text:
Talk:Arson

Firefighters
Just something to stimulate discussion, it is a well-known fact/urban legend (prolly fact) that firefighters stand a much higher chance of becoming arsonists than the general population, because adrenaline is addictive -- hence, they set fires then rush to go put them out once someone calls 911. This needs documentation, but is interesting and thus, I'm putting it here until someone can confirm in some verifiable way. Tuf-Kat — Preceding undated comment added 07:36, 18 February 2003 (UTC)

 * I'd lean towards fact. In recent years, there was a well reported case (in California I believe) of a highly regarded arson investigator who was working on a novel. There was an accumulation of baffling and suspicious arson occurrences; meanwhile a working draft of the novel somehow met eyes they weren't intended for and it happened that occurrences in the plot of the book matched rather closely the fires that were being perpetrated. And that's just one example I've heard of. -- knoodelhed 11:55, 4 Oct 2003 (UTC)

 * It is an urban legend. John Orr was an aberration and a disgrace. If anything, the opposite is true, with arsonists being drawn to the fire service, but I don't think most of them make it through training. The psychology of arson just doesn't propel them to like it. If you'd like some reading on the subject, try: http://www.usfa.fema.gov/downloads/pdf/publications/tr-141.pdf. Meanwhile, for more information on the John Orr story, which was made into a TV movie, you cna run a search for his name.--catseyes 18:39, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

 * According to the pyromania article, pyromaniacs are attracted also to instiutions that control fire like fire alarms and firehouses. Therefore I think it makes more sense that someone is obsessed with fire when they become a fireman, not they become obsessed with fire while they are a fireman (though it seems possible) Johhny-turbo 05:59, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Psychology
Maybe a section on the Psychology of arson should be added. (unless that is covered by pyromania) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.163.243.216 (talk) 23:34, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

 * I've added a section on Firesetter Motivation, which has a brief discussion of psychology, and well as other motives behind arson.--SLCFD876 16:33, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

picture caption
Is The fire of the century, caused by arson trying to refer to Old_Fire? --Espoo 05:52, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Intent
Going back through the edit history, I noticed that the original, broad definition of arson posted was "setting a fire with the intent to cause damage." Then this language about "with the intent to kill people or animals inside." If someone sets a fire with the intent to kill people, and it kills them, that's a homicide. If they fail to kill the people, that's attempted homicide. Granted, arson is still involved, but the definition is not so narrow as to requrie an intent to kill. I know of no statute that requires the intent to kill an animal as an element. I understand PETA and ELF/ALF have arson related animal rights activisim, but there are no statutes of which I am aware that employ animals or require an intent to harm an animal in any element of the crime of arson. Arson is setting a fire with the intent to cause damage, plain and simple. I've removed the superfulous language, but I guess we can discuss what if any ought to be back in. I think the arson definition language is more accurate without it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SLCFD876 (talk • contribs) 17:26, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

 * you are correct Urukagina — Preceding undated comment added 2:49, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Galicia (under motivation)
193.203.200.2 wrote about the frequency of man made fires in Galicia. It seems very specific to me. Without verification to the paragraphs significance, ill just correct puncuation for now. Urukagina 02:49, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Arson in fiction
I wonder what the point of the subsection "arson in fiction" is? Marc K 11:49, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

 * that's so true🖖 Arson.banza (talk) 22:41, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

Etymology
Etymology behind the word "arson"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by UrbanGrill (talk • contribs) 19:05, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

 * For some reason in footnote 1, which is strange because it is probably a major reason to visit the page ... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:8109:3C0:6D0:89DF:FD54:EE8D:E267 (talk) 10:32, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

European bias
This article is quite clearly only about arson in Europe. Anyone up for editing it to include a more general worldview? 128.113.98.26 18:11, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

 * Well, I can't imagine setting off wildfires that endanger lives and property is looked well upon anywhere in the world....but okay what other views are there? Masterblooregard 21:41, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

 * I made some changes in an attempt to correct the Euro-centric bias. Might the tag be pulled?--Valkyryn (talk) 22:15, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

 * There never was a "globalize" tag on there. The refimprove tag is still there, and needs to remain for now, as the article is still in need of more citations.  SchuminWeb (Talk) 01:21, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Legal Definition
What are the elements of the crime of arson? I think that would be pretty relevant. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 168.179.185.82 (talk) 19:51, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Elements added
I added the common law elements of arson in the U.S. In doing so, I reorganized the article to separate English and Scots law from U.S. law. I moved the sentence concerning felony-murder in the U.S. to the U.S. Law section. --G77 (talk) 21:40, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Reorganization and new references
I added several references to legal works in the U.S. law section. I also added external links to a web MD article dealing with the motives behind arson. Finally, I noticed that many of the introductory remarks dealt with the motives behind arson. So, I thought it better to create a separate section for the motives behind arson. --G77 (talk) 01:48, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Only a few citations still needed
After I added many citations to almost every section, I found that the disclaimer about need for citation was no longer necessary. Therefore, I moved it to the only section still in need of cites: English and Scots law. My expertise is only in U.S. law. Any barristers out there who could lend a few cites?--G77 (talk) 20:58, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Misdemeanor Arson
Recently, someone put in some language about different degrees of arson. I had to revert those changes back to the original for two reasons. First, the writing was of a poor quality and was unsigned by any Wikipedia user. Second, the language about the different degrees of arson had no real citation and seemed out of place.

I'm not opposed to talk about different degrees of arson, but, it would have to take place in the U.S. law section. Furthermore, it must make clear that the degrees of arson vary from state to state. Finally, this article is a part of the common law portal. That is why its language focuses on the common law and not each jurisdiction's individual statutory scheme. It is impossible to give each state's outline of the differing degrees of arson. We might consider simply stating that the sentencing schemes vary by state and that certain acts of arson are only misdemeanors.--G77 (talk) 01:03, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

 * I'm sorry, I didn't see your explanation until just now. As you can see, I recently re-vamped, restored and re-positioned the information in question...I was careful to maintain the citations you added, while adding some more. Incidentally, it would be nice if you could include a brief summary of what some of the legal citations you refer to, are saying, since few readers are able to immediately access the Legal works you are citing (unless they are available online). It is acceptable to me, your suggestion that 'We might consider simply stating that the sentencing schemes vary by state and that certain acts of arson are only misdemeanors.' The main reason I introduced 'talk about different degrees of arson' is because the statement it replaces was insufficient and inaccurate, the sentence about "arson is considered a dangerous crime, and is a felony."  For one thing, all crimes are considered dangerous, and secondly arson is not always prosecuted as a felony, in common law or otherwise. Now that we are more aware of each other's perspectives, we probably can easily come to an agreement on the ideal characterization of the information, for the article. Signed: 69.155.104.98 (talk) 22:42, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

 * OK, sorry I took so long to get back to this. At common law, arson was a felony. Crimes similar to arson but punished as a misdemeanor were not called "arson." They were called "houseburning" and "malicious mischief." Therefore, it is incorrect to say that at common law arson was sometimes punished as a misdemeanor. It is only by statute, in contravention of the common law, that states punish "arson" as a misdemeanor.
 * However, I like the style of your latest writing and I agree that something must be said about the different degrees of arson in the U.S. I hope you don't mind if I move that information to the U.S. law section.--G77 (talk) 07:09, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

 * I do mind. What's with your edits? You seem to be wanting to turn a somewhat balanced template into a peculiar amplification of archaic discussions, you refer to "common law" this and "common law" that, as if modern case precedent is not particularly relevant. What are you trying to accomplish? Are you an attorney? Lonmower (talk) 13:26, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

 * I'm sorry. I don't mean any offense. I'm trying to make an accurate description of arson as a legal concept. Arson is part of the "common law" series on wikipedia. That's why I think it's important to talk about the common law elements of arson. After talking with another wikipedia editor who practiced law in England, he and I thought the best way of organizing the common law articles is to start with a basic definition of the crime, move to the common law elements (as these serve as the basis of the law in most English speaking countries), describe basic themes in the law of specific common law countries, and finally include miscellaneous information such as motives behind the crime.
 * I am not unconcerned with modern precedent. I definitely think we should include it in the U.S. law section. I kept everything that you said; I only moved it to the U.S. law section and (if I remember correctly) changed a few verbs from passive to active.
 * It sounds like you've probably gone to law school. So, I'm sure you know that the way a legal concept is usually described is by starting with the old common law rule, then describing how it has changed, and finally stating some basic themes in the way courts deal with the concept modernly. I assumed that this would be the best way to write an article about a concept like arson. Do you think the article is organized incorrectly?
 * I'm hoping to use the arson article to form a basic template for organizing other articles on common law legal concepts. I'm still new to this whole wikipedia thing and the arson article is the only one that I've really taken time to work with, other than a few edits on burglary. My plan is that once I/we hammer out a basic template for articles concerning crimes in English speaking (common law) countries we can more easily edit other articles in that genre.
 * Let me know if you think this is a bad idea. If so, I will definitely consider changing my plan. --G77 (talk) 01:09, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

 * I find the whole Wiki Law Project a bit quiet, with many editors inactive. At least, I rarely encounter any, but them I'm one of the few UK criminal lawyers editing here at all. If this gets contentious (and I don't think it will), we could set up a discussion on the Project's Talk Page, but meanwhile I think we should just get on with it and try to improve these articles. Peripherally involved are articles on mugging and vandalism which don't seem to focus on anything in particular and might be better redirected, especially considering that they are poorly sourced. I'm around most of the time, so drop me a note and I'll get back to you. -- Rodhullandemu  (Talk) 01:41, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

 * You're right. I think it's time to move on, too. I can't think of much more that I can add to this article. I might try to clean up the robbery article, whenever I get some time. --G77 (talk) 01:56, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Namdaemun arson
I think that the arson in Namdaemun should be added to this article. Namdaemun is Korea's number 1 treasure. I feel sad for me and the rest of the Koreans. Weatherlover819 (talk) 11:11, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

 * In the general article about arson, no. It is, however, mentioned in the specific article about the structure.  SchuminWeb (Talk) 11:27, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

New Organization for the article
I tried to copy the basic organization of the burglary article. After a bit of discussion, another user interested in editing the common law articles and I decided the best organization for these types of articles is: --G77 (talk) 23:34, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Common law definition
 * U.S. Law
 * English Law
 * X nation's law
 * Misc.

Passive and active voices
A user undid my edit which corrected a sentence by changing it from passive voice to active voice.

English passive voice is a common stylistic problem and Wikipedia users generally agree that we should avoid using it. For example:

"John threw the ball" is better than "The ball was thrown."

In this case, the sentence read: "As with any crime, arson charges are punished..." This structure is not as good as the correction I made: "States typically prosecute arson in degrees of seriousness."

The correction changes the sentence from passive voice to active. Therefore, I suggest that it should remain in its improved state.

With the change, I also corrected a few other problems. First, the corrected sentence adds the word "typically." This is an important addition because the criminal laws of every state change from time to time, and it is impossible, or at least extremely inefficient, to constantly check on the arson laws of every state. Instead, we should state the general theme. Furthermore, the word "typically" does not imply that "not all states punish arson in degrees of seriousness." The word "typical" means "combining or exhibiting the essential characteristics of a group." The essential characteristic of the group (states in the U.S.) is that they punish arson in degrees of seriousness. Therefore, the change I made does not imply that not all states punish in degrees; it simply implies that at least the majority, if not all of them, do punish in degrees.

Finally, the improved sentence removes the language "As with any crime..." This is important because not all crimes are punished in degrees of seriousness. The user who offered this comment gave no citation indicating that every crime is always punished in degrees of seriousness. Therefore, I suggest that, in the very least, this language should be removed.

The change I made to the sentence increased the accuracy of the statement without altering its essential content. It also made a stylistic improvement. Therefore, the improved sentence should remain.

In good faith, I will wait for a response to this argument for a few days before making (or actually remaking) the improved sentence. --G77 (talk) 21:10, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

 * States do not "typically prosecute crimes with regard to degrees of seriousness" states _always_ prosecute crimes with regard to degrees of severity. But I'm not wanting to argue this with you; there is a peculiar, ulterior motive evident to most of your edits, and I am more keen to discuss that with you if necessary, or if you prefer. Lonmower (talk) 21:31, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

 * I'm interested in the idea that every crime is always punished in degrees of seriousness. Do you have a cite for that? If it's true, I will certainly alter my stance on that issue. In regard to my motives for my edits, they are only to write accurate articles. I guess I should talk about that on your profile page though, not on the arson article...--G77 (talk) 21:50, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

 * Crime has been described and prosecuted with attention to varying degrees of severity since the beginning of human history, in every culture, in every nation, in every era. Are you actually requesting a cite for that? Lonmower (talk) 07:43, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

 * OK, sorry it took me a while to get back to this. Many, if not most, crimes are not punished with attention to varying degrees of severity. For example, statutory rape is not prosecuted in degrees. Either the defendant is guilty of statutory rape or he is not. The vast majority of crimes in the U.S. are not prosecuted in varying degrees of seriousness. Arson and murder charges are an exception. Under the rubric of arson, the prosecutor might choose to charge first degree arson, or second degree arson, and so on, depending on the situation. The same is true of murder. This is not true of statutory rape, just as one example.
 * On the other hand, if you are referring to the possible punishment that a convicted defendant might receive based on sentencing guidelines, these, of course, vary. In sentencing a defendant, the judge must adhere to the possible range of punishments that the particular statute requires him to consider. He might take into account, for example, whether the defendant has committed other crimes in the past. The judge, generally, has a good deal of discretion to determine the correct punishment, and he will make his decision with attention to the circumstances of the case.
 * Sentencing guidelines are not, however, what the phrase at issue in the arson article is considering. The phrase indicates that all crimes ("As with any crime...") are prosecuted in degrees of severity. This is simply untrue. A quick look at the criminal code of any state in the union will show that not all crimes are punished as first degree X, second degree X, and so on. Not all crimes are like arson and murder. Murder is punished in degrees; so is arson. But that is certainly not the case with all, and probably not even most, charges that a defendant might face. Therefore, my answer to your question is yes. I would like to see a cite that indicates that every crime since the dawn of mankind has been prosecuted in degrees of severity. I remain willing to change my mind if you can produce a rational argument. --G77 (talk) 01:58, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

 * "For example, statutory rape is not prosecuted in degrees." Well, that's because statutory rape involves a degree of the crime of rape. In other words, as with all crimes, the crime of rape has been 'prosecuted or described with attention to degrees of severity,' and statutory rape is modern terminology for a certain degree of severity.   For more about how crime is historically adjudicated with attention to degrees of severity, have a look at attendant circumstance and extenuating circumstances and related articles. Lonmower (talk) 04:54, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
 * "not all crimes are punished as first degree X, second degree X, and so on." semantics: the sense of the word "degrees" in the article is not identical to sense of the word "degree" in " first degree X, second degree X, and so on." In the article degrees refers to levels of severity, whereas " X degree X" is legal terminology not strictly employed in every case. Lonmower (talk) 06:57, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

 * Statutory rape is not a degree of rape. It's a different crime that the prosecutor can choose to charge someone with. Consider SEC rule 10b-5; either someone is guilty of fraud in connection with the sale of securities or not; there are no degrees of the offense. The same with SEC rule 16b; either someone violates the rule against short-swing profits or not--no degrees there either. Is someone who violates a law against bingo games without a license subject to prosecution by varying degrees of illegal bingo gaming? No. That's just ridiculous. The prosecutor never thinks "which degree of conspiracy should I charge him with." Voter Harassment is not a degree of another crime; it's just a crime. Don't harass voters. What other offense is that a degree of?
 * Furthermore, even if all of these crimes are a degree of something else (I have no idea what that would be, maybe a degree of just being bad?), the sentence in question is still misleading. It insinuates that all crimes are punished in degrees, as in "first degree X, second degree X, and so on." That's simply not how criminal codes are organized, just take a look at one.
 * In regard to your references to circumstances, extenuating circumstances are taken into account at sentencing, not in the prosecution of the offense. During the trial, the prosecutor must prove the attendant circumstances as defined by a particular crime. This concept actually proves my point. The prosecutor cannot cause someone to be especially guilty of operating a bingo hall without a license, or increase the degree of the illegal bingo hall offense. He must simply prove the attendant circumstances required for the crime, nothing more, nothing less. The court will then determine the severity of punishment at the sentencing, not during the prosecution of the offense.--G77 (talk) 09:45, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

 * What a pointless discussion this has become. You seem to go from one misconception to another, obviously neither an attorney nor a paralegal, nor having attended law school or pre-law, nor having any experience in legal discourse. You're just expressing opinions, confident in your own inclinations, what a waste of time to argue with anyone who approaches debate from such a standpoint.  Lonmower (talk) 10:44, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
 * nevertheless, I did revise the disputed sentence. Lonmower (talk) 11:56, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

 * While my writing style here was certainly more conversational, I feel I presented my argument in a straightforward and rational manner. I don't think it's necessary or relevant to accuse me of a lack of competence. I graduated from a top 100 law school, hold the top award for my school's appellate advocacy competition, and am now licensed to practice law in two states. As to the Breaking and Entering bit, I did not argue that matter because it was clear that I could be mistaken. I've never seen burglary listed as breaking and entering. But, as Montaigne says, "what do I know?" Just because I think something is true everywhere, does not make it so.
 * In any event, thank you for changing the sentence. I actually see this debate as beneficial. Please feel free to challenge any of my future entries.--G77 (talk) 17:22, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

"Breaking and entering" was a UK term for burglary prior to the Theft Act 1968, when a distinction was drawn between offences committed at night (="burglary") and during daylight hours (="housebreaking"), and persists in several common-law jurisdictions. -- Rodhullandemu  (Talk) 17:32, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Dark Ages
In medieval continental Europe arsonists were burned at the stake (a.k.a. autodafe), which was very much fitting for their crime. 91.83.16.172 (talk) 22:35, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

 * Interesting, but without a reliable source, we can't use it. SchuminWeb (Talk) 01:39, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Historical examples
It seems there is no consensus for having too much detail on these in this article when they are more than adequately discussed in their own, and sourced. I'd suggest going into too much detail here is a breach of WP:UNDUE; in fact, they might just as well be in the "See also" section. -- Rodhull andemu  15:06, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

 * I have reverted your edit since the Reichstag fire is perhaps the most important example of arson in recent times. The article is extremely short on real examples, and should be expanded and not cut down. Peterlewis (talk) 16:19, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

 * Why does that detail need to be here when it is already covered (and sourced) in the relevant article? -- Rodhull andemu  16:26, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

 * Its hardly any great detail at all: there is much more in the main article. To repeat, the article as it stands lacks examples. If you like I could put in some other examples where forensics has assisted in finding the causes of fire. Arson is frequently blamed when there are other explanations, such as faulty products. Car fires, for example, are often caused by faulty fuel lines. At present the artcile is very dry and dusty, almost as if written by a lawyer. Peterlewis (talk) 17:28, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

 * Well, that should come as no surprise; this article is mainly within the Criminal Law project. If there is a Criminology project, which I don't know at the time of writing, and it comes within that project, the psychological aspects of arsonism should certainly be addressed. As it happens, they haven't been so far. Historical examples of arson might well be addressed by such attention; but the political dimension thus far appears to be as moot as any other form of property damage, or attacks on individuals or sections of population. As far as this article is concerned, arson is apparently no more a political tool than any other means of oppression, and I suggest that this article would be better off without it, given the alternatives. Accordingly, I've removed a lot of unsourced, tendentious tosh. Seriously, if this article is to mean anything at all, it needs to be focused on its reason to exist: which is "the destruction of property by fire", and although motives may vary, they do need careful, and reliably sourced analysis. Rodhull  andemu  01:26, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Motivation for arson
The Radio Four series All in the Mind discussed motivation for arson on July 12 2011. Criminological psychology is not my strong point, but if any knows anything about this topic, it could go in the article. ACEOREVIVED (talk) 20:45, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Arson. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080722133206/http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/tandi2/tandi350.html to http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/tandi2/tandi350.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081224000233/http://www.csumb.edu/site/x7006.xml to http://www.csumb.edu/site/x7006.xml
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=%2Fc%2Fa%2F2007%2F09%2F01%2FMN8LRTBBN.DTL
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081222082858/http://www.saljournal.com/rdnews/story/Salinan_pleads_no_contest_to_misdemeanor_charges_1_25_08 to http://www.saljournal.com/rdnews/story/Salinan_pleads_no_contest_to_misdemeanor_charges_1_25_08
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080503193949/http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/blackstone/bk4ch16.htm to http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/blackstone/bk4ch16.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090225154641/http://www.asiaforests.org/doc/resources/fire/pffsea/Report_Community.pdf to http://www.asiaforests.org/doc/resources/fire/pffsea/Report_Community.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 00:38, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Arson. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080503065349/http://www.ncc.state.ne.us/statistics/data_search/jcr/jcr_referrals.htm to http://www.ncc.state.ne.us/statistics/data_search/jcr/jcr_referrals.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 02:07, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

along with psychology
It didn't seem like there was a ton of information on why people do this or what they are considered (the impulse control disorder and pyromania), the only place I could find the information was in the introduction. Should it be brought down to a new section or could it be talked about more in-depth. Tina leighann (talk) 14:52, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: English 111 First-Semester College Composition
— Assignment last updated by Lincol7 (talk) 14:59, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Adding a Psychology topic to the actual article.
I am immensely interested in psychology and I was wondering if it would be a good idea to add a psychology paragraph to the topic of arson because I think it would be important for readers to learn about why arsonists might commit the crime or what attributions start that chain of bad events in a person. In all, why do arsonists do what they do and what got them to start. Was it their childhood or was it a trigger in their life? Melbaby52822 (talk) 01:54, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

 * This has been discussed a few times before, and I don't see any consensus against it having developed, so please do be bold and add one if you're able to. You're welcome to add it as just a paragraph or an appropriately-placed section as you see fit. If you need more help with contributing, feel free to read the new contributors' guide or ask others for help. Happy editing, Closingbrackettalk 05:50, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Arson


text:
Talk:List of entities that have issued postage stamps (A–E)

2003 edits
To whoever wants to dink with this; the links to renamed countries could go direct, but the country article should have a note about the renaming, including its dates. Dead countries absorbed into a present-day country can link to the country, but the country article needs to say that this happened, and when, and have minimal thumbnail about the absorbee. Anything complicated, like Italian occupation of the Aegean islands, should have its own article. The idea is that a person with a stamp ought to be able to use wikipedia to find out the story behind the mysterious name on the stamp. Stan Shebs 07:44 Feb 18, 2003 (UTC)

 * There should be a better way to present the entities than to use all those badly named subpages. --Lorenzarius 15:25 Feb 18, 2003 (UTC)

 * Absolutely. The entries are ugly because they're extracted from a database, and their only virtue is uniqueness.  Military occupations can be complicated to describe - the tangle of stamps is mute evidence - but until the articles exist, it will be hard to decide how the links should work.  For instance, Horta as a stamp issuer was never more than an administrative district of the Azores, so I made info about the stamps be part of the Azores info, but it also happens to be a town, which is only relevant in that most letters using Horta stamps will have been postmarked in Horta town. Stan Shebs 18:16 Feb 18, 2003 (UTC)

dead countries
What a blunt name! :-) How about provinces that formerly issued postage? Are they called dead "countries" as well? --Menchi 04:49, 2 Dec 2003 (UTC)

 * Yeah, one of the reasons why I don't favor the term. A nine-week military occupation of a city can and does issue its own stamps, but it consists of a rented printing press and a guy at HQ selling them, a pretty far cry from a "country". I guess it's a useful abstraction for philatelists, and not as alien-invasion-sounding as "entity". :-) Stan 05:14, 2 Dec 2003 (UTC)

It's actually universal philatelic usage (including in the UK, for instance by Stanley Gibbons) to say "Great Britain" instead of "United Kingdom". To see it in Google, compare things like '"great britain offices" morocco' to '"united kingdom offices" morocco', you'll see 10x or more in favor of GB. Stan 14:15, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Omissions
Someone with an accurate list of these entities should carefully re-check this list. Or is it true that the peoples of Spain and Togo distain the use of stamps? MeltBanana 16:42, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
 * As it says at the top, "The list excludes the current members of the UPU", but people are not getting it, because they keep wanting to add countries. This list is really "dead countries that philatelists care about", I've never been happy with the current title. Stan 04:32, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

 * Ah that will teach me to read an article before complaining about it but I do think the current organisation is far from good. If this is going to be confined to defunct entities it sould be more explicitly said in the title as Togo and Sapin 'have issued stamps but still do. Also the companion Postal organizations is odd as they are not actually organisations like GPO and USPS but just a list of countries. I would think readers are better served if the list are merged with some identifier for existing entites, anyone agree? If not rename them something like List of countries with current Postal organizations and List of defunct postage stamp issuing entities or some combination so they near match. MeltBanana  19:08, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Soviet Union?
The Soviet Union isn't on this list, and neither are the RSFSR, Soviet Armenia (Independent), The Republic of the Far East, Federated Transcaucasia, the Tuva Republic, the Bukhara Emirate/Buhara Soviet Republic, and so on. These seem to be significant ommisions, is there a reason they're not here that I'm missing? I'm not certain of the qualifications neccesary.

Correction, Tuva is on the list. Crocodilicus 04:05, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Format Revised
I've been trying for a couple of weeks to put together a definitive list of needed country surveys and it occurred to me that this list is the ideal place to do it. The list itself was not helping us much because nearly all the links were to the entity main articles (e.g., to Peru and not to the postage of Peru). I was also aware, by reference to the compendium, that quite a lot of material could be added so I decided to kill two birds with one stone.

I realise this has left us with three lists instead of one but we did have a size problem that we should have resolved. I also realise that it has created a large and unrecommended number of redlinks but, given my purpose, I feel justified in doing this. The redlinks can be used in the short to medium term to instigate creation of stubs. I have material about most of the redlink entities that, given time, I can use to create a large number of stubs. Stan has provided a huge number of images that can be used and so I think that, providing no one expects Rome to be built in a day, we can use this list as our basis for development.

The titles I have used in the redlinks are up for grabs given the length of some that I have tried to shorten. I realise a lot of display titles have been missed out but I did the work on a text processor before uploading it and I was a little hidebound by some of the more extensive titles on offer. Our standard is of course "Postage stamps and postal history of X" but please bear in mind that it is not entirely useful when it prefaces the Mahra Sultanate of Qishn and Socotra!! If the article is re post abroad, particularly an occupation issue, then I suggest we should use something like "German post in occupied Poland" or "German post offices in China".

--BlackJack | talk page 11:04, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

 * What you're doing is similar to User:Stan Shebs/Philatelic accounts, which I once upon a time intended to be the main list to general surveys, while the "list of entities" was more to ensure that everything had an article irrespective of whether there was any philatelic content for it. That's why current UPU members aren't here, it's the list of "everything else". To some extent this list has outlived its usefulness; when I started it was nearly all red, now only a handful of articles are still missing. Stan 12:32, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Ah, that's interesting. I admit I didn't realise the "list of entities" was designed re the entities per se (i.e., not necessarily philatelic).  In that case, I see the difference and you're right that there were very few redlinks left.  But, as you say, that does mean it has outlived its usefulness and we now need to address the philatelic content.  I think there is one thing we (especially I) must not forget, and I notice you raised the point way back in 2003 (see above), which is that we must ensure connectivity and cross-referencing between the philatelic article (if independent) and the general entity article.  Isn't this word "entity" awful, but it is actually fit for our purpose!  --BlackJack | talk page 14:29, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Crete
I've removed two spurious entries under Crete. The first was for Ottoman issues; however, there were no Ottoman issues for specific use in Crete (although there were some specific revenue stamps). The second was for Austro-Hungarian Post Office in Crete; however, again there were no stamps issued specifically for use by these post offices. In former years it was traditional in many quarters to refer to the Austro-Hungarian stamps issued in French currency as being for the Post Office in Crete; however, these issues were used in Austro-Hungarian Post Offices across the Turkish Empire and stamps in both Turkish and French currencies (and in earlier times in Lombardy-Venetian currency) were used in the Austro-Hungarian Post Offices in Crete. Nigel Campbell (talk) 01:01, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Name List Format Revisit Suggestion
Firstly, let me say how great it is that such a list exists. As a collector, identifying the country or entity of origin of stamps have always been somewhat challenging and, to me at least, has been one of the greatest pleasures of this hobby. The process is a lesson in geography and history all rolled in one.

On this premise, I wonder if I could suggest that this list, being the starting reference for a collector especially a new and inexperience one, be sorted according to the name that appears on the stamp. I think this would be the most natural way a person would start searching when using this list. In order words, if I have an "Ajman" at hand (wallpaper or otherwise aside), I would naturally look for the "Ajman" entry on this list, which at the moment, there is none. It would take some off-list research to know that Ajman is listed under the "Trucial States" or the "UAE" entry.

I understand that this could cause the three lists that we have here to balloon, with the possibility of many repeated entries. Hence, it may be that the "Ajman" entry just directs the person searching to the "Trucial States" entry, or even the "UAE" entry, which would have a list of all previous stamp issuing entities within that geographical area prior to it becoming unified under the UAE.

Or there can be a link to the "Postage stamps and Postal History of Ajman" page if there is already one, and a second item on the list (the first item being "Ajman - 1967-1973") which says "United Arab Emirates - 1973-" or whatever the years may be.

I believe this is how physical stamp catalogues are listed and I do not see any reason why our three stamp issuing entity lists here in Wikipedia should be difference, at least from the standpoint of a user.

This forum has been quiet for quite a while, but I have seen people editing the page proper. Hence, keen to hear views on this. Thanks. Slleong (talk) 06:00, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

Mixture in Congo
There's a mixture between the two Congos. Of course the Belgian Congo never was in the Repúblic of Congo (Brazzaville), before Moyen Congo, but in the Democratic Republic of Congo (Kinshasa). Same for Burundi. And the Independent State of Congo was directly the antecedent of Congo Democratic Republic (Kinshaha). In fact the issues of the restablished democratic republic, seems to be still under Zaire. The Republic of Congo stamps must be in the republic of Congo instead in the democratic republic.--Jolle (talk) 21:44, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

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


text:
User talk:Bon d'une cythare

Hello there, welcome to the 'pedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you need pointers on how we title pages visit Naming conventions or how to format them visit our manual of style. If you have any other questions about the project then check out Help or add a question to the Village pump. Cheers! --maveric149

title: User talk:Bon d'une cythare


text:
User talk:Abou Ben Adhem

Alani map
Could you, please, put to http://commons.wikimedia.org, so as other language editions could use it too. Thank you for the map, it's beautiful and easy to understand. - Slavik IVANOV 03:08, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

 * Done! I've uploaded the file here: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Alani_map.jpg . (I tried to do this to begin with, but couldn't figure out how to resolve the overlapping Image: and commons: namespaces.) - Abou 00:22, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Decade List template
You've been removing categories, interwiki links, and the such. Is there a reason for doing this? --Nlu (talk) 01:36, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

 * The template Template:Decade List generates category and interwiki links automatically; so I was removing the redundant manually-entered links. Sorry; I should have explained that in the edit summaries. Abou 03:31, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

California WikiProjects
As a California Wikipedian, you may be interested in the California WikiProject (and/or one of its 'daughter' Wikiprojects on Southern California,  Santa Barbara County, California State Highways and California County Routes). Please take a look at the WikiProject to see if there is anything that interests you. If you have any comments or questions, feel free to contact me. If enough people express an interest, it would also be very easy to create additional daughter WikiProjects, such as a Northern California WikiProject or a California Politics WikiProject.

It has also more than seven months since the 2nd Los Angeles area Wikipedia meetup ([ 26 September]] 2005), so it is time for another one. There have also been California meetups in San Diego (18 October 2005) and a very small one in Santa Barbara (8 April 2006. It's also about time that the Bay Area gets its first Meetup if anyone is willing to organize it. Blank Verse 06:00, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

noinclude
Any reason you've been adding no include tags articles? •Jim 62 sch• 14:27, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

 * I've written a template for use in decade articles, which aggregates the entries for the years comprising that decade into a single listing. To simplify that aggregate listing, I put noinclude tags around everything in the year articles except the actual list of events for that year. The template is currently used in the articles for the first three decades of the fifth century, but the frequency with which other editors remove the noinclude tags gives me doubts about the practicality of using this template further. Also, your splitting up of the event listings by region and topic, while a great improvement to the year articles, makes the aggregate decade listings somewhat more confusing. Abou 18:26, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Abou: Ah, I see. I couldn't find any info on noinclude tags, so while I knew the probable general purpose, I didn't know the overall purpose. If it's any consolation, I'm going to hit the decade and century articles once I get through 1000AD and add the important stuff. I realise that auto-population of fields beats manual anyday, but at least the data you want to capture will be there. Sorry if the changes I made created a problem, Take care,  •Jim 62 sch•  20:42, 11 June 2006 (UTC) .

(moved from your userpage)
Dear Abou Ben Adhem, First of all I would like to ask you to be quite polite in your suggestions and statements regarding the “probability” of the doctoral researches of the Turkist writers. Many thanks for that.

If you are not satisfied by the reference to the research of the Turkist writers, there is another one the most authoritative Russian historian Professor, Doctor E. P. Alekseeva. She is also Academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences (Moscow). The fact that Karachays and Balkars are the linear descendants of Alans is mentioned in her book (in Russian) "Карачаевцы и балкарцы древний народ Кавказа", Москва, 1993 (“Karachays and Balkars – ancient Caucasian nations” 1993, Moscow). Electronic version of the monograph is available on-line at: http://real-alania.narod.ru/alanialand/history/page1.htm Best regards, Kemal —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Kemal09 (talk • contribs).

Reference please
You added "educated in Africa" to Augustine of Hippo. Do you have a reference for this? My information at this point is that he was sent to and educated (our equivalent of tertiary) principally in Rome and Milan - as per the record in his "Confessio". Could you please clarify and revert my reversion by adding a citation? Cor Unum 12:15, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

 * Augustine went to Italy as a teacher, not a student. He was educated in Madauros and Carthage, in Africa, then taught successively in Tagaste, Carthage, Rome, and Milan. From the Confessio:
 * "For that year were my studies intermitted: whilst after my return from Madaura (a neighbour city, whither I had journeyed to learn grammar and rhetoric), the expenses for a further journey to Carthage were being provided for me; and that rather by the resolution than the means of my father, who was but a poor freeman of Thagaste."

 * "In those years when I first began to teach rhetoric in my native town..."

 * "Thou didst deal with me, that I should be persuaded to go to Rome, and to teach there rather, what I was teaching at Carthage."

 * "I began then diligently to practise that for which I came to Rome, to teach rhetoric..."
 * --Abou 15:04, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

 * Calm down
 * Be bold is the principle. My memory (having studied Augustine) was of his studies in Italy and principally the conversion in Milan of course. When I see one word added like "Africa" (and you have an African name/handle) to seemingly skew an article (without reference) and I think I know better, I sometimes revert to find out if it is a thoughtless (and hence unimportant) addition. Keeps people on their toes. I have seen a lot of axes being ground on wiki. It's part of the territory of course.

 * These are references you have supplied to me on my page- so why not add them as citations or footnotes? It will improve the article no end if you supply the reference. You will note I have aded quite a few to the article and it is on my watchlist. It strengthens the ability of people to corroborate.
 * Cor Unum 11:48, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

 * No problem! I just saw your Latin name/handle and figured you were a Roman trying to skew the article in favor of Italy :)

 * Seriously, the article could use some expansion on these points, but I was just trying to make a quick correction to a factual error in the meantime. It didn't seem significant enough or controversial enough to merit a citation in the intro paragraph.

 * As to strengthening the ability of people to collaborate/corroborate (whichever you meant): It would help if you raised issues like this on the article discussion page, where other editors could help verify information and incorporate it into the article. Bringing it up here suggests you see it as a personal issue that needs to be dealt with privately.
 * —Abou 14:44, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Honorius (emperor)
Thank you for your corrections to Honorius (emperor).--Panarjedde 12:36, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Notification: changes to "Mark my edits as minor by default" preference
Hello there. This is an automated message to tell you about the gradual phasing out of the preference entitled "Mark all edits minor by default", which you currently have (or very recently had) enabled.

On 13 March 2011, this preference was hidden from the user preferences screen as part of efforts to prevent its accidental misuse (consensus discussion). This had the effect of locking users in to their existing preference, which, in your case, was. To complete the process, your preference will automatically be changed to  in the next few days. This does not require any intervention on your part and you will still be able to manually mark your edits as being 'minor'. The only thing that's changed is that you will no longer have them marked as minor by default.

For established users such as yourself there is a workaround available involving custom JavaScript. If you are familiar with the contents of WP:MINOR, and believe that it is still beneficial to the encyclopedia to have all your edits marked as such by default, then this discussion will give you the details you need to continue with this functionality indefinitely. If you have any problems, feel free to drop me a note.

Thank you for your understanding and happy editing :) Editing on behalf of User:Jarry1250, LivingBot (talk) 18:21, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

TFD
I see that you are mostly inactive here, but I thought I had better notify you about a TFD concerning some templates you created in 2006. Regards, — This, that, and the other (talk) 11:01, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Template:Simple Yearbox Year List 6

A tag has been placed on Template:Simple Yearbox Year List 6 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it must be substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Bulwersator (talk) 14:44, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Are you still active on Wiki?
Need to discuss a problem with your Timeline on the Alans article. Thanks.HammerFilmFan (talk) 02:28, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:52, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Women in Red World Contest
Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!

title: User talk:Abou Ben Adhem


text:
User talk:KHALSA

Hello there, welcome to the 'pedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you need pointers on how we title pages visit Naming conventions or how to format them visit our manual of style. If you have any other questions about the project then check out Help or add a question to the Village pump. Cheers! --maveric149

title: User talk:KHALSA


text:
User talk:Gustavf~enwiki

Old comments deleted -- Gustavf 16:23, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Could you please confirm, that the pictures of Trondheim and Tromsø you have submitted are really GNU-FDL or public domain, or could you confirm, that you have taken the pictures by yourself. It would really like to use these picture in German Wikipedia.

Thanks 80.133.84.56 18:25, 13 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * As stated on the talk pages for thos pictures, I have taken them myself. -- Gustavf 09:28, Mar 16, 2004 (UTC)

 * Thank you. The German "administrators" didn't believe this. 80.133.73.152 14:10, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Hi - regarding the picture of the ferry I wonder if it should be in more detail? As you know Wikipedia is scaling pics itself, so by uploading a bigger picture a user can look it up in detail. I have lots of pictures of ferries myself that can be uploaded, but will not do anything about it before asking you. If you think its a good idea and have one yourself then I leave it to you. If not - I will upload one of mine to Wikimedia Commons. Ulflarsen 21:15, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

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

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Gustavf. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Gustavf~enwiki that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name. If you think you might own all of the accounts with this name and this message is in error, please visit Special:MergeAccount to check and attach all of your accounts to prevent them from being renamed.

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

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 00:21, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 13:32, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Gustavf~enwiki


text:
User talk:Nicolas Delahaye~enwiki

Hello there, welcome to the 'pedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you need pointers on how we title pages visit Naming conventions or how to format them visit our manual of style. If you have any other questions about the project then check out Help or add a question to the Village pump. Cheers! --maveric149

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

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

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Nicolas Delahaye. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Nicolas Delahaye~enwiki that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name. If you think you might own all of the accounts with this name and this message is in error, please visit Special:MergeAccount to check and attach all of your accounts to prevent them from being renamed.

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

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 01:47, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 16:57, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Nicolas Delahaye~enwiki


text:
User talk:Feliz~enwiki

Hello there, welcome to the 'pedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you need pointers on how we title pages visit Naming conventions or how to format them visit our manual of style. If you have any other questions about the project then check out Help or add a question to the Village pump. Cheers! --maveric149

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

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

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Feliz. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Feliz~enwiki that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name. If you think you might own all of the accounts with this name and this message is in error, please visit Special:MergeAccount to check and attach all of your accounts to prevent them from being renamed.

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

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 23:51, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 12:51, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Feliz~enwiki


text:
User talk:Pweemeeuw

Hi, i saw that the image of the Mokugyo is from you. I work on Mokuyo-Articles in other languages, therefore it would be very useful to have this image available in Wikipedia-Commons - so I can use it for e.g. a german article also. (http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Hauptseite) Can you do this? --BambooBeast 10:31, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

 * Hi - I did it by my self. You can find the image now at Commons using the same filename (Mokugyo.jpg) I copied all additional Information (Author, Discription, Licence,...) also. Hope that is ok for you. --BambooBeast 15:46, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Nomination of Spiral Dynamics for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Spiral Dynamics 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/Spiral Dynamics 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.  DGG ( talk ) 17:07, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Pweemeeuw


text:
User talk:Axon

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:52, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Axon


text:
User talk:Jleybov

There are indications that the Wikiversity project might actually be lanched this year. I think an organized effort to promote improved citing of sources should be an important part of Wikiversity. I think it would be constructive to integrate Wikicite into Wikiversity. I'm not a great fan of splitting off every useful idea into a new sister project. --JWSchmidt 21:26, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Wikicite prototype in a few months <-- Very exciting! I really like the idea of a system that would let wiki users mark-up wiki pages to show where citations are needed and where other problems exist. In the context of Wikiversity and using the wiki interface as a learning tool, it would be useful to have a way for students to just point-and-click in order to mark spots on wiki pages where they get confused and need help. I wonder if you ever saw Wiki Science:Semantic prosthetic. --JWSchmidt 23:01, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Implementing Wikicite on Wikipedia?
Hi,

User:Taxman mentioned to me the Wikicite project that you have been valiantly pursuing. It looks to be excellent, thanks for all of your hard work on that! I'm coordinating a discussion on validation at Wikimania, as I explained in my outline, and I'm trying to sound out the opinions of those people interested in such topics. I would like to be able to introduce Wikicite as part of the discussion, as something a review team would be able to use to validate an article. Could you let me know the status of the software? If things are beginning to look ready, perhaps we could talk on the phone before Friday, if that's OK with you? You can contact me by email if you wish (I'm away from home, without a cellphone). If you're going to Wikimania, that would be better still! I should get a chance to ask Paul Kobasa from World Book in detail how they handle this activity (he's the co-organizer). You can see his abstract linked from my outline.

I'm hoping that we can begin to start things moving on this issue. I think at Wikimania we might get the necessary critical mass of important/talented people together to come up with a good plan and then agree who does what. Through work at Wikipedia 1.0, I've seen that we can link up the WikiProjects and get them to produce valuable metadata (almost 30,000 article assessments in less than three months!). I think those same projects could set up review teams that could use your software to produce thoroughly checked articles. Do you think this could work? Thanks, Walkerma 03:19, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply! After the Wikimania discussion I set up a page called Pushing to validation. Could you take a look over that? It summarises the viewpoint I found garnered most acceptance in many one-on-one discussions. I had a long talk with Kurt from the German Wikipedia, and it seems they are unfamiliar with Wikicite. I'd be interested in your thoughts on the idea of allowing readers of articles to say, "Where did they get that fact?" We envisaged a link or comment balloon in the validated version that would allow the reader to see "On 4 Oct 2008 User:Joe checked this fact in the Journal of Useless Facts, Vol 524, p1234." Cheers, Walkerma 07:28, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

 * If you haven't seen it yet, you should look at several threads on here, Wikicat came up several times. You should comment there if you see this soon, before the thread dies completely, and also contact the people who plan to work on things. Today Francis Tyers said "When anybody says we "have to" introduce completely new markup or we "have to" wait for Wikidata to be implemented, then I know it's just an excuse for doing nothing" and then he/she offered to develop a system of his/her own.  Please let us know where things are! Thanks, and keep up the good work, Walkerma 21:25, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Static content
Thanks for raising the issue of static content and validation at the meeting; sorry I had left, I had assumed we weren't going to get that far in the agenda, and I had originally assumed the meeting would be two hours max. Unfortunately I get little time with my family as it is, I can't just shut them out for 4 hours on our main family day! We need someone with an eye on the agenda and a firm hand, but I think that's very hard when you get Wikipedians together on IRC! We are having another meeting with Sj at 20:00 UTC this coming Sunday to discuss just static content, please join us at #wikipedia-static if you are interested. I will post things soon on meta and at Wikipedia_talk:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team. Thanks, Walkerma 03:32, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Oscar photographer
Hi Jleybov, do you know if your friend is still interested? I've had no response otherwise, I think people are skeptical of how legit my offer is. I'd love to see samples, and likely approve him. -- Zanimum 22:10, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

AfD nomination of List of Chinese Americans
List of Chinese Americans, an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that List of Chinese Americans satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/List of Chinese Americans& and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of List of Chinese Americans during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Leuko 17:52, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Status of Wikicite?
Has there been any recent activity on Wikicite? If not, is the main hurdle implementation of Wikicat, which seems to be a huge undertaking? If that's the main bottleneck, then I'm wondering if it might be possible to proceed on an interim citation/validation model independent of Wikicat. In particular, maybe it is possible to implement Fact-point extensions, and allow editors in the Preview Page to manually enter a citation in wikitext (maybe even a citation template like Citation) for each "++fn" in the article. This would allow work to proceed on article validation independent of Wikicat. Has there been any thought or discussion along those lines? CO GDEN  19:24, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Lina Wertmüller
Hey. I don't know if you're still here, but I'm translating the artical to Hebrue, and you wrote there that she met someone named Mastroianni, but that could be a lot of people... so, who is he? --Shirooosh (talk) 15:51, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Wikicat
Hi. I'm very interested in Wikicat and I have many ideas, but some things about it are not very clear to me. Please, how would look a page on Wikicat??? --StephenG 02-Jan-2010 15:46 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.221.8.180 (talk) 14:46, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

 * After a long time, some of us are getting around to implementing a wikicite project. Drop me a line sometime or check out the updated pages on Meta.  – SJ +  04:02, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Wikicite is growing, and Wikidata seems powerful enough now to implement the full initial idea of Wikicat :) Sending warm regards.  – SJ +  09:48, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:52, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Journalistic scandal

The article Journalistic scandal has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
 * Original research, unsourced since creation.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article 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. Atsme 📞📧 12:29, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Rotten.com

The article Rotten.com has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
 * The page has no citations, and it has had the refimprove template for seven years and four months.

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. ―  PapíDimmi  (  talk |  contribs  ) 04:16, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Jleybov


text:
User talk:Card~enwiki

Hello there, welcome to the 'pedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you need pointers on how we title pages visit Naming conventions or how to format them visit our manual of style. If you have any other questions about the project then check out Help or add a question to the Village pump. Cheers! --maveric149

Menee se viisaskin vipuun. Niin vannoin, etten sotkeentuisi Mother Teresa artikkeliin. -- Jussi-Ville Heiskanen 23:16, Dec 19, 2003 (UTC)

Great summary, but...
It could use some embellishments. And no #xfiles?

Female anatomy images
Hello. I've been tagging images, and I came across Image:Fem isa.gif. You said "GFDL issue resolved in 2003, see Talk:Penis." I've looked around talk:penis, but I can't find how the GFDL issue was resolved. Is the image released under the GFDL? Thanks, – Quadell (talk) (help) 23:21, Dec 30, 2004 (UTC)
 * Yes, Elf released the old alt.sex FAQ pictures under GFDL. --Card 11:00, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

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

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Card. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Card~enwiki that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name. If you think you might own all of the accounts with this name and this message is in error, please visit Special:MergeAccount to check and attach all of your accounts to prevent them from being renamed.

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

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 22:52, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 11:22, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:52, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Card~enwiki


text:
User talk:Avatarbg

Hello there, welcome to the 'pedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you need pointers on how we title pages visit Naming conventions or how to format them visit our manual of style. If you have any other questions about the project then check out Help or add a question to the Village pump. Cheers! --maveric149

title: User talk:Avatarbg


text:
User talk:Kdochain

Hello there, welcome to the 'pedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you need pointers on how we title pages visit Naming conventions or how to format them visit our manual of style. If you have any other questions about the project then check out Help or add a question to the Village pump. BTW, what is the purpose of Image:Résumé anglais.doc? How is that going to be used in Wikipeidia? Cheers! --maveric149

title: User talk:Kdochain


text:
User talk:Wall0159

Hello there, welcome to the 'pedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you need pointers on how we title pages visit Naming conventions or how to format them visit our manual of style. If you have any other questions about the project then check out Help or add a question to the Village pump. Cheers! --maveric149

title: User talk:Wall0159


text:
User talk:Thorbjørn~enwiki

Hello there, welcome to the 'pedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you need pointers on how we title pages visit Naming conventions or how to format them visit our manual of style. If you have any other questions about the project then check out Help or add a question to the Village pump. Cheers! --maveric149

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

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

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Thorbjørn. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Thorbjørn~enwiki that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name. If you think you might own all of the accounts with this name and this message is in error, please visit Special:MergeAccount to check and attach all of your accounts to prevent them from being renamed.

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

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 03:05, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 19:40, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Thorbjørn~enwiki


text:
User talk:Branden

Hello there, welcome to the 'pedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you need pointers on how we title pages visit Naming conventions or how to format them visit our manual of style. If you have any other questions about the project then check out Help or add a question to the Village pump. Cheers! --maveric149
 * Thanks, but I've been around a while. :-) --Branden

I couldn't help but notice your complaining about the gross inaccuracy of Michael's contributions (with regard to Rhoads & Quiet Riot). Believe me, man, you're preaching to the choir. Some people have been reverting his edits on sight. -- goatasaur
 * Yeah, I just got done bitching about him on his own talk page. Thanks for the heads up.  It's weird.  I also do some work on pages having to do with Middle East politics, and it seems the Wikipedia has less trouble with those than with what should be innocent pages about heavy metal bands!  Color me stupefied.  Thanks again for the notice, and sorry if I come off too harshly in my editorializing.  I just think it's kind of hurtful to spell a guy's name wrong and state that his accidental death in a plane crash was really the result of suicide.  If that's not mean or hateful, I don't know what it is.  Though I'll admit some bias; I play guitar myself, and I think Randy's solo at the end of Tonight by Ozzy is just brilliant. -- Branden
 * You play guitar?! Maybe I'm not the only one who thinks Wikipedia could use some more learning resources for guitar players. My contributions to tablature are about as much as I've done, and it's just some basic information on reading tabs. -- goatasaur
 * Well, I'm not sure if this what you had in mind, but I tried to elaborate your palm mute article a little bit. Let me know if that's the sort of thing you're talking about. -- Branden

Out of curiosity, how long have you been playing guitar? -- goatasaur

 * About 12 years. -- Branden

You've got over ten years on me. I don't feel so bad now. :) -- goatasaur

 * I'm on #wikipedia on OPN^WFreenode^Wwhatever as Overfiend if ya wanna talk more interactively... -- Branden

- Brandon- Not meaning to debate you, but your comment on Tailhook was cryptic. If you hae any information that US Special Forces used nerve gas in Laos (heck or anywhere else), please let me know.

Now, with three tildies … PaulinSaudi
 * (Just FYI, my name is is spelled "Branden" as is hopefully obvious from the name of this page. ;-) )  Also, I think you mean the Operation Tailwind article, not "Tailhook".  Tailhook was that Navy scandal where female officers were allegedly subjected to sexual harassment by being groped at a party (Hint to readers: either the search engine is broken, or the Wikipedia has no article on Tailhook...). Anyway, if I had something more substantial to contribute to the Tailwind article, I'd have done so in the article itself and not in its talk page.  I just question the credibility of a report solicited by the Department of Defense that purports to investigate misconduct by...the Department of Defense!  CNN's investigation might have been wrong -- I don't know -- but even if it were, that wouldn't mean the Pentagon is right. Branden 04:32 11 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Wikipedia Meet Up
I invite anybody who likes to come to Shag's Tavern (937) 258-8353 1926 S Smithville Rd Dayton, OH at midnight on Sunday the 21st/Monday the 22nd of March. Meet in the rear, near to the jukebox. Feel free to contact me in regards to specifics. Cheers, User:Sam Spade / Jack

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meetup#USA_meet_up

Sam Spade 09:22, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Article Licensing
Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 2000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:
 * Multi-Licensing FAQ - Lots of questions answered
 * Multi-Licensing Guide
 * Free the Rambot Articles Project

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the " " template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

 * Option 1
 * I agree to multi-license all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:

OR
 * Option 2
 * I agree to multi-license all my contributions to any U.S. state, county, or city article as described below:

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace " " with "  ". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk)

Indiana Wikipedians
Hello! Please consider adding yourself to Category:Indiana Wikipedians. Thanks! Kurt Weber 7 July 2005 02:49 (UTC)

Nomination of Libre for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Libre 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/Libre 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. — Keφr 12:24, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

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

Nomination of Libre (word) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Libre (word) 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/Libre (word) 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. —Keφr 15:45, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Branden


text:
User talk:Dommkopf

Hello! Hi, jsut wanted to say hi, and to introduce myself. I'm from Puerto Rico and also a student of the University of Puerto Rico. Be sure to check any article ahving to do with Puerto Rico; the boricua presence in Wikipedia is becoming large! C ya! Coburnpharr04

Hello there, welcome to the 'pedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you need pointers on how we title pages visit Naming conventions or how to format them visit our manual of style. If you have any other questions about the project then check out Help or add a question to the Village pump. Cheers! --maveric149
 * All hail mav :)

Hello! When you say Spanish and Portuguese do you refer to the languages or the nationalities? I ask because I am somewhat obsessed with removing links to disambiguation pages but I wasn't sure what to do in the case of your user page. Of course you could mean both, in which case they would be valid links. Thanks -- sannse 18:16 Feb 20, 2003 (UTC)

 * Thanks, sannse! Done deal!

- Hi! I just wanna say saludos!! Yo soy de Puerto Rico. I did the inverse compared to you I left Puerto Rico and came to live near the Mexican border. I love it here, its so beautiful and Mexico too. I wish I had the money to have a house in Mexico.

Anyways I hope you feel welcome in my country which is your casa too, and to let you know you are always more than welcome to return to Puerto Rico if you ever have to leave, and I hope you live amongst those in my country forever and find irt enjoyable!

God bless you!

Sincerely yours, Antonio Latinos Unidos Martin

Help
I need your help. It seems that someone wants to delete my article on Carlos Lozada, one of four Puerto Ricans to have been awarded the Medal of Honor. You can help fight this injustice by voting against deletion here: | VfD. Please participate. Your friend Tony the Marine 05:24, August 3, 2005 (UTC)

Hi addis Me too i  want  just  a little  of  your  time  and  your  help, i'm just want to you  help  me  with the  translation of  the page from  nicky cruz to  spanish, and fix if you  can the  yiye's page in  both  lenguage(english  and  spanish), i just started from some others i  think they  were not  to  clear at  the  time when  they  make it but  i  read  the  first  version  of  yiye,and  right  away someone saw it"non neutral",at them  mind i  think  anyway  thank you  for  your  help

--Teknomegisto 07:28, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

User Categorisation
You were listed on the Wikipedians/Puerto Rico page as living in or being associated with Puerto Rico. 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 Puerto Rico for instructions.--Rmky87 02:05, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

Handbook of Texas proposed deletion
Please go here and express your opinion on whether Category:Handbook of Texas citations should be deleted. As a Texan Wikipedian, your opinion on this topic is particularly valuable. 66.167.253.162 17:52, 26 September 2005 (UTC).

WikiProject Puerto Rico
Hola Ciudad. How's it going? I wanted to invite you to become a member of the new project about our pais. If you want to, just click there and list your name where it has the list of writers on the project. As you can see, the page is poorly formatted. I don't know how to build a country-box, but we'll work on it :)

I hope I can see your name there soon! Thanks and God bless you!

Your wikifriend, Antonio X Martin

Shelley Sekula-Gibbs, Houston City Council member and candidate for Congress from Houston/Sugar Land
Please review the debate on this article for deletion and provide your opinion please: Articles for deletion/Shelley Sekula-Gibbs. Thank you. --Getaway 22:19, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Invitation to participate in the 1st. Art+Feminism Wikipedia edit-a-thon in Puerto Rico
Hello, Dommkopf. This in an invitation to participate in the 1st. Art+Feminism Wikipedia edit-a-thon in Puerto Rico. The event will take place from March 27th to April 8th in The contemporary Art Museum in San Juan. If you would like to attend and give technical support as an experience wikipedian, please, feel free to reach me at my talk page or contact the organizers: https://www.eventbrite.com/e/primer-wiki-ton-en-el-mac-mujeres-arte-y-activismo-tickets-32364939405?aff=es2 --Yhhue91 (talk) 22:01, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Dommkopf


text:
Talk:Degrees of freedom

Untitled
In the ancient past, I failed a statistics class in which the professor blathered on about degrees of freedom as though I cared, but this page doesn't mention it. If I was supposed to have learned is one of the two meanings used in the article, the word statistics should probably be mentioned (with a link), otherwise the statistical meaning is necessary. Tuf-Kat
 * Thanks Tuf-Kat

I'm not going to mess with that half of it. :-)  EasilyAmused

My Stats teacher right now is having a terrible time explaining degrees of freedom, and I can't figure it out... this page is no help. Hopefully when I figure it out I can provide a better explanation. -Booya

The definition provided needs to be fixed. The common usage is applicable both to the engineering/statics and physics applications, which is that the number of degrees of freedom is the dimension of the system's configuration space, not the dimension of its phase space. More generally, it's the number of independent ways a system may vary, move or change (which, therefore, also subsumes the applications in statistics). A single atom has 3 degrees of freedom, not 6, while two atoms rigidly joined together collectively has 5. - Mark, 2006 August 22

According to Internic, degrees-freedom.com was only registered 5 days ago (2nd of Febuary 2007) Looks like marketing to me. Kaenneth 10:00, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 8 September 2021 and 19 December 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): ScaleneTriangle.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 19:14, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

numerics vs statistics?
Not sure if there is a difference between degrees of freedom (statistics) and degrees of freedom (numerics). Thoughts? --71.35.12.210 (talk) 05:39, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

 * I have a Ph.D. in statistics and I've never heard of "numerics". What is the term supposed to mean? Michael Hardy (talk) 20:54, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Singular, not plural
The plural in the page title is incorrect. "Degree" here means "The amount that an entity possesses a certain property; relative intensity, extent" (degree). Analogous cases where the singular is already correctly used are: Degree of polymerization, Degree of curvature, Degree of inventiveness, Degree of unsolvability, Degree of relationship. Therefore I'd like to rename the currect dab page and its linked pages. fgnievinski (talk) 05:30, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I disagree: the degrees of freedom of a mechanism are never considered individually, but collectively. In most cases only the number of degrees of freedom is relevant. For example, a point on the Earth surface has two degrees of freedom corresponding to the two independent directions in which it can move; but these two directions are not individually defined; one may choose any pair of independent directions. Note also that all pages linked in this dab page, written by people from very different areas, use also the plural in their titles. D.Lazard (talk) 09:15, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
 * "Degree" here acts as a measure word for freedom, which is a mass noun. It's like speaking of "head of cattle" instead of "cattle population". The plural form leads to convoluted expressions such as your "number of degrees of freedom" instead of more simply "(translational or rotational) freedom". fgnievinski (talk) 19:32, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
 * You may be right from a grammatical point of view. However, here, "degree" can only take integer values, and, therefore is not an usual measure word. In any case, Wikipedia must follows the common usage, which is plural. D.Lazard (talk) 20:33, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

Editing Plan
I plan to find sources for this article, and to try and simplify the language into a more general definition for degrees of freedom. I also plan to clearly link to the pages with more specific applications of degrees of freedom (currently at the bottom) and add more simple examples so that this article is more reader friendly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ScaleneTriangle (talk • contribs) 15:28, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Deletion of this page
This page is ridiculous. Typing in degrees of freedom should just lead to a redirect. Adamopoulos (talk) 19:26, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I agree with your first sentence. A redirect is not possible because of the number of pages titled "Degree of freedom (something)". A disambiguation page is not convenient, as these pages refer to instances of a unique concept (in the past, this page was a disambiguation page). So this page must be a WP:Broad-concept article. I have therefore restored the last version where the general concept is clearly described, and where it is explained why the subpages refer to instances of the same concept. D.Lazard (talk) 21:11, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Degrees of freedom