as a natural history magazine and progressed to include more physical observational science and technical subjects and less natural history. The journal's name changed from its original title to Intellectual Observer: A Review of Natural History, Microscopic Research, and Recreative Science and then to the Student and Intellectual Observer of Science, Literature, and Art. While Recreative Science had attempted to include more physical sciences such as astronomy and archaeology, the Intellectual Observer broadened itself further to include literature and art as well. Similar to Recreative Science was the scientific journal Popular Science Review, created in 1862, which covered different fields of science by creating subsections titled "Scientific Summary" or "Quarterly Retrospect", with book reviews and commentary on the latest scientific works and publications. Two other journals produced in England prior to the development of Nature were the Quarterly Journal of Science and Scientific Opinion, established in 1864 and 1868, respectively. The journal most closely related to Nature in its editorship and format was The Reader, created in 1863; the publication mixed science with literature and art in an attempt to reach an audience outside of the scientific community, similar to Popular Science Review.

These similar journals all ultimately failed. The Popular Science Review survived longest, lasting 20 years and ending its publication in 1881; Recreative Science ceased publication as the Student and Intellectual Observer in 1871. The Quarterly Journal, after undergoing a number of editorial changes, ceased publication in 1885. The Reader terminated in 1867, and finally, Scientific Opinion lasted a mere 2 years, until June 1870.

Creation
Not long after the conclusion of The Reader, a former editor, Norman Lockyer, decided to create a new scientific journal titled Nature, taking its name from a line by William Wordsworth: "To the solid ground of nature trusts the Mind that builds for aye". First owned and published by Alexander Macmillan, Nature was similar to its predecessors in its attempt to "provide cultivated readers with an accessible forum for reading about advances in scientific knowledge." Janet Browne has proposed that "far more than any other science journal of the period, Nature was conceived, born, and raised to serve polemic purpose." Many of the early editions of Nature consisted of articles written by members of a group that called itself the X Club, a group of scientists known for having liberal, progressive, and somewhat controversial scientific beliefs for their time. Initiated by Thomas Henry Huxley, the group consisted of such important scientists as Joseph Dalton Hooker, Herbert Spencer, and John Tyndall, along with another five scientists and mathematicians; these scientists were all avid supporters of Darwin's theory of evolution as common descent, a theory which, during the latter half of the 19th century, received a great deal of criticism among more conservative groups of scientists. Perhaps it was in part its scientific liberality that made Nature a longer-lasting success than its predecessors. John Maddox, editor of Nature from 1966 to 1973 and from 1980 to 1995, suggested at a celebratory dinner for the journal's centennial edition that perhaps it was the journalistic qualities of Nature that drew readers in; "journalism" Maddox states, "is a way of creating a sense of community among people who would otherwise be isolated from each other. This is what Lockyer's journal did from the start." In addition, Maddox mentions that the financial backing of the journal in its first years by the Macmillan family also allowed the journal to flourish and develop more freely than scientific journals before it.

Editors
Norman Lockyer, the founder of Nature, was a professor at Imperial College. He was succeeded as editor in 1919 by Sir Richard Gregory. Gregory helped to establish Nature in the international scientific community. His obituary by the Royal Society stated: "Gregory was always very interested in the international contacts of science, and in the columns of Nature he always gave generous space to accounts of the activities of the International Scientific Unions." During the years 1945 to 1973, editorship of Nature changed three times, first in 1945 to A. J. V. Gale and L. J. F. Brimble (who in 1958 became the sole editor), then to John Maddox in 1965, and finally to David Davies in 1973. In 1980, Maddox returned as editor and retained his position until 1995. Philip Campbell became Editor-in-chief of all Nature publications until 2018. Magdalena Skipper has since become Editor-in-chief.

Expansion and development
In 1970, Nature first opened its Washington office; other branches opened in New York in 1985, Tokyo and Munich in 1987, Paris in 1989, San Francisco in 2001, Boston in 2004, and Hong Kong in 2005. In 1971, under John Maddox's editorship, the journal split into Nature Physical Sciences (published on Mondays), Nature New Biology (published on Wednesdays), and Nature (published on Fridays). In 1974, Maddox was no longer editor, and the journals were merged into Nature. Starting in the 1980s, the journal underwent a great deal of expansion, launching over ten new journals. These new journals comprise Nature Research, which was created in 1999 under the name Nature Publishing Group and includes Nature, Nature Research Journals, Stockton Press Specialist Journals and Macmillan Reference (renamed NPG Reference). In 1996, Nature created its own website and in 1999 Nature Publishing Group began its series of Nature Reviews. Some articles and papers are available for free on the Nature website, while others require the purchase of premium access to the site. , Nature claimed an online readership of about 3 million unique readers per month.

On 30 October 2008, Nature endorsed an American presidential candidate for the first time when it supported Barack Obama during his campaign in America's 2008 presidential election. In October 2012, an Arabic edition of the magazine was launched in partnership with King Abdulaziz City for Science and Technology. As of the time it was released, it had about 10,000 subscribers. On 2 December 2014, Nature announced that it would allow its subscribers and a group of selected media outlets to share links allowing free, "read-only" access to content from its journals. These articles are presented using the digital rights management system ReadCube (which is funded by the Macmillan subsidiary Digital Science), and does not allow readers to download, copy, print, or otherwise distribute the content. While it does, to an extent, provide free online access to articles, it is not a true open access scheme due to its restrictions on re-use and distribution. On 15 January 2015, details of a proposed merger with Springer Science+Business Media were announced.

In May 2015 it came under the umbrella of Springer Nature, by the merger of Springer Science+Business Media and Holtzbrinck Publishing Group's Nature Publishing Group, Palgrave Macmillan, and Macmillan Education. Since 2011, the journal has published Nature's 10 "people who mattered" during the year, as part of their annual review.

Publication in Nature
According to Science, another academic journal, being published in Nature has been known to carry a certain level of prestige in academia. In particular, empirical papers are often highly cited, which can lead to promotions, grant funding, and attention from the mainstream media. Because of these positive feedback effects, competition among scientists to publish in high-level journals like Nature and its closest competitor, Science, can be very fierce. Nature's impact factor, a measure of how many citations a journal generates in other works, was 42.778 in 2019 (as measured by Thomson ISI). However, as with many journals, most papers receive far fewer citations than the impact factor would indicate. Nature 's journal impact factor carries a long tail.

Studies of methodological quality and reliability have found that some high-prestige journals including Nature "publish significantly substandard structures", and overall "reliability of published research works in several fields may be decreasing with increasing journal rank".

As with most other professional scientific journals, papers undergo an initial screening by the editor, followed by peer review (in which other scientists, chosen by the editor for expertise with the subject matter but who have no connection to the research under review, will read and critique articles), before publication. In the case of Nature, they are only sent for review if it is decided that they deal with a topical subject and are sufficiently ground-breaking in that particular field. As a consequence, the majority of submitted papers are rejected without review.

According to Nature's original mission statement: "It is intended, FIRST, to place before the general public the grand results of Scientific Work and Scientific Discovery; and to urge the claims of Science to a more general recognition in Education and in Daily Life; and, SECONDLY, to aid Scientific men themselves, by giving early information of all advances made in any branch of Natural knowledge throughout the world, and by affording them an opportunity of discussing the various Scientific questions which arise from time to time."

This was later revised to: "First, to serve scientists through prompt publication of significant advances in any branch of science, and to provide a forum for the reporting and discussion of news and issues concerning science. Second, to ensure that the results of science are rapidly disseminated to the public throughout the world, in a fashion that conveys their significance for knowledge, culture and daily life."

Landmark papers
Many of the most significant scientific breakthroughs in modern history have been first published in Nature. The following is a selection of scientific breakthroughs published in Nature, all of which had far-reaching consequences, and the citation for the article in which they were published.

 * Wave nature of particles (Davisson–Germer experiment) —
 * The neutron —
 * Nuclear fission —
 * The structure of DNA —
 * First molecular protein structure (myoglobin) —
 * Plate tectonics —
 * Pulsars —
 * The ozone hole —
 * First cloning of a mammal (Dolly the sheep) —
 * The human genome —

Controversies
In 2017, Nature published an editorial entitled "Removing Statues of Historical figures risks whitewashing history: Science must acknowledge mistakes as it marks its past". The article commented on the placement and maintenance of statues honouring scientists with known unethical, abusive and torturous histories. Specifically, the editorial called on examples of J. Marion Sims, the 'Father of gynecology' who experimented on African American female slaves who were unable to give informed consent, and Thomas Parran Jr. who oversaw the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment. The editorial as written made the case that removing such statues, and erasing names, runs the risk of "whitewashing history", and stated "Instead of removing painful reminders, perhaps these should be supplemented". The article caused a large outcry and was quickly modified by Nature. The article was largely seen as offensive, inappropriate, and by many, racist. Nature acknowledged that the article as originally written was "offensive and poorly worded" and published selected letters of response. The editorial came just weeks after hundreds of white supremacists marched in Charlottesville, Virginia, in the Unite the Right rally to oppose the removal of a statue of Robert E. Lee, setting off violence in the streets and killing a young woman. When Nature posted a link to the editorial on Twitter, the thread quickly exploded with criticisms. In response, several scientists called for a boycott. On 18 September 2017, the editorial was updated and edited by Philip Campbell, the editor of the journal.

When Paul Lauterbur and Peter Mansfield won a Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for research initially rejected by Nature and published only after Lauterbur appealed against the rejection, Nature acknowledged more of its own missteps in rejecting papers in an editorial titled, "Coping with Peer Rejection": "[T]here are unarguable faux pas in our history. These include the rejection of Cherenkov radiation, Hideki Yukawa's meson, work on photosynthesis by Johann Deisenhofer, Robert Huber and Hartmut Michel, and the initial rejection (but eventual acceptance) of Stephen Hawking's black-hole radiation."

In June 1988, after nearly a year of guided scrutiny from its editors, Nature published a controversial and seemingly anomalous paper detailing Jacques Benveniste and his team's work studying water memory. The paper concluded that less than a single molecule of antibody diluted in water could trigger an immune response in human basophils, defying the physical law of mass action. The paper excited substantial media attention in Paris, chiefly because their research sought funding from homeopathic medicine companies. Public inquiry prompted Nature to mandate an extensive and stringent experimental replication in Benveniste's lab, through which his team's results were refuted.

Before publishing one of its most famous discoveries, Watson and Crick's 1953 paper on the structure of DNA, Nature did not send the paper out for peer review. John Maddox, Nature's editor, stated: "the Watson and Crick paper was not peer-reviewed by Nature ... the paper could not have been refereed: its correctness is self-evident. No referee working in the field ... could have kept his mouth shut once he saw the structure".

An earlier error occurred when Enrico Fermi submitted his breakthrough paper on the weak interaction theory of beta decay. Nature rejected the paper because it was considered too remote from reality. Fermi's paper was published by Zeitschrift für Physik in 1934.

The journal apologised for its initial coverage of the COVID-19 pandemic in which it linked China and Wuhan with the outbreak, which may have led to racist attacks.

Retractions
A paper was published with important figure anomalies from an author with a past of publishing figure anomalies.

A 2013 fraudulent paper was also published in Nature.

From 2000 to 2001, a series of five fraudulent papers by Jan Hendrik Schön was published in Nature. The papers, about semiconductors, were revealed to contain falsified data and other scientific fraud. In 2003, Nature retracted the papers. The Schön scandal was not limited to Nature; other prominent journals, such as Science and Physical Review, also retracted papers by Schön.

In 2022, an editorial published in Nature entitled "How Nature contributed to science's discriminatory legacy" mentioning the problematics of some of their articles: "But we have also published material that contributed to bias, exclusion and discrimination in research and society."

In 2024, a paper titled "Pluripotency of mesenchymal stem cells derived from adult marrow," published in 2002, was retracted due to concerns raised regarding some of the panels shown in a figure, making it the most-cited retracted paper ever.

Science fiction
In 1999, Nature began publishing science fiction short stories. The brief "vignettes" are printed in a series called "Futures". The stories appeared in 1999 and 2000, again in 2005 and 2006, and have appeared weekly since July 2007. Sister publication Nature Physics also printed stories in 2007 and 2008. In 2005, Nature was awarded the European Science Fiction Society's Best Publisher award for the "Futures" series. One hundred of the Nature stories between 1999 and 2006 were published as the collection Futures from Nature in 2008. Another collection, Futures from Nature 2, was published in 2014.

Publication

Nature is edited and published in the United Kingdom by a division of the international scientific publishing company Springer Nature that publishes academic journals, magazines, online databases, and services in science and medicine. Nature has offices in London, New York City, San Francisco, Washington, D.C., Boston, Tokyo, Hong Kong, Paris, Munich, and Basingstoke. Nature Portfolio also publishes other specialized journals including Nature Neuroscience, Nature Biotechnology, Nature Methods, the Nature Clinical Practice series of journals, Nature Structural & Molecular Biology, Nature Chemistry, and the Nature Reviews series of journals.

Since 2005, each issue of Nature has been accompanied by a Nature Podcast featuring highlights from the issue and interviews with the articles' authors and the journalists covering the research. It is presented by Kerri Smith and features interviews with scientists on the latest research, as well as news reports from Nature 's editors and journalists. The Nature Podcast was founded – and the first 100 episodes were produced and presented – by clinician and virologist Chris Smith of Cambridge and The Naked Scientists.

Nature Portfolio actively supports the self-archiving process and in 2002 was one of the first publishers to allow authors to post their contributions on their personal websites, by requesting an exclusive licence to publish, rather than requiring authors to transfer copyright. In December 2007, Nature Publishing Group introduced the Creative Commons attribution-non-commercial-share alike unported licence for those articles in Nature journals that are publishing the primary sequence of an organism's genome for the first time.

In 2008, a collection of articles from Nature was edited by John S. Partington under the title H. G. Wells in Nature, 1893–1946: A Reception Reader and published by Peter Lang.

Communications journals
Nature also publishes a number of journals in different disciplines, all prefixed with "Communications", which complement their other journals. These include:
 * Communications Biology
 * Communications Chemistry
 * Communications Earth & Environment
 * Communications Engineering
 * Communications Materials
 * Communications Medicine
 * Communications Physics
 * Communications Psychology

title: Nature (journal)


text:
Mary, Queen of Scots (disambiguation)

Mary, Queen of Scots (1542–1587; (r. 1542 – 1567)) was queen regnant of Scotland and queen consort of France.

Mary, Queen of Scots may also refer to:

People

 * Mary II of England (1662–1694; (r. 1689 – 1694)), queen regnant of Scotland, England and Ireland
 * Mary of Guelders (1434–1463), queen consort of James II of Scotland and queen regent of Scotland from 1460 to 1463
 * Mary of Guise (1515–1560), queen consort of James V of Scotland, mother of Mary, Queen of Scots and queen regent of Scotland from 1544 to 1560
 * Henrietta Maria of France (1609–1669), queen consort of Charles I of Scotland and England, also known as Queen Mary
 * Mary of Modena (1658–1718), queen consort of James VII of Scotland and II of England
 * Mary of Teck (1867–1953), queen consort of George V of the United Kingdom, whose primary realm included Scotland

Films

 * Mary of Scotland (film), 1936, an American film
 * Mary, Queen of Scots (1971 film), a British film
 * Mary Queen of Scots (2013 film), a Swiss film
 * Mary Queen of Scots (2018 film), a UK–US film

Literature

 * Mary Queen of Scots (1969 book), a book by Lady Antonia Fraser
 * Mary, Queen of Scots, an 1831 book by Mary Russell Mitford
 * Mary, Queen of Scots and the Murder of Lord Darnley, a 2003 book by Alison Weir
 * Queen of Scots: The True Life of Mary Stuart, a 2004 book by John Guy

Music

 * Mary Queen of Scots (album), a 1994 album by Eugenius
 * Mary, Queen of Scots (opera), a 1977 opera by Thea Musgrave

Other uses

 * Mary Queen of Scots House, Jedburgh, Scotland

title: Mary, Queen of Scots (disambiguation)


text:
User:Anatoly Vorobey

I live in Jerusalem, Israel. My native language is Russian.

An old homepage now hideously out of date can be found at

An online journal which I write in Russian is located at

Due to pressures of work and very little free time, I'll be unable to contribute to Wikipedia for some time and won't even able to monitor Recent Changes. This should not be interpreted as leaving the project and I hope to be able to come back soon.

Totally understandable, Anatoly! Hasta la vista! --LMS

Hmm, guess I'm back. Let's see what's new here, what's changed, and if I remember anyone at all.

Worked on Old talk --- Anatoly Vorobey, On the Talk page of an article you originated, "Original proof of Gödel's completeness theorem" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Original_proof_of_G%C3%B6del%27s_completeness_theorem), I have put what I think is a fatal objection to the supposed proof in the current version of the article; I don't know whether this error was in Gödel's paper or was created by a Wikipedia editor. Please comment on the article's Talk page. Dirsaka (talk) 13:38, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

title: User:Anatoly Vorobey


text:
User:Anatoly Vorobey/Worked on

I caught the Wikipedia bug some time during August.

Some pages and topics I worked on:

 * 1) Various logic- and computability- related pages, especially Halting problem and Goedels completeness theorem, with more to come.
 * 2) Israel-and-PLO-related pages, mostly fixing small mistakes, trying to NPOV when I can, and deleting blatant propaganda.
 * 3) Hebrew language and subpages.
 * 4) A bunch of other stuff I'm forgetting.

Self-reference -- a rather interesting debate on a/an in talk:English language.

Areas of interest:

Everything.

title: User:Anatoly Vorobey/Worked on


text:
User:Anatoly Vorobey/Old talk

AV: I still haven't got a response from you on this, so I'm writing it again here in case you missed me. If terrorism only applies to acts against civilians, then how come the U.S. government and the world media have referred to the Cole bombing and the attacks on U.S. troop barracks in Saudi Arabia terrorism?

 * Because the attacks were indiscriminate and anonymous, two qualities that are typical to terrorism and not typical to military attacks. Compared with this, Israeli military operations, and yes, this includes assasinations of terrorist leaders, are neither indiscriminate nor anonymous. If anyone wishes to retaliate, they know where to find the perpetrators.

 * Anatoly, while I agree that terrorism can be defined properly, I disagree that indiscriminate and anonymous acting should be part of that definition. Terrorists often discriminate (when they assassinate heads of state) and rarely act anonymously (because they want to further their cause). The recent attacks on the US are somewhat atypical in that regard. --AxelBoldt

 * Fair enough; let me rephrase. Terrorism works by propagating the feeling of terror inside the country as a whole; that is its purpose - to scare, to intimidate, to, well, terrorize. Organised military action, e.g. war between two states, obviously isn't terrorism; activities ordered by a state and carried out by its official agents (e.g. police or army) will rarely be characterised as terrorist acts; any other action which attempts to terrorize a whole society, usually by indiscriminate killing, might be characterised as terrorist activity, unless there's already an established pigeon-hole to file it into. So for instance a serial killer who kills many people is still not a terrorist, while those who tried to blow up the WTC in '93, with far less casualties are obviously terrorists. Does this look better? --AV
 * If we believe the British and the Americans, the Lockerbie bombing was ordered by the Libyan government and carried out by Libyan intelligence agents. If "activites ordered by a state and carried out by its official agents (e.g. police or army)" aren't terrorist attacks, then the Lockerbie bombing (presuming the British-U.S. explanantion for it) was not terrorism.

 * It was indiscriminate and meant to terrorize. See above.
 * Was the assasination of Zeevi indiscriminate and meant to terrorize? It certaintly wasn't indiscriminate. I wouldn't call Israel's assasination policy indiscriminate either, but it certaintly is meant to terrorize -- even if only to terrorize Palestinians into not attacking Israel. -- SJK

 * Here's a challenge for you, Anatoly: write down a definition for terrorism which clearly includes everything which is normally called terrorism, and clearly excludes everything which isn't. I bet you'll find you can't do it. -- SJK

 * I'm game, but first you do the same for the following words (selected randomly, really): "love", "homosexual", "country", and "science". I bet you won't be able to do it for any of them, which by your logic means that we shouldn't use these words on Wikipedia, right?

 * Again, absence of a rigorous and all-encompassing definition doesn't render a concept useless. --AV
 * No one is claiming that the meaning of words like "love", "homosexual", "country" or "science" is vague because they are used politically, I mean, certaintly they are vague, but no one has claimed that these words are vague because they are little more than political boo words for violent action (or political boo or yay words for anything else, for that matter). People have claimed that for the word 'terrorism'. The fact that the concept is not clearly defined does not in itself mean the concept is useless; but my argument is that the concept is useless because it is primarily a politicial value judgement, and a lack of a clear definition would be evidence for that. Regards, SJK.

It appears that the world terrorism, as commonly used applies to attacks on military targets also. Hence, by that definition (used by the U.S. government), the Government of Israel is a terrorist.

 * No, the analogy doesn't hold. As I wrote earlier, certainly there are borderline cases. And perhaps the two incidents you mentioned should be counted among them. They're said to be terrorist simply because of a common false dichotomy. I see no great harm in their being called terrorist, however, and I certainly don't see how this renders the concept unusable.

 * If tomorrow private American citizens will e.g. blow up an army base in Syria for political reasons, that will also be called a terrorist act in the papers, etc. On the other hand, if the US military does that, it won't be so called. There's a clear difference.

Secondly, even if only attacks on civilians are terrorism, government leaders aren't really civilians. They may not directly participate in military operations, but they order them and hence are responsible for them. So if terrorism is only attacks against civilians, then the assasination of Zeevi was not terrorism (let's ignore the question of whether Zeevi, as tourism minister, actually had that much to do with military decision-making).

 * First, no, let's not ignore that question. Zeevi wasn't in a position, under Israeli law, to order anything except tourism-related acitivities. Whether the prime minister listened to him on other occassions or not (and he didn't, really), the responsibility for military decisions rests with the prime minister and minister of defense.

 * Second, government leaders are civilians, even though they oversee the military. This is how it works in democratic countries.

 * Now if Zeevi was the prime minister of Israel, maybe there would be a point in what you're saiying; I'm not sure about it.

Or, you might insist that government leaders are civilians even though they are responsible indirectly for military action. In which case Israel is a terrorist, for many of the Palestinian leaders it has assasinated did not directly participate in attacks against Israel, they merely ordered them. So using your definition (terrorism excludes civlians) either the assasination of Zeevi wasn't terrorism, or Israel is a terrorist.

 * First of all, a state can't be a terrorist, it can engage in terrorist activities. Whether or not Israel, as a state, engages in terrorist activities is debatable, whether or not Palestinian groups engage in terrorist activities is not debatable. Next, Israel claimed that it only assasinated leaders who actually sent the terrorists into action and oversaw the execution of terrorist acts, not political leaders who may have okayed or ordered such actions. On the Israeli side this would correspond to an army general in charge of a military operation (even though, again, whether such operation is terrorist is debatable).

As I have said here, my point is not that Israel is or is not a terrorist, or that the assasination of Zeevi or of Palestinian leaders was or was not terrorism -- my point is that the word 'terrorist' has no real meaning: a terrorist is whoever you don't like, and other definitions of terrorism put forward are simply rationalizations. -- SJK

 * And I still disagree. To say that a terrorist is whoever you don't like is simply absurd. I don't like my uncle, but I'm not saying he's a terrorist. If you reflect on that example, I trust you'll see that at least some objective conditions are necessary before you call someone a terrorist - and in fact as I claim there's a perfectly adequate and widely used definition, or a set of definitions - and if they're sometimes blurry, so are virtually all of labels we use to call other humans. --AV

title: User:Anatoly Vorobey/Old talk


text:
User talk:Anders Torlind

2001 talk
Nice work on the mythos, Anders. This is beginning to look like this is going to be the definitive word on the Net about it already... sjc

Thanx Steve! There are a couple of really good sites in Swedish and Norwegian tho, but they lack analysis and extensive history sections. So when we have them, we are on top :-) -- Anders Torlind

Yes, I have struggled with them with my pathetic Danish... sjc

- I really like the entry for Magick, Anders - far and away the best cross-reference we've got! --MichaelTinkler

Thanx...I think. Never really could see the true point of the exotic spelling :-) --Anders Torlind

- I see what you mean, Anders. The Battle of Lutzen won't link because it's got an umlaut.

Yup. Kinda like Anders Törlind, and a host of other personal names and cities outside of the anglo-american language sphere :-)
 * I don't think I had ever truly appreciated the wonders of English spelling (people whine, but we're the only people able to type with nothing but a shift key since we have no little marks!), but this is an inadequate system for representing world languages. --MichaelTinkler
 * Or to put it another way,  all the marks that English does need, the Americans placed on the standard typewriter keyboard decades ago just to spite the world!   ((grin))

You campaign appears in the recent changes comments; I think that is very rude. --drj

Why do you think it is rude? --Anders

I believe others have answered for me by now. Basically, there is a mechanism for debate and suggestions and you are not using it; respect the conventional way of doing things. Obviously you are right, this wiki should change, but your methods are not endearing. To take an extreme anaology, just because you have a right to free speech doesn't give you a right to come round to my house and shout through my letterbox. --drj

It clutters up the page, takes up screen real estate and has a belligerent unpleasant tone to people, largely volunteers, who probably have other things to do. Where do you get the idea that you can say what "must" be done? What will the repercussions be? -- GWO

Have you considered the Battle of Lützen form? That's how I've been getting around it in a variety of places....Paul Drye

 * I can clearly see that it takes up screen real estate, and that is unfortunate. It as also a bit of the point. In order to make the point, people must see the message. I do not to spam for the sake of spamming, note that every aricle has additional content after i've been there. Also: Who am i rude to? I have as far as i know i have accused noone of nothing. I am merely stating an opinion (a strong one, granted). As for "must"...well, i for one am not content with seeing things like the Battle of Lützen not link properly, and i do think that even this version of Wikipedia must be enabled to handle such things, just as the german version does. As for the Lützen solution, it is clearly inferior. In this instance, it might work, but umlaut is not just cosmetic (sometimes a hard point to get across): In many instances it will mean two subjects end up in the same article when they are not in any way related. Furthermore, the recent changes page have a low persistence, and all entries with the "(I declare that Wikipedia must support international characters)" text will be gone in one day. See also Cato the Censor and the Punic War for a historical example of successful nagging. Long winded rant, but at least there IS a debate going on now, which i see as a step forward. --Anders Törlind

There is no debate, we're just tellling you that spamming is rude. Yes wiki should support intl. chars, but there are better much better places to make this point (the mailing lists, for example, which will be read by the coders i.e. THOSE PEOPLE WITH THE POWER TO UPGRADE THE SOFTWARE). On Recent Changes, you're just pissing off us powerless volunteers. So quit it.
 * The software is being worked on, but it, like everything else here is a voluntary effort. Please look at what is changing (see Wikipedia Announcements for Sept 29 and ) and put you comments on the beta software where the developers can sse them. -- mike dill

 * Excellent! I shall look into it immediately :-) --Anders Törlind

The newest version of UseMod (actually ready since early June or so) does support international character. (Check in any of the non-spanish wikipedia). The problem is, that that version also does other things, like changing the capitalization of links rules (in capitalizes every first letter of a multiword title), so, if we put that version here now, we would lose about half our articles (maybe not that many, but a lot anyway). That happened on the Spanish wikipedia, that was up when the change happened. Fortunately, it only had a few articles ten, so rewriting then was no problem. But, in the case of wikipedia, something must be done before. AN

Comment
Scary! So it is actually possible to change someone else's name pages? We can erase or change personal histories? Sounds like 1984 to me! ;-))

Vänliga hälsningar!

/[Herman]

Main namespace cleanup
Heya, I've moved Anders Torlind/Articles to User:Anders Torlind/old-Articles. There's some edit history, so perhaps you want to keep it. Otherwise just delete it (or ask an admin to do so). --fvw *  19:22, 2004 Dec 14 (UTC)

Tourism in Stockholm
Another editor has added the "prod" template to the article Tourism in Stockholm, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also What Wikipedia is not and Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the prod template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 14:45, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

December 2008
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to November 26, 2008 Mumbai attacks, did not appear to be constructive and has been automatically reverted by ClueBot. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you believe there has been a mistake and would like to report a false positive, please report it here and then remove this warning from your talk page. If your edit was not vandalism, please feel free to make your edit again after reporting it. The following is the log entry regarding this warning: November 26, 2008 Mumbai attacks was moved to 'H Ā G GĖR? by Anders Torlind (u) (t) redirecting article to non-existant page on 2008-12-01T10:01:46+00:00. Thank you. ClueBot (talk) 10:01, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of "A transsexual freak who is really a male."
A page you created, A transsexual freak who is really a male., has been tagged for deletion, as it meets one or more of the criteria for speedy deletion; specifically, it is vandalism.

You are welcome to contribute content which complies with our content policies and any applicable inclusion guidelines. However, please do not simply re-create the page with the same content. You may also wish to read our introduction to editing and guide to writing your first article.

Thank you. – Jerry  teps  10:02, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Note
This account was used by a legitimate Wikipedia editor who contributed before February 2002, and was subsequently taken over by a sockpuppet of JarlaxleArtemis. This was possible because the account was abandoned by its original owner after Wikipedia converted to phase II software (which became MediaWiki) in late January 2002. Since the only way for the original user with this name to gain access to this account is by developer intervention, this account should remain indefinitely blocked. Graham 87 17:01, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Comic
Hello Anders Torlind,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Comic for deletion, because it seems to be inappropriate for a variety of reasons. For more details please see the notice on the article.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Comic&action=edit&section=new&preload=Template:Hangon_preload&preloadtitle=This+page+should+not+be+speedy+deleted+because...+ contest this deletion], but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions.

Okamialvis (talk) 20:22, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Comic
Hello Anders Torlind,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Comic for deletion, because it doesn't seem to have any encyclopedic content.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=&action=edit&section=new&preload=Template:Hangon_preload&preloadtitle=This+page+should+not+be+speedy+deleted+because...+ contest this deletion], but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions.

Nerd1a4i (talk) 17:48, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

title: User talk:Anders Torlind


text:
User:Andrea Parri

I have found this project in early June 2001 and have been contributing here and there ever since, but did not register as a user for almost two months. I am convinced that both the Wikipedia and Nupedia, each one in its own way, have historical importance and are destined to enormous success and I will try to help them to get there.

Welcome, Andrea! It's nice to see you with a name after two months of being an IP number. :) While it's perfectly fine to have a homepage as a subpage of Wikipedians, if you try to make a subpage (say, Wikipedians/Andrea Parri/Todo list ), it will end up being a subpage of Wikipedians ( Wikipedians/Todo list ). I hope you're having fun here. --Stephen Gilbert

Hi Andrea,

Thanks for showing me this!

Good work Andrea!

PMelvilleAustin 00:59 13 Jun 2003 (UTC)

title: User:Andrea Parri


text:
User talk:Stephen Gilbert

Archives

 * User talk:Stephen Gilbert/Ancient (from our pre-MediaWiki days)
 * May 2002 to March 2003
 * April 2003 to August 2005

New ship table template
I've spent the last few days working on a new ship table template to enable us to centralise the editing of things like weapons outfits for a particular class of ships in one template (so with the Fletchers or Gearings or other big classes you only have to edit in one place to alter a mistake rather than in dozens or hundreds). Please have a look at the WikiProject Ships page's talk section and see what you think. I haven't written the instructions for using it yet, and I want to see whether there are any table cells people would like me to include that aren't present yet. There are two example tables, one with all the optional cells present, and the other with some excluded. David Newton 14:04, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)

So you're the one responsible
...and I'd like to say thanks. You gave us Unusual Articles, and all of us bent and twisted people owe you a debt of thanks for leading the way:

Thank you. Thank you so very, very much. -Litefantastic 00:21, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

Templates-for-Deletion entry: Template:Musicbrainz wiki box
see Templates_for_deletion This TFD-entry has too few discussion points for me to make a judgement as to consensus. Could you consider providing your opinion as you provided input to the MusicBrainz article back in early 2003? Thanks for considering this. Courtland 01:46, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

==== Wayback Machinebdbdbbddco

Heading text
====

Nashville user?
I noticed you were trying to get in touch with Lane Wright; sorry, I can't help you there, but did you try the "E-mail this user" link on the left column of his user page?

I'm actually contacting you to get an idea of other Wikipedians around Nashville. I'm compiling a small list of users in the area. Are you in or around Nashville? See also Category:Wikipedians in Tennessee. --J. J. 18:26, 2005 September 6 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your reply! --J. J. 19:20, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

User Categorisation
You were listed on the Wikipedia:Wikipedians/Canada page as living in or being associated with New Brunswick. As part of the User categorisation project, these lists are being replaced with user categories. If you would like to add yourself to the category that is replacing the page, please visit Category:Wikipedians in New Brunswick for instructions.--Rmky87 21:23, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

Wikimedia Canada
Hi there! I'd like to invite you to explore Wikimedia Canada, and create a list of people interested in forming a local chapter for our nation. A local chapter will help promote and improve the organization, within our great nation. We'd also like to encourage everyone to suggest projects for our national chapter to participate in. Hope to see you there! -- user:zanimum

Commincation Article
I noticed that you last post ong the commincation talk page in 2003. I waas wondering about your progress on the update for that page. I am looking at taking it up to make a viable encyclodpia article. Is there anything I should know?Kyle.Mullaney 08:05, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:Nucleus ER golgi ex.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Nucleus ER golgi ex.jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Fair use, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following [ this link]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. - SCEhard T 04:41, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

 * Dear you,
 * let me tell that Nucleus ER golgi ex.jpg is the most beautiful image i've seen in my life
 * best regards,
 * me 82.66.23.99 (talk) 12:44, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

Help
Hey Stephen, my names Mike and I'm from Los Angeles. I'm stuck in a youth Rehab right now in the middle of Kansas and I’d like to wreak a little havoc on our network, which consists of about 15 PCs. You seem pretty literate in means of computing, and I’m not too, so it would be much appreciated if you could give me some pointers on how I could go about doing this. I have basic knowledge on Command Prompt, but would like to learn more. The sites we are able to visit consist of about four, and it would be nice to get through their firewall, and be able to do more things. I am on the admin. account, so if you could throw out any suggestions on what I could do, and how, that would be awesome. Thanks..

Fear and Loathing 02:49, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

 * Response on your talk page. -- Stephen Gilbert 20:19, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Stephen, this was most definitely not the answer I was looking for. See, the thing is, I am restricted to only a couple of web sites that I am able to view. Open internet is a problem. Wikipedia is my only form of information right now. I appreciate the links, but am not able to view them. I am at a lack of motivation to learn in depth about computers, and my ambitions are not set towards something of that magnitude. As humans, we want in now, or not at all. I was merely looking for a quick answer to which I threw out a question. What you speak is true. Fear and Loathing 16:07, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Possibly unfree Image:Map of irish counties1998.gif
An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Map of irish counties1998.gif, has been listed at Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at Possibly unfree images if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. - SCEhard T 02:14, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

ArtCyclopedia
A "" template has been added to the article ArtCyclopedia, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached.

I decided to notify you because you were one of the earlier editors of that page. It was initially created by someone anonymous (owner of the website?), so I had no way to contact them.

Tullie 23:28, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

original Wikipedia logo
Hi! I noticed that you uploaded Image:Old wikipedia logo.png, though am unsure if you're the creator. I've asked at Wikipedia talk:Logos and slogans if anyone knows what the text of the logo is taken from, and was referred your way. Could you drop by and fill us in? Thanks, BanyanTree 22:34, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Electronic underground community
An editor has nominated Electronic underground community, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 22:59, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Award
I would like to present to you the I Edited Jimbo Wales' Userpage Barnstar! — ComputerGuy890100  Talk to meWhat I've done to help Wikipedia 23:13, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Nintendo
I have nominated Nintendo, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/Nintendo. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. SaiyanEmperor2008 (talk) 12:10, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
 * To save you the effort of looking, I'll let you know that I've already closed this ridiculous AFD. JulesH (talk) 12:25, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of List of record labels
I have nominated List of record labels, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/List of record labels&. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Tavix (talk) 22:50, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Welcome
Hello, Stephen Gilbert, I know this is a bit late, but welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like wikipedia and decide to stay. I am sorry that there are so many impersonal warning messages on your talk page. There are many editors who feel that your hard work here is important and valuable, especially me.

If you are looking for help, you can just type:
 * Need help?
 * helpme

...and your question on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer. Or, please visit  New contributors' help page , where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have!

If you have any questions at all, please message me. Again, welcome! Ikip (talk) 03:44, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

An article you created maybe deleted soon: Tools which can help you
The article you created: List of record labels may be deleted from Wikipedia.

There is an ongoing debate about whether your article should be deleted here:
 * Articles for deletion/List of record labels.

The faster you respond on this page, the better chance the article you created can be saved.

Finding sources which mention the topic of your article is the very best way to avoid an article being deleted Findsources3:
 * Find sources for List of record labels: google news recent, google news old, google books, google scholar, NYT recent, NYT old, a9, msbooks, msacademic ...You can then cite these results in the Article for deletion discussion.

Also, there are several tools and helpful editors on Wikipedia who can help you:
 * 1. List the page on Article Rescue Squadron. You can get help listing your page on the Article Rescue Squadron talk page.
 * 2. At any time, you can ask any administrator to move your article to a special page. (Called userfication)

 * 3. You can request a mentor to help explain all of the complex rules that editors use to get a page deleted: Wikipedia:Adopt-a-User. But don't wait for a mentor to respond to you before responding on the article for deletion page.
 * 4. When trying to delete a page, veteran editors love to use a lot of rule acronyms. Don't let these acronyms intimidate you. Here is a list of acronyms you can use yourself: WP:Deletion debate acronyms which may support the page you created being kept.

If your page is deleted, you also have many options available. Good luck! Ikip (talk) 03:44, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks
Thank you for the support, it seems like I am either getting super praise or super condemnation, with no in between. I have only been here since 2005 myself. I bet you have seen things change a lot here? Ikip (talk) 19:08, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Favor to ask
I need an outside observer's comments (and I think you are as outside as they come): Can you look at and comment on the removal of the dispute tag on Television episodes, 3 like minded editors keep removing any tag, as they have done for the past year (evidence of this on talk page). Dispute tag removed Comprimise tag removedComprimise tag removed

Thanks. Ikip (talk) 19:11, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

File:Vatche Arslanian sm.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Vatche Arslanian sm.jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Papa November (talk) 16:30, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

MfD nomination of User talk:Jimbo Wales
User talk:Jimbo Wales, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User talk:Jimbo Wales and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of User talk:Jimbo Wales during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Techman224 Talk  16:44, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

 * It's because your the first contributor :). Techman224  Talk  16:45, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Mailing list
I have nominated Mailing list, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/Mailing list. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 11:36, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Charles Sanders Peirce article
I've been looking at its earliest versions and I see that you did the first substantial writing (whole paragraphs, etc.). Quite a bit is still there in the current version. Some things which which you wrote have disappeared from it but should be put back in. I'll see to that eventually. The Tetrast (talk) 00:52, 17 May 2009 (UTC).

Historical review
Hi, Mr. Gilbert. I'm a wikipedist, but I'm afraid almost exclusively for the spanish wikipedia. Currently I'm involved in a retrospective of some of the first time steps in wikipedia. I'm very intrigued in what moved you to make this edit in WP:NOT on June 15th 2002, I mean the concrete circumstances. I would appreciate greatly if you could drop me just some words in my talk page here, or better -if possible- in my talk page at the spanish wikipedia. With my deepest appreciation for your very early contributions, Yours, --Gustavocarra (talk) 19:08, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Project Galactic Guide
I have nominated Project Galactic Guide, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/Project Galactic Guide. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Joe Chill (talk) 22:11, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Internet encyclopedia project
I have nominated Internet encyclopedia project, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/Internet encyclopedia project. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 23:53, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

The WITF wants you
''The World Intelligence Task Force would like to recruit you as an agent. If you accept, comment under the pending section on the project page. It is a relatively new task force and we need new members right away so if you are interested please don't be shy. At this moment in time we only have three members. If you want more information, please go to the project page.'' — Preceding unsigned comment added by SunCountryGuy01 (talk • contribs)

MystiCon AfD
Thanks for fixing the lost comments. I tried, and I think I just made things worse. :-) - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 00:55, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Invitation to join the Ten Year Society
Dear Stephen,

I'd like to extend a cordial invitation to you to join the Ten Year Society, an informal group for editors who've been participating in the Wikipedia project for ten years or more.

Best regards, — Hex    (❝ ?!  ❞)   02:42, 11 November 2012 (UTC).

Notice of change
Hello. You are receiving this message because of a [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Administrators&oldid=526254016#Restoration_of_the_tools_.28proposal.29 recent change] to the administrator policy that alters what you were told at the time of your desysopping. The effect of the change is that if you are inactive for a continuous three year period, you will be unable to request return of the administrative user right. This includes inactive time prior to your desysopping if you were desysopped for inactivity and inactive time prior to the change in policy. Inactivity is defined as the absence of edits or logged actions. Until such time as you have been inactive for three years, you may request return of the tools at the bureaucrats' noticeboard. After you have been inactive for three years, you may seek return of the tools only through WP:RFA. Thank you.  MBisanz  talk 00:20, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

 * Hee. When I asked to be "desysopped", there was no administrator policy. If I ever lose my mind and want super-administrator powers back, I'll be sure to fill out the all the right forms in triplicate. Now, get off my lawn, young whippersnapper! ;) --Stephen Gilbert (talk) 03:30, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

 * Haha, I can outrun an oldtimer like you!  MBisanz  talk 16:19, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Your user and talk pages
Hi Stephen, I found your user and talk pages while doing some wikiarchaeology. . I have restored all of their earliest surviving revisions from old copies of the Wikipedia database, so they are available to everyone now. Hope you don't mind. Graham 87 08:02, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

 * Thank you for your archaeological work! I appreciate it. -- Stephen Gilbert (talk) 18:38, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

MfD nomination of How to draw a diagram with Microsoft Word
How to draw a diagram with Microsoft Word, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:How to draw a diagram with Microsoft Word and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of How to draw a diagram with Microsoft Word during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. the wub "?!"  17:31, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Just to let you know -- Missing Wikipedians
You have been mentioned at Missing Wikipedians. Ottawahitech (talk) 09:32, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the heads-up. I'm still around, just not particularly active. --Stephen Gilbert (talk) 15:42, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of 2.PAK for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 2.PAK is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/2.PAK until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. ― Padenton |✉  20:46, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of 20-GATE for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 20-GATE is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/20-GATE until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. ― Padenton |✉  16:11, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:51, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Question
you've been around the block, what was old wikipedia circa 2002 like? (I Dan tha Man I (talk) 06:00, 2 October 2018 (UTC))

Heee
Hee, How're you? (: Kind regards, some youngster Wikipedian TruthToBeSpoken   (talk)  20:58, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Invitation to join the Fifteen Year Society
Dear ,

I'd like to extend a cordial invitation to you to join the Fifteen Year Society, an informal group for editors who've been participating in the Wikipedia project for fifteen years or more.

Best regards, Urhixidur (talk) 16:38, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Avonlea (Anne of Green Gables)

The article Avonlea (Anne of Green Gables) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern: "The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing General notability guideline and the more detailed Notability (fiction) requirement. WP:BEFORE did not reveal any significant coverage on Gnews, Gbooks or Gscholar. If you disagree and deprod this, please explain how it meets them on the talk page here in the form of 'This article meets criteria A and B because...' and ping me back through WP:ECHO or by leaving a note at User talk:Piotrus. Thank you."

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 08:05, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Wikipedia:Glossary
Wikipedia:Glossary, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Glossary and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia:Glossary during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Seventyfiveyears (talk) 19:02, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of The Digital Village for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Digital Village is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/The Digital Village until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Ahmetlii (talk) 21:17, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Association des Bibliophiles Universels

The article Association des Bibliophiles Universels has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern: "SOurcing isn't there in either language to indicate this was a notable project, no evidence of WP:ORG/WEB"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Star  Mississippi  22:57, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

"Satyricon(band)" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Satyricon(band)&redirect=no Satyricon(band)] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached. Steel1943 (talk) 02:02, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

New Article Alert
I noticed you have contributed immensely to creating new pages on existing Countries today such as Israel and Netherlands. This is to notify you of the ongoing discussion here on Biafra. Fugabus (talk) 19:33, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

title: User talk:Stephen Gilbert