text:
Pavel Chekov

Pavel Andreievich Chekov (Павел Андреевич Чехов) is a fictional character in the Star Trek universe.

Walter Koenig portrayed Chekov in the second and third seasons of the original Star Trek series and the first seven Star Trek films. Anton Yelchin portrayed the character in the 2009 Star Trek reboot film and two sequels, Star Trek Into Darkness and Star Trek Beyond. Both Koenig and Yelchin were born to Russian parents, but grew up in the United States, and both affected Russian accents for their roles.

Origin
Star Trek creator Gene Roddenberry wanted to include a younger cast member to appeal to teenage audiences. With a second season of Star Trek to be produced, Roddenberry interviewed Walter Koenig on the recommendation of director Joseph Pevney. After casting Koenig, Roddenberry wrote a letter to Mikhail Zimyanin, editor of Pravda, informing him of the introduction of a Russian character, and an NBC press release announcing the character at the time stated that it was in response to a Pravda article, condemning the show for having no Russian characters. The existence of such a Pravda article is disputed. Roddenberry also acknowledged that the character was in response to the popularity of The Monkees' Davy Jones. Koenig always denied the "Russian origin" story and affirmed that his character was added in response to the popularity of The Monkees, and the character's hairstyle and appearance are a direct reference to this. Roddenberry had previously mentioned, in a memo to his casting director, a desire to have someone reminiscent of one of The Beatles or Monkees on the show.

Koenig's modest height, eyes, thick eyebrows, boyish face, and smile were all strikingly evocative of the lone British "Monkee" who captivated millions of pre-teen girls. Early attempts were made to style Koenig's brown hair similar to that of Jones too. Wigs were used in a couple of early episodes but not in others, which reveals a stage of experimentation to attentive viewers. Eventually, a final look for Koenig's hair length and fullness was reached and used consistently thereafter.

After Paramount Television signed Koenig to a contract because of the number of fan letters he received as Chekov, Roddenberry wrote in another memo "Kirk and Spock and the others actually seem rather 'middle aged' to the large youthful segment of our audience. We badly need a young man aboard the Enterprise—we need youthful attitudes and perspectives. Chekov can be used potently here". In actuality, Koenig is only five years younger than co-stars Leonard Nimoy and William Shatner.

The episode "Amok Time", which was the first episode broadcast during the second season, was Chekov's first television appearance ("Catspaw", the first episode shot with the Chekov character, would be broadcast a month later to roughly coincide with Halloween). Because of budgetary constraints, the character did not appear in the animated Star Trek.

Character biography
Pavel Andreievich Chekov was born in 2245 and is a young and naïve ensign who first appears on-screen in the original series’ second season as the Enterprise's navigator. According to Roddenberry, he is "an extraordinarily capable young man—almost Spock's equal in some areas. An honor graduate of the Space Academy." Chekov also substitutes for Mr. Spock at the science officer station when necessary. His promotion to lieutenant for Star Trek: The Motion Picture brings with it his transfer as the ship's tactical officer and chief of security. During his tour of Duty on the Enterprise, Chekov lost his mind on three occasions: in "Day of the Dove" Chekov was implanted with false memories and driven to violence by a non-corporeal alien entity; in "And the Children Shall Lead", Chekov was exposed to mind control by a group of children who had been given powers by a non-corporeal being; and in "The Tholian Web" Chekov became violently insane following exposure to interspace. Furthermore, in the film Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, Chekov was subject to mind control after being implanted with a juvenile Ceti eel. A running gag on Star Trek is that whenever Chekov gets into personal combat with opponents stronger than him, he loses the fight: "The Trouble with Tribbles" with Klingons or "The Gamesters of Triskelion" with the gladiator-like slaves/thralls. In "Spectre of the Gun" he is shot and killed in the fantasy but survives only because he was thinking of a beautiful fantasy woman. He also likes the beautiful female androids in "I, Mudd".

By the events of Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, Chekov is executive officer aboard the USS Reliant. In that film, Khan Noonien Singh uses a creature that wraps itself around Chekov's cerebral cortex to control him and his captain. Chekov overcomes the creature's mind control and serves as Enterprise tactical officer in the film's climactic battle.

A common myth about Star Trek is that Khan recognizing Chekov in the film is a continuity error because "Space Seed", with the villain, was broadcast before Koenig's casting. Adaptations: From Text to Screen, Screen to Text calls this "the apparent gaffe notorious throughout Star Trek fandom". Although Chekov does not appear in "Space Seed", "Catspaw"—with the character—has an earlier stardate. Koenig joked that Khan remembers Chekov from the episode after he takes too long in a restroom Khan wants to use.

Chekov is an accomplice in Kirk's theft of the Enterprise to rescue Spock in Star Trek III: The Search for Spock, but is exonerated in Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home. He serves as navigator aboard the Enterprise-A during the events of Star Trek V: The Final Frontier and Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country. The character's final film appearance is as a guest aboard the Enterprise-B on its maiden voyage in Star Trek Generations. Chekov is mentioned in the series finale of Star Trek: Picard as being deceased in a broadcast by his son, Anton, who is serving as the president of the Federation. Koenig insisted that the character be called Anton as a tribute to the late Anton Yelchin, who inherited his role as Chekov for the J. J. Abrams reboot films.

Spinoff novels show a continued career path, but these are not considered canon in the Star Trek universe. Novels written by William Shatner detail that Chekov reaches the rank of admiral, and even serves as Commander in Chief of Starfleet.

Reboot films
The 2009 Star Trek film creates an alternate timeline in the franchise. In this timeline, Anton Yelchin's portrayal presents Chekov as a 17-year-old prodigy whose mathematical ability proves instrumental in a few events within the film, and whose accent provides some of the film's comic relief.

In the sequel, Star Trek Into Darkness, Chekov finds himself promoted to chief engineer after Scotty resigns. When Kirk orders him to put on a red shirt, a brief sting is heard as a closeup shows Chekov's nervous face, playing on the reputation of redshirts in the franchise as much as the character's shock regarding his sudden promotion.

The third film, Star Trek Beyond, was Yelchin's final appearance as Chekov, the film seeing Chekov accompanying Kirk after the entire crew are marooned on an uncharted planet following the destruction of the Enterprise, forcing them to destroy the last of the Enterprise to escape a trap and later work with the rest of the senior staff to restart a long-lost Starfleet ship to escape the planet and defeat a plan to attack the Federation.

Anton Yelchin's death
Yelchin was crushed to death by his 2016 Jeep Grand Cherokee on June 19, 2016, little more than a month before the scheduled release of Star Trek Beyond on July 22, 2016. All filming had been completed and post-production had started. A dedication to Yelchin's memory was inserted into the credits. J. J. Abrams, producer of the reboot trilogy and director of its first two films, has stated that the role will not be recast for future sequels, implying the character of Chekov will be written out in future films.

Fan productions
Walter Koenig reprised his role as Chekov 12 years after Star Trek Generations in the fan-created series New Voyages episode "To Serve All My Days". Andy Bray portrayed a younger Chekov in that episode. Koenig reprised the character again in Star Trek: Renegades as 143-year-old Admiral Chekov, the newly appointed head of Section 31. He has stated that should there be a sequel, he would reprise Chekov and then retire from the role. He also returned as Chekov in the online miniseries Star Trek: Of Gods and Men.

In scientific illustrator Jenny Parks' 2017 book Star Trek Cats, Chekov is depicted as a Russian Blue.

Reception
In 2018, The Wrap placed Chekov as 21st out 39 in a ranking of main cast characters of the Star Trek franchise prior to Star Trek: Discovery. In 2016, Chekov was ranked as the 30th most important character of Starfleet within the Star Trek science fiction universe by Wired magazine, out of 100 characters.

In 2018, Comic Book Resources ranked Chekov the 22nd best member of Starfleet.

title: Pavel Chekov


text:
Talk:Electrochemical potential

Comments
Can one of you gentlemen explain to me how a Daniel Cell works? As a young lad, age 7, (it is now 60 years later!) I built ALL the cells but NEVER understood why the Daniel cell was so LONG_LASTING. HOW does the porous pot STOP the zinc supphate mixing with the copper sulphate?

Is the volts of the daniels cell that BETWEEN zn and Cu suplhate "electrodes" or what?

Many thanks. REMEMBER they taught ME that in the electrolysisis of dilute H2So4 the H went one way and the so4 the other. When I complained that it was NONSENSE, they said "Well we know that, but THAT is what you MUST say to get thru the exam!"

So I took up PHYSICS!

Many thanks. Sorry if I am doing all this wrong - NO INSTRUCTIONS! John

Couple points:

Electrochemical, or chemiosmotic potentials, are use for far more in biology than the production of ATP. Limiting the biological usage of transmembrane potentials to just ATP production ignores their creation in other organelles, or for example their existence across nerve membranes. David Myers

This is for the person who thinks "chemiosmotic potential" isn't a term. If you edit out my use of the term, I will post, in the talk area of this encyclopedia reference, all 63 hits that Google gets to the term chemiosmotic potential, and I'll make sure every link to the term works. David Myers

168...
 * I'm the person who complained about "chemiosmotic potential." Hi. Before I made my comments I looked around the Web for usage. I didn't find anything that struck me as authoritative. Xrefer and other online scientific dictionaries I searched didn't have it. Plus, I gave some weight to my simple gut feeling, because if it were the popular term for the potential, I suspect I'd have heard it when I learned about this subject in a college course for physical science majors. But it struck me as a word I'd never heard. To me, the number of Google hits is less important than what they hit. If you can show me the Web site of a professor or a text book publisher or something else authored by someone who ought to know, you'll persuade me.

 * O.K. I'll back off. I see that this guy, who really ought to know, uses it here [shiva.msu.montana.edu/courses/mb480_580_2002_fall/ docs/firstlivingsystems.pdf]. 168... 04:07 Feb 9, 2003 (UTC)
 * I'd be appreciative if you would realize that it is a term used among scientists involved in studies of bioenergetics. I use it because I recall its use among class notes at Rice University, notes penned by Professor John Olson (Rice is a small school. Professors teach the classes and write their own class notes). My major professor when I was at Rice, Professor Graham Palmer, is an expert on ESR of electron transport proteins and genuinely an expert on cytochrome c oxidase. It is from these men that I recall the term. That it is a term among specialists I will not deny.The important issue is the breakdown of the protonmotive force into three component terms, relative concentration of protons, which of course determines pH, the voltage difference across the membrane, and the remaining non-proton concentration differences across the membrane(e.g. Ca2+, Na+, etc). By the way the last rewrite of the chemiosmotic potential portion is totally confusing. It makes it seem as if the membrane has some magic permeability characteristics that makes it transport protons via a magic wand, instead of using active transport mechanisms to maintain the chemical potential across the membrane.David Myers Dwmyers 14:00 Feb 9, 2003 (UTC)

 * How much crow do you want me to eat? So what if I challenged you initially? I didn't do it without some basis. Plus the evidence you mustered in reply was mostly of the "listen, I know what I'm talking about" sort, which just doesn't cut the mustard here where no one knows you're a dog. In the end, it was me who found my own compelling evidence for your claim before you ever cited a text book or an unchallengeable source. You might thank me for my conscientiousness and good-spirited concession. Anyway, what I wrote above is _exactly_ the concession you seem to resent not having been offered. The professor whose use I cited is evidently an old-school bioenergeticist (he's emeritus, recalled). If he uses the term, it follows without saying that it's "a term used among scientists involved in studies of bioenergetics." But there anyway, I've said it.

 * Meanwhile, whether it's used by the majority of such people has not been established. Although this question is not the one I raised when I challenged you (I hypothesized the term was an imaginary conflation of two others), I'm curious about it, because if few experts use the term, that would make me even less of a dweeb for challenging it. But I'd say the jury is still out on this question. While complimenting me for my conscientiousness and good spiritedness, you might throw in a concession for that.

168... 18:08 Feb 9, 2003 (UTC)
 * I don't know what the answer is. It wouldn't surprise me to find that it isn't common, because Google doesn't pull up a lot of meeting abstracts; but also I could believe it is common. Since you don't claim yourself to be a bioenegeticist or somebody who hears lots of presentations from bioenergeticists at meetings, I'm supposing that, if you do have an opinion on this question, you won't be asking me to take your word for it.

Is the electrochemical potential expressed in volt? In the article this is kept very vague, as if it is something qualitative, not quantatitive - Patrick 21:21 Feb 7, 2003 (UTC)

In the context of an electrochemical half cell, electrochemical potentials can be expressed in units of voltages or in units of energy. In the mitochondrion, because the components of the potential have other physiological effects, the tendency is to break chemiosmotic potentials into three parts, a voltage difference, a concentration difference, and a pH difference across the membrane. David Myers208.17.215.247 21:32 Feb 7, 2003 (UTC)

168...
 * My hunch is you would use volts in a context where you are thinking about the movement of a charged particle. Volts are units of energy per unit charge. But in complicated membrane situation involving many solutes and coupled transport (where a pump used the transmembrane concentration gradient of an uncharged solute to drive the transport of a charged solute against its gradient, say), I can imagine you might have to consider uncharged molecules too, and for them the leap across the memembrane would be a potential energy change, though the voltage exerts no force on them. You'd probably want to talk about them in units of pure energy. Probably somebody should look in a book at this point.

 * Thanks. - Patrick 20:55 Feb 8, 2003 (UTC)

This statement is confusing:

Therefore a transmembrane difference in pH, in addition to the factors above, represents a distinct contributing component of the electrochemical potential in these contexts. This more complex potential might sometimes be called a chemiosmotic potential, after the chemiosmotic hypothesis of Peter Mitchell.

pH is a concentration term, and therefore is included in the concentration term of the general definition of electrochemical potential. It is "broken out" of the general definition in the biological case because pH affects acidity, and because biological systems usually have tight controls on acidity. Other concentration gradients, such as the sodium and potassium gradients, aren't immediately as complicating as the pH gradient.

To restate, the general definition of an electrochemical potential is complete in the sense that it has all the terms necessary to account for a chemiosmotic potential. But when people speak of chemiosmotic potentials across a membrane, for historical reasons they treat the concentration terms as split into two, one part being purely the proton concentration gradient, which affects pH, and the other being the remaining concentration terms. It's a complex potential to be sure, but not somehow a "more complex" electrochemical potential. Dwmyers 14:16 Feb 9, 2003 (UTC)

I reread the latest edit again and rewrote the section on the chemiosmotic potential. The old version confused chemical reaction energies of protons with a chemiosmotic potential. Nope, reaction energies have nothing to do with a chemiosmotic potential. It's simply that because the membranes are proton translocators, scientists in this area think of the potential in terms of proton concentrations and also in terms of the relative concentrations of other chemical species. This energy is a pure potential and does not include terms involving proton chemical reactions. If you need a reference to see what I'm talking about, try Tzagaloff's book on mitochondria, page 152. (the paperback 1982 edition from Plenum press) 24.98.55.136 15:10 Feb 9, 2003 (UTC)

168... 17:36 Feb 9, 2003 (UTC)
 * O.K. I can believe that was a goof on my part--letting reaction energies seep in. Good that you fixed that.

 * I just simplified the sometimes-protons-are-special section.

168... 18:52 Feb 9, 2003 (UTC)
 * My hunch is you were thinking of a context where one considers only what crossing the membrane would mean for a proton, but the text read as if one might seperate out the protons for any energy calculation for such membranes. In your scenario, I'm guessing you're thinking of the proton energy as a voltage term plus a proton concentration or pH term. But hiding in that voltage component, which I think would have to look like the GHK equation, I think you'd have the proton concentration lurking again, alongside separate "terms" (albeit all within the same numerator and denominator) for the concentrations of the other permeant ions. If that's right, the suggestion that proton concentration can be separately dealt with, while the other ions can be lumped, I find a little misleading. (The suggestion is just by way the ambiguity in talking about "the concentration component" of the potential without having an equation and specific terms to point to. I don't think you deliberately suggested it.) Besides that, I just think simpler would be better for this article.

Another point: this article has been pushed so far to the biological side, and it's done it so poorly, that the link from Lithium to here is more an act of hubris than an attempt to educate anyone. No one can find out why lithium is used in anodes of a battery from this article, because any discussions of freshman level analytical electrochemistry don't appear in this article. This really does need to be more than a bad explanation of some third year university biology, which seems to be the direction this article is headed. Dwmyers 15:38 Feb 9, 2003 (UTC)

168... 17:36 Feb 9, 2003 (UTC)
 * Pushed so far? It's just that it started from a biophysical perspective. There was no electrochemical potential article before I made one. I just happen to be much more familiar with it's use in membrane biophysics and I didn't want to stray far from what I knew about (see what happened with the H-bond reaction energy confusion). Granted, membrane biophysicists are a small minority of users of the term, but indeed it's near and dear to them and represents a use. So I think it's worth the paragraph, which is really all it gets here, devoted specifically to the general case of a biological membrane.
 * Looked at the article again. I don't know who did the rewrite, but the first two paragraphs read more cleanly and more openly point to electrochemical cell. It seems far more suitable than it did a few days ago. Dwmyers 14:29 Feb 13, 2003 (UTC)

But why?
A question:

Why is the electrochemical potential where it is? I understand that it a form of potential energy, but can someone break this down further? For example, why is water at 0.4V vs SHE? [Reaction: O2 + 2H2O + 4e ---> 4OH-]. I understand the driving forces involved between differences in electrochemical potential, but I'm having problems wrapping my head around the concept of why an electrochemical potential is where it is.

Any help would be appreciated.

---

I don't know what you mean by "SHE" and so I'm not positive I understand your question, but I guess the answer to it is that it's at least partly about how tightly each element clings to its most loosely held electron a.k.a. the ionization potential for that electron. 168... 00:56, 11 Aug 2003 (UTC)

--- Standard Hydrogen Electrode

Ok, that makes sense. My next question is a similar idea for a cell, notably a battery cell. Why is the point where the voltage of the battery (or cell) is zero, where it is?

To expand... when a battery is charged it starts with a 0V differential between the two electrodes, this differential then increases very rapidly (usually) and then is approximately flat. If we insert a reference electrode we can see that the 'zero point' is some value on the electrochemical potential scale. Why that value?

Two Questions
In the article it says "In a battery, an electrochemical potential arising from the movement of ions balances the reaction energy of the electrodes. The maximum voltage that a battery reaction can produce is sometimes called the standard electrochemical potential ..."

First, is standard electrode potential meant by standard electrochemical potential?

Second, is this article stating that the maximum voltage a wet cell can produce the difference between the two standard reduction potentials? If so, it is wrong. One can vary the voltage of a wet cell by changing the ratio of concentrations of the two solutions involved. Loggie 02:52, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Conflicting terminologies
I have added "electronic and electrical engineering" to electrochemistry, as a domain in which the term "electrochemical potential" means "total thermodynamic chemical potential". I have also restricted the domain where the other convention applies to "metal physics", because (in my experience) the term "electrochemical potential" is not commonly used in semiconductor physics. (RGForbes (talk) 11:43, 10 April 2009 (UTC)) (Richard)

 * Sorry but you need sources for the changes. Also note that sources were given for the text as is. Using only one's own personal experience is a violation of WP:NOR. --Bob K31416 (talk) 12:44, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

 * Ashcroft and Mermin use the "other convention" in their discussion of the p-n junction. (page 593). They're not primarily semiconductor physicists, but still... --Steve (talk) 04:53, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

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

title: Talk:Electrochemical potential


text:
Love in a Cold Climate

Love in a Cold Climate is a novel by Nancy Mitford, first published in 1949. The title is a phrase from George Orwell's novel Keep the Aspidistra Flying (1936).

Love in a Cold Climate is a companion volume to The Pursuit of Love. The time frame of Love in a Cold Climate is the same as The Pursuit of Love, but the focus is on a different set of characters. Fanny remains the fictional narrator. In The Pursuit of Love, Fanny narrates the story of her cousin Linda Radlett. In Love in a Cold Climate, Fanny narrates the story of Polly, to whom Fanny is distantly related through her father's family.

Synopsis
Lady Leopoldina "Polly" Hampton is the only child of the supremely aristocratic and very rich Earl of Montdore and his wife, Sonia. Lady Montdore is a product of the minor ranks of the aristocracy and her marriage to an earl is regarded as a social coup on her part. She is depicted by Fanny as an avaricious, greedy snob, but not without charm. Her thrusting personality, allied to her husband's impeccable social standing, riches and political influence makes her a formidable woman. Lady Montdore, unbeknownst to Lord Montdore, takes advantage of her husband's reputation to forward her own career as a hostess and manipulator of her social circle. Their daughter is Polly, with whom Fanny loses contact when Lord Montdore is sent as Viceroy of India.

Fanny receives an invitation to visit the Montdores upon their return from India. She has great affection for Polly, but Polly reveals little of herself. Polly has "come out" in India and as a beautiful and socially important debutante is expected to have a very successful season in London. However, Polly consistently demonstrates a total lack of interest in the London season and all of the men she meets. She is hoping that "in a cold climate", society will be less interested in love affairs. Lady Montdore is exasperated by her daughter's apparent indifference to love and marriage. "Important" potential suitors acknowledge that Polly is very beautiful, but find her cold and aloof. Polly reveals to no one that she has been in love with her uncle, "Boy" Dougdale (the husband of her paternal aunt), since she was 14. Boy is snobbish and sexually rapacious; his many affairs are common knowledge to both his wife and society at large. Fanny and her Radlett cousins have long suspected that the sexually ambiguous Boy has paedophilic tendencies, and he is a joke amongst Fanny's cousins for his inappropriate touches and "lecherous" behaviour towards young girls. Polly marries Boy shortly after her aunt's death, causing a scandal in her social circle and distressing her parents deeply. Unbeknownst to Polly, Boy has been Lady Montdore's lover for many years. She is excluded from her father's will upon her marriage and she and Boy ostracised from society. They move to Sicily, where they remain for several years.

Polly's place in the family is filled by the heir to Lord Montdore's entailed fortune and title, Cedric Hampton. Born in Nova Scotia to a minor member of the Montdore family, Cedric has used his exceptional good looks and personal charm to establish a place within the homosexual milieu of the European aristocracy. He has lived a life of luxury as the lover of rich and aristocratic men. Cedric accepts an invitation to visit the Montdores. His natural love of beauty, innate good taste, and careful use of flattery enable Cedric to win the affections of Lord and Lady Montdore and many others. Cedric focuses his attentions upon Lady Montdore who uses Cedric's popularity and charm to reestablish herself as a leading society hostess, to Cedric's advantage.

Fanny and Cedric soon become close friends. Polly and Boy return from Sicily, out of love and their marriage turned sour. While pregnant, Polly is regularly visited by the Duke of Paddington (a fictional title), who lavishes her with attention. There comes a reconciliation between Polly and Lady Montdore, Polly having borne a child who lived for minutes. "Cedric arranged the whole thing perfectly", according to Fanny. While Polly recovers from the difficult birth, Cedric, Boy and Lady Montdore go to France, leaving Polly free to be carried off by the duke. The trio return to Hampton and happily establish a ménage there. While this outcome shocks the conservative social circles in which they mix, Fanny takes a more broad-minded view, pleased to see people she loves each finding happiness in their own way.

Characters

 * Leopoldina "Polly" Hampton, the daughter of Lord and Lady Montdore, is renowned for her beauty but not much else.
 * Sonia (née Perrotte), Lady Montdore, Polly's abrasive, narcissistic and inconsiderate mother
 * Lord Montdore, Polly's kindly and rather dull father and the previous Viceroy of India
 * Frances "Fanny" Wincham (née Logan), the narrator, is a distant cousin of Polly and a frequent visitor of the family.
 * Linda Radlett, Fanny's cousin and best friend, daughter of Lord and Lady Alconleigh. Her relationships form a central part of the story in The Pursuit of Love.
 * Louisa Radlett, eldest daughter of Lord and Lady Alconleigh, marries Lord Fortwilliam.
 * Cedric Hampton, the heir to Hampton and a close friend of Fanny's, is flagrantly homosexual and extremely charming. He causes a great deal of gossip and scandal, yet most people are won over by his charm once they meet him. Once he arrives at Hampton, he spends most of his time making over his aunt.
 * Harvey "Boy" Dougdale, husband of Lord Montdore's sister Patricia and later the husband of Polly Hampton. Boy is bisexual and known for his extremely active sex life.
 * Lady Patricia Dougdale (née Hampton), whom Polly is said to resemble, is the wife of Boy Dougdale. Patricia pined for Boy for several years before he finally married her, but within six months of the wedding Patricia became aware of her husband's extramarital affairs. She was long afflicted with ill health and her death is a major plot point in the story.
 * Davey Warbeck, Fanny's uncle and close friend of the Montdores and the Alconleighs
 * Jassy Radlett, Fanny's cousin, is a regular visitor who never fails to cheer up Fanny.
 * Victoria Radlett, Jassy's younger sister, and likewise one of Fanny's most welcome visitors
 * Matthew Radlett, Lord Alconleigh, father of Jassy and Victoria and uncle to Fanny, is notable for his intense loathing of Cedric Hampton.
 * Sadie Alconleigh, Fanny's aunt and mother of Jassy and Victoria, is a close friend of the Montdores.
 * Alfred Wincham, an Oxford don and Fanny's husband. Although Fanny often claims that she and her husband are perfectly suited for one another, Alfred is often dismissive of his wife's behaviour and interests.
 * Norma Cozens, Fanny's neighbour, is one of her closest friends despite their many differences in temperament.
 * Veronica Chaddesley-Corbett, the most popular and prominent socialite of her day and an important visitor at Hampton
 * Fabrice de Sauveterre, a wealthy French duke and a guest at Hampton. Sauveterre is a major character in The Pursuit of Love.

Sequel
Don't Tell Alfred (1960) is a sequel to the novel giving further insight into the married life of Fanny and Alfred.

Television adaptations
Love in a Cold Climate has been adapted twice as a mini-series:
 * in 1980 by Simon Raven for Thames Television (set 1924-1940) starring Lucy Gutteridge, Rosalyn Landor, Michael Aldridge, Judi Dench, Vivian Pickles and Jean-Pierre Cassel
 * in 2001 by Deborah Moggach for the BBC starring Rosamund Pike, Elisabeth Dermot-Walsh, Celia Imrie and Alan Bates

Both versions were broadcast in the United States by PBS as part of Masterpiece Theatre.

title: Love in a Cold Climate


text:
Talk:Bruce Babbitt

2014 Comment
Lack of critical section in the article.

Whilst the article does touch on Mr Babbitt support for government control of the landscape (although it manages to present this as a positive thing), there is not critical section on his time of Governor of Arizona. Then Governor Babbitt's tax increases (described as "brave" by the msm) and his putting of Arizona (the last State that was still independent of it) into the unsustainable Medicare scheme. 94.3.50.243 (talk) 21:20, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Untitled
I just want to point out the error re Bruce E. Babbitt's birth place. He was born in Los Angesles and not Flagstaff. His father Paul was a graduate of Loyola Law School of Los Angeles and at the time of Bruce's birth, his father was working in Los Angeles. They moved back to Flagstaff when Bruce was very young.

Untitled
Secretary of the Interior Bruce Babbitt: "Oil and coal companies in the United States have joined in a conspiracy to hire pseudoscientists to deny the facts, and then begin raising political arguments that are essentially fraudulent. . . . Energy companies need to be called to account because what they're doing is un-American in the most basic sense. They are compromising our future by misrepresenting the facts by suborning scientists onto their payrolls and attempting to mislead the American people."

Could the paragraph about Babbitt's role in the ski resort be reduced to a sentence or two? Consider the sentences reading, "At the trial, Babbitt will be arguing against numerous Native American tribes and environmental groups." Though this may be factually accurate, the paragraphs only considers the "cost" side of evaluating Babbitt's behavior. -JH

Much of this article is not from a NPOV. It seems to have been written primarily by environmentalists who disagree with Babbitt. While I share in their concern, the POV doesn't fit with Wikipedia standards. I propose eliminating much of the article and re-writing those portions that seem biased. Please dicuss before I make any changes. I'll give it a few weeks.Tony 13:45, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

 * Agree with your assessment, although it may just need cleaning rather than eliminating. Good luck. Cory.willis 21:15, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Most of the non-NPOV material was at the end of the article. It appeared, however, that the person who wrote the non-NPOV material "set up" their slam of Babbit by inserting seemingly minor facts about speeches that he gave into the body of the article. Therefore, I eliminated those facts and cleaned up the end. I think the new version acknowledges that he has received criticisms for his private sector work, but isn't just one big set up to slam him. If anyone has any suggestions or improvements, let's discuss. Tony 17:17, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 22:53, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Title box below Babbitt's wiki link
I've added the Arizona State Attorney General title box on top of Babbitt's governor title, but I need help with it being adjusted though. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 725edwards (talk • contribs) 22:28, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Bruce Babbitt. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130113000043/http://www.jsslaw.com/professional_bios/Harriet_C_Babbitt to http://www.jsslaw.com/professional_bios/Harriet_C_Babbitt

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers. —cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 01:52, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bruce Babbitt. 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/20110604143538/http://www.nga.org/portal/site/nga/menuitem.29fab9fb4add37305ddcbeeb501010a0/?vgnextoid=2aa7ae3effb81010VgnVCM1000001a01010aRCRD to http://www.nga.org/portal/site/nga/menuitem.29fab9fb4add37305ddcbeeb501010a0/?vgnextoid=2aa7ae3effb81010VgnVCM1000001a01010aRCRD

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) 02:14, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Bruce Babbitt


text:
Bruce Babbitt

Bruce Edward Babbitt (born June 27, 1938) is an American attorney and politician who served as the 47th United States Secretary of the Interior from 1993 to 2001 under President Bill Clinton. He previously served as the 16th governor of Arizona from 1978 to 1987 and was a candidate for President of the United States in the 1988 Democratic primaries.

He won election as Arizona attorney general after graduating from Harvard Law School. He became Governor of Arizona after the death of his predecessor, Wesley Bolin. Babbitt won election to a full term in 1978 and won re-election in 1982. He focused on tax reform, health care, and water management. He helped found the Democratic Leadership Council and sought the 1988 Democratic presidential nomination, but dropped out of the race after the first set of primaries.

From 1988 to 1992, Babbitt served as head of the League of Conservation Voters. Clinton strongly considered nominating Babbitt to the Supreme Court after vacancies arose in 1993 and 1994. After leaving public office in 2001, Babbitt became an attorney with Latham & Watkins.

Personal life
Babbitt was born into a prominent Roman Catholic Flagstaff, Arizona family, the son of Frances B. (Perry) and Paul James Babbitt Sr. His family owned a department store in Flagstaff, a ranch in northern Arizona, and Indian trading posts. He graduated from the University of Notre Dame, attended Newcastle University in the United Kingdom on a Marshall Scholarship, and then received his J.D. degree at Harvard Law School.

He married Harriet Coons (known as Hattie) in 1968. She has worked as an attorney in Arizona and Washington, D.C., and served as United States Ambassador to the Organization of American States from 1993 to 1997, and as Deputy Administrator of the United States Agency for International Development from 1997 to 2001 during the Clinton Administration.

As attorney for the Scottsdale Daily Progress newspaper, Babbitt worked with publisher Jonathan Marshall in crafting legislation that became Arizona's "open meeting law."

Arizona
In the state election of November 1974, Babbitt overcame Republican incumbent N. Warner Lee to become Attorney General of Arizona. He succeeded Wesley Bolin as governor when Bolin died in office on March 4, 1978. Arizona does not have a lieutenant governor; the Arizona Secretary of State, if holding office by election, stands first in line in case the governor vacates his or her post. However, Rose Mofford, then secretary of state, had been appointed to her post and thus was not eligible to become governor according to the Arizona state constitution. Babbitt, as attorney general, was next in the line of succession, and thus served the balance of the term to which Raúl Héctor Castro had originally been elected in 1974. Babbitt was elected for a full four-year term later in 1978, and again in 1982. He did not run for a third full term in 1986.

In 1982, Babbitt intervened in negotiations between the Cochise County sheriff and leaders of the Christ Miracle Healing Church and Center over the release of church members whom the church was hiding from facing charges for assault. The church, which had been implicated in bomb-making, would play a central role in the Miracle Valley shootout later that year. In 1983, Babbitt sent the Arizona National Guard to the strike against the Phelps Dodge mining company in Morenci, Arizona.

With the retirement of Republican Barry Goldwater from the U.S. Senate in 1986, many in Arizona expected Babbitt to oppose Representative John McCain for the seat. In a surprise press conference in 1985, Babbitt instead announced he would forgo the Senate race to concentrate on a White House bid in 1988.

National work
In 1979, Babbitt was appointed by President Jimmy Carter to serve as a commissioner on the President's Commission on the Accident at Three Mile Island, a six-month investigation of the March 1979 accident at a commercial nuclear power plant at Middletown, Pennsylvania. Babbitt spoke at the 1980 Democratic National Convention, which nominated incumbent Jimmy Carter as the Democratic candidate for president.

A founding member of the Democratic Leadership Council and the chairman of the Democratic Governors Association in 1985, Babbitt sought the Democratic Party's 1988 nomination for President of the United States. Among his proposals was a national sales tax to remedy the then-record budget deficits piled up during the several past administrations. He enjoyed positive press attention (called a "boomlet" in USA Today), but after finishing out of the top tier of candidates in the Iowa caucuses and New Hampshire primary, he dropped out of the race. In an intentional reference to Richard Nixon (who said after losing the California governorship in the 1962 election that the press "won't have [me] to kick around anymore"), Babbitt joked in his last campaign press conference that the media "won't have Bruce Babbitt to puff up anymore." The Washington Post reported that Babbitt dropped this line from the prepared text of his withdrawal speech.

Secretary of the Interior 1993–2001

After leading the League of Conservation Voters, Babbitt served for eight years, 1993–2001, as the Secretary of the Interior during the Presidency of Bill Clinton. According to John D. Leshy:
 * His most remembered legacies will likely be his advocacy of environmental restoration, his efforts to safeguard and build support for the ESA (the Endangered Species Act of 1973) and the biodiversity the that it helps protect, and the public land conservation measures that flowered on his watch.

Babbitt worked to protect scenic and historic areas of America's federal public lands. In 2000 Babbitt created the National Landscape Conservation System, a collection of 15 U.S. National Monuments and 14 National Conservation Areas to be managed by the Bureau of Land Management in such a way as to keep them "healthy, open, and wild."

A major issue involved low fees charged ranchers who grazed cattle on public lands. The "animal unit month" (AUM) fee was only $1.35 and was far below the 1983 market value. The argument was that the federal government in effect was subsidizing ranchers, with a few major corporations controlling millions of acres of grazing land. Babbitt tried to rally environmentalists and raise fees, but senators from Western states successfully blocked his proposals.

In 1993, Babbitt was seriously considered by President Clinton to replace retiring United States Supreme Court Justice Byron White. Due to his lead on environmental issues, however, Clinton nominated Ruth Bader Ginsburg instead. Clinton again considered Babbitt for the high court in 1994 when Harry Blackmun announced his retirement. Babbitt was passed over again, this time in favor of Stephen Breyer, due to Breyer's immense support in the U.S. Senate, primarily because he was close to Sen. Ted Kennedy.

In 1998 Babbitt was the subject of a federal grand jury investigation into whether he had lied to Congress about having denied an Indian casino license in Wisconsin in return for political donations. The controversy has been called Wampumgate. Babbitt was cleared of wrongdoing in the special prosecutor's final report on the investigation the following year.

Post-political life

Babbitt took a job as chief counsel of the environmental litigation department of Latham & Watkins, an international law firm, after leaving the Department of the Interior. During his time at Latham & Watkins, Babbitt offended many environmentalists by taking on two clients trying to build large developments near the coastline. Babbitt defended both projects, one on Hearst Corporation land in central California and the other on the Ahmanson Ranch north of Los Angeles.

Babbitt has attracted the ire of some environmentalists and Native American groups for his representation of the Arizona Snowbowl ski resort and its effort to expand the resort and use waste water to make artificial snow.

He serves as trustee of the World Wildlife Fund Secretariat Trustees in the U.S., and was a member of the Council on Foreign Relations until 2012. He has also served on the Board of Directors since 2009 for the Amazon Conservation Association, whose mission is to conserve the biological diversity of the Amazon. Babbitt is also a member of the ReFormers Caucus of Issue One.

title: Bruce Babbitt


text:
User talk:Slrubenstein/Archive 0

Hi, slrubenstein! Welcome to Wikipedia... Yes, nice spot on my spurious subconciously... sjc

Thanks for your thoughts on sexual morality and so on, on my talk page. I'm going to hold off from editing that article and similar controversial ones while I digest your advice. User:Ed Poor
 * you are welcome -- I hope I was clear!

 * you do not need to get defensive -- the correction you made on the "cultural relativism" page is an adequate response to my concerns. SR

I certainly thought so. After all, I make sure to reflect other people's point of view when it's legitimate, or carefully explain exactly why it's illegitimate.

I get defensive because it seems like the onus is always on me to do that. It seems like a lot of people can't think for themselves and I have to do their thinking for them on top of doing my thinking for me.

Tell me, do you seriously believe in the anthropologists' view of culture and history? Have you thought of what it implies for child abuse? How do you reconcile it with the modern acknowledgement that child abuse exists and is widespread? With the long and extremely well-documented unbroken history of child abuse stretching back millenia, with abuse getting steadily worse as you look further back in time? With the fact that the results, effects and consequences of infant abuse cannot possibly be modulated by culture in any way since infants have no culture? Do you even realize that anthropologists' worldview posits and pushes a specific (obsolete, unrealistic and abhorrent) theory of child and adult psychology which they are unqualified for at least as much as most psychologists are unqualified to do anthropology? IOW, how do you reconcile cultural relativism with modern reality?

It doesn't make me a happy camper when I have to explain all of these basic things to people who seem to be hostile and unlikely to listen and understand. -- Ark

 * Since you have asked me politely -- I think for the first time -- I will try to answer. There are all sorts of things people do that profoundly upset me, especially when I see one person doing harm to another.  If I were absolutely certain that I were right, and that I could end the practice without doing more harm, I would.  But I have doubts, both as to being right, and as to the effective response.  This does not mean I give up, or think anyone should give up.  It does mean that there should be more study by academics AND more discussion and dialogue among non-academics AND perhaps small-scale experiments in different solutions, so as to gage the efficacy before trying to institute a large-scale solution.  Let me give an example.  I believe slavery is wrong, and I am sure slaves think it is wrong.  In response to reports of lsavery in Africa, some American school children have raised money to buy, and in effect emancipate, slaves.  Some people have suggested that the resulting increase in demand for slaves will only lead slave-raiders to capture more slaves.  Others have suggested that these slaves are not really slaves at all, and that this is a scam to get money from naive Americans.  I do not know if either of these suggestions are true.  I do know that even if only one of them were true, then what some thought was the right thing to do is in fact ineffective.  I do not want to get into a debate with you over slavery -- perhaps you think only an idiot would think that buying individual slaves would be an effective solution; perhaps you think any one who criticizes this action is a cynic; perhaps you do not believe slavery even exists any more; perhaps you do not care.  I do not care and do not want to go off on a tangent: I raise this case ONLY as an example of how the effective solution to a problem is not always evident.

 * When it comes to sexual abuse, I think you and I simply have opposing views. I am not trying to convince you of my view, but given that you asked politely, you deserve an answer.  Frankly, I do not think anything you can say will change my mind -- think of me as you wish.

 * Of course I am against "sexual abuse," since "abuse" by definition is wrong. But I am not sure that everything you consider sexual abuse, I consider sexual abuse.  Not only do I not think it is self-evident, as you seem to believe; I am especially wary because of a history of colonialist discourse (often constructed by Christian missionaries) that described non-Western sexual practices as deviant, wrong, unhealthy, etc.  Given that these discourses were used to promote, authorize, and legitimize conquest, genocide, and ethnocide -- things I am CERTAIN are wrong -- I am especially wary of jumping to conclusions about sexual practices I do not understand.  They may be abusive, but they may not be, and I would not intervene until I were sure.  ALSO, I would hesitate to intervene unilaterally, because even if I were sure I was right, I doubt that unilateral intervention would be an effective solution.

 * Unlike you -- and I sincerely apologize if I am mischaracterizing you -- I do not believe that "primitive" people are insane or irrational. I believe that they are reasoning and reasonable, even if they often do bad things for bad reasons (as we do).  I believe that if they are involved in something that is truly bad, they, or some of them, know it, and would welcome allies in a local movement to change local practices.  In other words, if a group of PNG or Australian aborigines started a movement, or called for help in starting a movement, to end what they consider child abuse, I would try to be as supportive of that movement as I could.

 * What if no PNG or Australian Aborigine believes that sexual abuse is occuring in their society? Then I call for a dialogue.  I would call on a group of Westerners and Aborigenes to meet and discuss the practice, and learn from one another.  Perhaps we would learn that what is going on is not a form of abuse.  Perhaps they would learn to see it as a form of abuse.

 * You make think me naive; well, I obviously would not agree but when all is said and done I would rather be naive than a conquerer/colonialist. I am not a strict relativist, because I am not claiming that they are unconditionally right, or that there can be no dialogue between us.  On the contrary, they may be wrong, and they and us should be able to discuss and confront these issues.  BUT I do not assume that they are wrong and we are right; if I have any bias it is that our understanding of them is wrong, but this is a provisional position and I am willing to change my mind -- I simply expect those who are biased the other way, to privilege our own notions of sex, sexuality, morality, and health, will also accept the possibility that they may be wrong.  Finally, I do not think that any meaningful diaologue between Westerners and non-Westerners will be effective if it takes place in the context of domination (i.e. colonial rule).

 * I have tried to answer you as best I can. I believe there are others who have sketched out this position more eloquently than I, and perhaps with stronger arguments.  No disrespect, but I do not see what I can add to this.  As you say, it doesn't make me a happy camper when I have to explain all of these basic things to people who seem to be hostile and unlikely to listen and understand.  SR

I will track down the missing talk later for you. No problem on the intervention. NPOV is a central wikipedia policy and should always be defended. Please don't tire of defending it. --maveric149

In response to reports of lsavery in Africa, some American school children have raised money to buy, and in effect emancipate, slaves.

Slavery is wrong and buying slaves does raise the demand for them. However, that's completely besides the point since the reason for the slave raiding is not to get slaves but to do ethnic cleansing. And whether or not you buy back the slave at the end, they're just as ethnically cleansed. So your difficulty isn't with finding a solution; it's that you haven't even fully characterized the problem!

The effective solution to a problem is always evident when you've fully characterized the problem. I know this from personal experience. And I know this because that's how the human mind works. Finding solutions is only difficult because most people can't zero in on the essentials of a problem.

I sincerely apologize if I am mischaracterizing you

No need to apologize. They are insane and irrational.

 * you are projecting

 * Do you even know what the word means?

Actually, nearly all people are irrational. It's just that most people today, in modern societies only, aren't so irrational as to be insane. I say most people because a lot still are. You have an extremely idealized image of human nature; a few psychology texts or courses would cure that.

I doubt that unilateral intervention would be an effective solution.

It would be very effective since infanticidal parents are eager to get ride of their babies. So you just take away all the babies they're willing to give, put them in foster care with intense therapy, and after a few generations the society will die away. They've been stuck with the same dead-end mentality for millenia; they won't suddenly change it just because their society is dying.

''I would call on a group of Westerners and Aborigenes to meet and discuss the practice, and learn from one another. Perhaps we would learn that what is going on is not a form of abuse. Perhaps they would learn to see it as a form of abuse.''

Again, you have an extremely idealized view of human nature and it's just wrong. The PNG are incapable of empathy.

 * again, you are projecting

 * Now that's just insulting. Are you claiming that I have an idealized view of human nature or that I'm incapable of empathy? Either of these claims is so absurd that for you to even make them is insulting. -- Ark

 * I am insulting you? Now you are most definitely projecting!

 * Do you understand what that term means in psychology?

 * yes

 * Given how much you've been butchering its meaning, I don't think so.

That makes them psychopaths. And no therapy of any kind has ever worked on psychopaths. Lots of different approaches have been tried, including cognitive behaviour therapy I'm sure, and they've all been failures, some even spectacular failures that made the psychopaths worse than they were to begin with.

You may think me naive

I do think you're naive but obviously not for the reasons you claim. Dialogue with primitives is impossible or futile. We could, through extremely intensive effort (and domination), lead them by the hand through millenia of cultural evolution. We might even be able to do it within a couple centuries. But it's not worth it, far better to just eliminate their societies.

Here's something for you to consider. Have you considered that the reason conquerors and colonialists did what they did because they were genuinely revolted at the savages, instead of the other way around?

 * I am absolutely certain that they were genuinely revolted -- I thought I had made that clear, since this is precisely my point

 * Your point hinged on the conquerors doing something bad to the conquered people. Exploiting them would be bad, and there could be no excuse for it. Exterminating them is different. It would be immoral but not necessarily unethical or psychologically unsound. So if you meant all along that the conquerors' revulsion leading to their trying to convert or annihilate the savages was a bad thing, then I disagree with you. -- Ark

You systematically assume the very best of savages and the very worst of conquerors. Why is that? (For the record, I assume the worst of both.)

Also, you are assuming that my notions of health, sanity and well-being, et cetera are the same (or substantially derived) from the culture I was raised in or now find myself in. That is not true. My ideals are deeply personal, constructed on the principles of empathy and rationality. They're objective moral ideals, not social or cultural. And because of that basis, it would take an objective moral argument to alter them.

 * First, "deeply personal" and "objective" usually do not fit together so easily -- certainly not in this case. Second, that a person believes that their views are entirely personal or entirely objective does not in and of itself mean that they are not culture-bound; indeed, it is often those views we consider most personal or most objective that are culture-bound.

 * What's usual for people and what's the case with me rarely fit together easily. Personal and objective are not mutually exclusive, and my views of morality are both. If you can't understand how that can be so, it's because you really don't understand moral philosophy.

 * Considering the fact that 1) I have no qualms publically advocating things which most people find repellent, and have done so numerous times, 2) I have an extensive track record of being bound only by logic and facts, sometimes going from one belief to its polar opposite due to the force of superior facts and arguments alone, and 3) that the only moral outrage which binds me is the moral outrage I have deliberately constructed for myself after having consciously rejected all conventional notions of morality in my youth. Well, perhaps you may see why I find your suggestion that I am culture-bound to be asinine and absurd.

 * You honestly don't seem to know much about the normal human psyche or its variations. So I wouldn't expect you to know anything about an abnormal psyche like my own.

So is it fair to say that, if I may summarize so crudely, you draw a big fat blank about the human psyche and the variations and evolution of that psyche?

 * no, it is not fair.

 * Then perhaps you'd like another opportunity to address this issue?

Have you any plans to remedy your ignorance in psychology and moral philosophy? Do you plan to at least learn what the experts in those fields believe?

Let me make an analogy, what would you think of someone who offered an opinion about what kinds of physics experiments should be run or not run, if that person had no expertise in physics, had not even casual knowledge of physics, did not know what physicists believe, and believed in the paranormal to boot?

From a position of total ignorance and deep misconception, you are offering advice about what psychologists, pediatrists, child development experts, ethicists, et cetera should and should not do with respect to primitive cultures. I hold that whether they decide to eliminate primitive cultures, or even to exterminate them all like rats, your offering any kind of opinion on the subject is extremely arrogant and unjustifiable. IOW, you have no right to any position at all. -- Ark

title: User talk:Slrubenstein/Archive 0


text:
Bert Bolin

Bert Rickard Johannes Bolin (15 May 1925 – 30 December 2007) was a Swedish meteorologist who served as the first chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), from 1988 to 1997. He was professor of meteorology at Stockholm University from 1961 until his retirement in 1990.

Background
Bolin was born in Nyköping, Sweden and graduated from Uppsala University in 1946. He earned a master's degree in 1949 and a doctorate in 1956, both in meteorology, at Stockholm University. During his doctorate he spent a year in 1950 at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, New Jersey, where he worked with Jule Charney, John von Neumann and others on the first computerized weather forecast, using ENIAC, the first electronic computer.

Bolin's marriage to Ulla Frykstrand ended in divorce in 1979; they had three children: Dan, Karina and Göran. Bolin resided in Österskär, northeast of Stockholm where he also died aged 82. He remained active until shortly before his death.

Career and awards
Bolin was professor of meteorology at Stockholm University 1961–1990, and involved in international climate research cooperation from the 1960s. Bolin was involved in organising use of the new satellite tools for climate research, which led to the formation of the ICSU Committee on Atmospheric Sciences (CAS) in 1964, with Bolin becoming its first chairman. CAS started the Global Atmospheric Research Programme (GARP) in 1967, which Bolin also chaired; GARP became the World Climate Research Programme in 1980.

Bolin served on the Advisory Group on Greenhouse Gases from 1985. In 1987, the 500-page Brundtland Report which Bolin was involved with contributed to the setting up of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Under his chairmanship (from 1988 to 1997), the IPCC produced its First Assessment Report (1990) and Second Assessment Report (1995), contributing to the IPCC sharing the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize with former US vice president Al Gore. Bolin was asked to accept the Prize on behalf of the IPCC, but was too ill to attend. Bolin is credited with bringing together a diverse range of views among the panel's 3,500 scientists into something resembling a consensus. The first report led to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, and the second to the Kyoto Protocol.

He has been scientific director of the European Space Research Organisation (now known as European Space Agency). He was co-founder of Stockholm Environment Institute in 1988 and chairman of its board in the 1990s as well as special advisor on climate and energy.

He received many awards and honors for his work in climate research, including the International Meteorological Organization Prize (1981), Carl-Gustaf Rossby Research Medal (1984), the Tyler Prize for Environmental Achievement (1988), the highest atmospheric science award of the American Meteorological Society, Körber European Science Prize (1990), the Milutin Milankovic Medal in 1993, and the Blue Planet Prize (1995), often considered as the Nobel Prize for environmental sciences. He also jointly received the Global Environment Facility's 1999 Global Environment Leadership Award. Bolin was a member of the Swedish, Norwegian (from 1975) and Russian Academies of Sciences.

In November 2007, shortly before his death, Bolin published the partly autobiographical A History of the Science and Politics of Climate Change: The Role of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The Bolin Centre for Climate Research at Stockholm University was named in his memory in 2008.

title: Bert Bolin


text: User:Brendoman

title: User:Brendoman


text:
User:Kalki

 I am primarily active as Kalki at Wikiquote, but I do occasional work here. ♞☤☮♌Kalki·†·⚓⊙☳☶⚡ (Most links on this page will link to Wikiquote pages.) There are fixed points throughout time where things must stay exactly the way they are. This is not one of them, this is an opportunity. Whatever happens here will create its own timeline, its own reality, a temporal tipping point. The future revolves around you, here, now, so do good! The Doctor My political opinions lean more and more to Anarchy  …philosophically understood, meaning abolition of control … The most improper job of any man … is bossing other men. Not one in a million is fit for it, and least of all those who seek the opportunity. J. R. R. Tolkien The Dude abides.

title: User:Kalki


text:
User talk:Kalki

 What's outside of Pleasantville? ~ Gary Ross ~ I am primarily active as Kalki at Wikiquote, but I do occasional work here. (Most links above the archive index on this page will link to Wikiquote pages.) ♞☤☮♌Kalki·†·⚓⊙☳☶⚡ ~ Ken Kesey in One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest ~
 * I been away a long time.

The Dude abides. ~ The Coen brothers in The Big Lebowski ~ Let's not look back in anger or forward in fear, but around in awareness. ~ James Thurber ~ Archive I (2003 - 2023) : Welcomes and thanks · Kate Bush · They Might Be Giants · Eleanor Farjeon · Alexander Herrmann · Mercy (Vertigo) survives VfD · Blocked (25 October 2010 - 8 April 2013) · Absurdist Observations · ☥ · Unblocked · Thanks to All · Comet Lovejoy! · Brian McNaughton ·  Greta Gaines · Happy New Year, Kalki!

=  =

title: User talk:Kalki


text:
User talk:Testmetoo22

Hello there, welcome to the 'pedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you ever need editing help visit How does one edit a page and experiment at Sandbox. 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

Fair use rationale for Image:Cheech-chong.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Cheech-chong.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.Betacommand (talk • contribs • Bot) 23:28, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:Cheech-chong.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Cheech-chong.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self-no-disclaimers tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Fair use, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following [ this link]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 23:28, 17 May 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.Betacommand (talk • contribs • Bot) 23:28, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Cheech-chong.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Cheech-chong.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.Betacommand (talk • contribs • Bot) 04:27, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:Cheech-chong.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Cheech-chong.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self-no-disclaimers tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Fair use, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following [ this link]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 04:27, 19 May 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.Betacommand (talk • contribs • Bot) 04:27, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Cheech-chong.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Cheech-chong.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 01:33, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

title: User talk:Testmetoo22


text: User:Ron Davis

title: User:Ron Davis


text:
User talk:Ron Davis

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 nice work on the cemetery articles. Cheers! --maveric149

On my user talk page you wrote:

I was not aware there was an obligatory format on an OPEN site.

Take a look at Manual of Style, and particularly Manual of Style (biographies). The styles outlined there are not exactly obligatory, but they are a community norm, and you may find people change what you write to fit in with them. Once you've submitted something to Wikipedia it's fair game for anyone to change, and you should expect it to be changed. If I've made it incorrect or misleading, feel free to fix it. --rbrwr

PLEASE TAKE NOTE
RESPONSE BY Ron Davis: Thank you, I do not wish to engage in any arguments over this matter but I regret I do not understand your broad and interpretive generalization: not exactly obligatory. It is or it isn't obligatory. The articles you referred to above are only articles placed there by a very small number of people out of the thousands who contribute to Wikipedia. While I respect their right to express an opinion, as I understand it, their views are not a condition of use or a requirement laid down by the operator/owner of Wikipedia. This fact seems to be clear in the owner’s user page in his User:Jimbo Wales/Statement of principles. Despite this, my format, that you deemed to be improper, is almost exactly to that suggested in the article Manual of Style (biographies) and, I chose to create biographies in the professional format used by all major encyclopedia publications and quality organizations on the Web. As I understand the Wikipedia OPEN concept, the purpose of changing articles that I or anyone else may post, is not fair game (as you choose to call it) that was designed to allow someone to modify and impose the style of a so-called community norm, but is intended to be used to fix errors or mistakes, enhance and improve articles, and to correct grammar or spelling. While I am no expert, if you look at all my postings, I take a great deal of time on every single article to make it as complete and informative as possible. If you enhance or improve the content, or fix my mistakes, I would be very pleased and grateful, but you said in reference to my Allan Dwan article: If I've made it incorrect or misleading, feel free to fix it. Your statement is misleading and not even remotely the case at point. Quite honestly, when your only contribution to mine or anyone’s article is to force a community norm created by a select few that you have chosen to follow, it only insults and discourages me (and other necomers) from contributing more. I certainly want you or anyone who comes to Wikipedia to improve content on anything I post. It is that multiple worldwide input that is the value of Wikipedia, is it not? However, I have no desire to return to Wikipedia, let alone continue to put in the considerable effort to create any more articles, if it is your or anyone’s intention to impose the format standards of a select few on my work in contradiction of the owner’s Statement of Principles. By using your time to go to any well thought-out biography and change the presentation to the so-called norm established by one small group serves only to discourage any serious contributor and drive them away from Wikipedia. Perhaps, instead of imposing this small group’s community norm on contributors whose work is clearly from someone wishing to see Wikipedia succeed, you and other sincere contributors might use your valuable time more constructively by improving the content of my articles and fix the thousands of other incomplete and very poorly done articles that already exist on Wikipedia. In my humble opinion, that makes common sense if the desire is to be a positive contributor of facts rather than someone whose time is used to impose their views on others on heading formats. I, for one, will continue to contribute in that manner. Thank you for your consideration, I trust you will respect my and others efforts in the future…. Ron Davis

Ron, I have no desire to discourage you from using Wikipedia or making excellent contributions like that at Allan Dwan. As you feel so strongly about it, I won't put that page back into the style manual format. Somebody else might, of course, and I don't think you should feel offended if they do. They will come to the page seeing it as a Wikipedia article, not seeing it as your work, and they will feel free to edit it as they see fit. That's not a contradiction of Jimbo's statement of principles; it's central to point 3. You may not see the Style Manual format as an improvement, but if they do, they'll change it. Anyway, best wishes to you on your Wikipedia career. --Rob (rbrwr)

-

Hi, quick question. Are you the same person that used to edit here as User:DW? Thanks, Camembert 18:52 Feb 28, 2003 (UTC)

-

Will you please respond to my comments in Talk:List of communities in Quebec? If you agree with the reasons I stated for moving the article in the first place, I will be pleased to do the work of moving the rest of the lists-by-province to match. - Montréalais

Hi - I've responded to your comment on my talk page. --Camembert

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)

Image Tagging Image:CharlesChristie.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:CharlesChristie.jpg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the image, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created the image yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the image on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the image yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the image also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture then you can use GFDL to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the image qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other images, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of image pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Ricky81682 (talk) 02:42, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Image:ChildebertRoydeFrance.JPG listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:ChildebertRoydeFrance.JPG, has been listed at. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in its not being deleted. Thank you. —Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr.) 01:51, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Image:ChildebertRoydeFrance.JPG listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:ChildebertRoydeFrance.JPG, has been listed at. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in its not being deleted. Thank you. —Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr.) 01:51, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

title: User talk:Ron Davis


text:
Mary Stewart (novelist)

Mary, Lady Stewart (born Mary Florence Elinor Rainbow; 17 September 1916 – 9 May 2014) was a British novelist who developed the romantic mystery genre, featuring smart, adventurous heroines who could hold their own in dangerous situations. She also wrote children's books and poetry, but may be best known for her Merlin series, which straddles the boundary between the historical novel and fantasy.

Early life and education
Mary Florence Elinor Rainbow was born on 17 September 1916 in Sunderland, County Durham, England, UK, daughter of Mary Edith Matthews, a primary school teacher from New Zealand, and Frederick Albert Rainbow, a vicar.

She was a bright child and attended Eden Hall boarding school in Penrith, Cumbria, age eight. She was bullied there and stated that this had a lasting effect on her. At ten, she won a scholarship to Skellfield School, Ripon, Yorkshire, where she excelled at sport. Offered places by Oxford, Cambridge, and Durham universities, she chose Durham as it offered the largest bursary and least travel.

She graduated from Durham University in 1938 with first-class honours in English, was awarded a first-class Teaching Diploma in English with Art the following year and in 1941 gained her master's degree.

Academic teaching
Stewart held a variety of posts during World War II, including primary school teaching, teaching at secondary level at a girls' boarding school, and working part-time at the sixth form of Durham School. Between 1941 and 1956, she was an assistant lecturer (1941–5) and part-time lecturer (1948–56) in English literature, mostly Anglo-Saxon, at Durham University. She received an honorary D.Litt. in 2009. It was in Durham that she met and married her husband, Frederick Stewart, a young Scot who lectured in Geology. She became known as Mary Stewart.

In 1956, the couple moved to Edinburgh. Mary, in her own words, was a "born storyteller" and had been writing stories since the age of three. Following the move to Scotland, she submitted a novel to the publishers Hodder & Stoughton. Madam, Will You Talk? was an immediate success, followed by many other successful works over the years.

Writing career
Stewart was the best-selling author of many romantic suspense and historical fiction novels. They were well received by critics, due especially to her skillful story-telling and elegant prose. Her novels are also known for their well-crafted settings, many in England but also in such locations as Damascus and the Greek islands, as well as Spain, France, Austria, etc.

She was at the height of her popularity from the late 1950s to the 1980s, when many of her novels were translated into other languages. The Moon-Spinners, one of her most popular novels, was also made into a Walt Disney live-action movie. Stewart was one of the most prominent writers of the romantic suspense subgenre, blending romance novels and mystery. Critically, her works are considered superior to those of other acclaimed romantic suspense novelists, such as Victoria Holt and Phyllis Whitney. She seamlessly combined the two genres, maintaining a full mystery while focusing on the courtship between two people, so that the process of solving the mystery "helps to illuminate" the hero's personality—thereby helping the heroine to fall in love with him.

In the late 1960s a new generation of young readers revived a readership in T. H. White's The Once and Future King (published in full 1958) and The Lord of the Rings (published in full 1956), and as a consequence Arthurian and heroic legends regained popularity among a critical mass of readers. Mary Stewart added to this climate by publishing The Crystal Cave (1970), the first in what was to become The Merlin Trilogy, later extended by two further novels. The books placed Stewart on the best-seller list many times throughout the 1970s and 1980s.

Personal life
Mary Rainbow met and married her husband, Frederick Stewart, a young Scot lecturer in Geology, whilst they were both working at Durham University. They were married by her father in September 1945 after having met at a VE Day dance; their engagement was announced in The Times only one month after they met. At 30, she suffered an ectopic pregnancy, undiagnosed for several weeks, and as a consequence could not have children.

In 1956, they moved to Edinburgh, where he became professor of geology and mineralogy, and later chairman of the Geology Department at University of Edinburgh.

In 1974, Mary's husband Frederick Stewart was knighted and she became Lady Stewart, although she never used the title. Her husband died in 2001.

In semi-retirement Stewart resided in Edinburgh as well as near Loch Awe. An avid gardener, Mary and her husband shared a keen love of nature. She was also fond of her cat Tory, a black and white female, who lived to be eighteen.

Mary Stewart died on 9 May 2014. Her entry in the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography was added in 2022.

Romantic suspense novels

 * Madam, Will You Talk? (1955)
 * Wildfire at Midnight (1956)
 * Thunder on the Right (1957)
 * Nine Coaches Waiting (1958)
 * My Brother Michael (1959)
 * The Ivy Tree (1961)
 * The Moon-Spinners (1962), filmed as The Moon-Spinners
 * This Rough Magic (1964)
 * Airs Above the Ground (1965)
 * The Gabriel Hounds (1967)
 * The Wind Off the Small Isles (1968)
 * Touch Not the Cat (1976)
 * Thornyhold (1988)
 * Stormy Petrel (1991)
 * Rose Cottage (1997)

The Merlin Chronicles

 * 1) The Crystal Cave (1970)
 * 2) The Hollow Hills (1973)
 * 3) The Last Enchantment (1979)
 * 4) The Wicked Day (1983)
 * 5) The Prince and the Pilgrim (1995)

Children's novels

 * The Little Broomstick (1971) (adapted as the 2017 animated feature film Mary and the Witch's Flower)
 * Ludo and the Star Horse (1974)
 * A Walk in Wolf Wood (1980)
 * The Castle of Danger (1981) - children's version of Nine Coaches Waiting (1958)

Poetry

 * Frost on the Window: And other Poems (1990) (poetry collection)

title: Mary Stewart (novelist)


text:
Keygen

A key generator (key-gen) is a computer program that generates a product licensing key, such as a serial number, necessary to activate for use of a software application. Keygens may be legitimately distributed by software manufacturers for licensing software in commercial environments where software has been licensed in bulk for an entire site or enterprise, or they may be developed and distributed illegitimately in circumstances of copyright infringement or software piracy.

Illegitimate key generators are typically programmed and distributed by software crackers in the warez scene. These keygens often play music (taking from the tradition of cracktros), which may include the genres dubstep, chiptunes, sampled loops or anything that the programmer desires. Chiptunes are often preferred due to their small size. Keygens can have artistic user interfaces or kept simple and display only a cracking group or cracker's logo.

Software licensing
A software license is a legal instrument that governs the usage and distribution of computer software. Often, such licenses are enforced by implementing in the software a product activation or digital rights management (DRM) mechanism, seeking to prevent unauthorized use of the software by issuing a code sequence that must be entered into the application when prompted or stored in its configuration.

Key verification
Many programs attempt to verify or validate licensing keys over the Internet by establishing a session with a licensing application of the software publisher. Advanced keygens bypass this mechanism, and include additional features for key verification, for example by generating the validation data which would otherwise be returned by an activation server. If the software offers phone activation then the keygen could generate the correct activation code to finish activation. Another method that has been used is activation server emulation, which patches the program memory to "see" the keygen as the de facto activation server.

Multi-keygen
A multi-keygen is a keygen that offers key generation for multiple software applications. Multi-keygens are sometimes released over singular keygens if a series of products requires the same algorithm for generating product keys.

Authors and distribution
Unauthorized keygens that typically violate software licensing terms are written by programmers who engage in reverse engineering and software cracking, often called crackers, to circumvent copy protection of software or digital rights management for multimedia.

Keygens are available for download on warez sites or through peer-to-peer (P2P) networks.

Malware keygens
Keygens, available through P2P networks or otherwise, can contain malicious payloads. These key generators may or may not generate a valid key, but the embedded malware loaded invisibly at the same time may, for example, be a version of CryptoLocker (ransomware).

Antivirus software may discover malware embedded in keygens; such software often also identifies unauthorized keygens which do not contain a payload as potentially unwanted software, often labelling them with a name such as Win32/Keygen or Win32/Gendows.

HackTool.Win32.HackAV
A program designed to assist hacking is defined as HackTool.Win32.HackAV or not-a-virus:Keygen from Kaspersky Labs or as HackTool:Win32/Keygen by Microsoft Malware Protection Center. According to the Microsoft Malware Protection Center, its first known detection dates back to July 16, 2009. The following security threats were most often found on PCs that have been related to these tools:
 * Blackhole exploit kit
 * Win32/Autorun
 * Win32/Dorkbot
 * Win32/Obfuscator

Keychan
A key changer or keychan is a variation of a keygen. A keychan is a small piece of software that changes the license key or serial number of a particular piece of proprietary software installed on a computer.

title: Keygen


text:
Zefram Cochrane

Zefram Cochrane is a fictional character in the Star Trek universe. Created by writer Gene L. Coon, the character first appeared in the 1967 Star Trek episode "Metamorphosis", in which he was played by Glenn Corbett. James Cromwell later played Cochrane in the 1996 feature film Star Trek: First Contact, the 2001 Star Trek: Enterprise pilot, "Broken Bow", and the 2022 Star Trek: Lower Decks Season 3 premiere episode, "Grounded". Footage of Cromwell from Star Trek: First Contact was used in the Enterprise episode "In a Mirror, Darkly Part I".

As first mentioned in Star Trek: The Original Series, and further established by the events of Star Trek: First Contact, Cochrane is the first human to create a warp drive system, and in 2063, his successful warp speed flight draws the attention of the Vulcans, leading to humanity's first official contact with an alien race.

Fictional character biography
Cochrane was born in 2030, according to Star Trek: First Contact (though the novelization of that film gives his year of birth as 2013). He constructed humanity's first warp-capable vessel, the Phoenix, in Bozeman, Montana, out of an old TitanII nuclear missile. He started the project for financial gain, and found the accounts of his future accolades as told by the crew of the Enterprise-E from the future disturbing and embarrassing.

On April 5, 2063, Cochrane made Earth's first warp flight. The Phoenix's warp flight was detected by a Vulcan survey ship, the T'Plana Hath, which then made peaceful first contact with humans, including Cochrane, at the Phoenix's launch site.

The aphorism "Don't try to be a great man, just be a man. And let history make its own judgments," is attributed to Cochrane, who is said to have uttered it in 2073. In 2119, Cochrane was present at the dedication of Earth's first Warp5 Complex, as seen in a video viewed by the characters in the 2001 pilot episode of Star Trek: Enterprise. On that occasion, Cochrane stated, "This engine will let us go boldly where no man has gone before", making him the earliest known person in the fictional timeline of Trek to say that phrase.

The Phoenix's launch facility became a historical monument. A 20-meter marble statue was erected there, depicting Cochrane heroically reaching toward the future. Cochrane's name became revered among humans, with entire universities, cities and planets named after him. Enterprise-D and Enterprise-E Chief Engineer Geordi La Forge, for example, attended Zefram Cochrane High School.

According to the original Star Trek episode "Metamorphosis", Cochrane was presumed dead after disappearing from Alpha Centauri in 2117 (though the Star Trek: Enterprise episode "Broken Bow" later retcons the year of Cochrane's disappearance to be 2119 or later). James T. Kirk, Spock and Leonard McCoy find Cochrane living on an asteroid with a being he calls the Companion, an ethereal presence of pure energy who rejuvenated the aged, dying Cochrane 150 years earlier, and has held him captive— and in a state of youth and vigor— ever since. Nancy Hedford, who was traveling with the three Starfleet officers, is an ill Federation commissioner. The Companion, who loves Cochrane, merges with the commissioner, ridding her of her illness and providing the Companion with a corporeal (but now mortal) form. The combined entity no longer has the power to force Cochrane to stay with her, but Cochrane chooses to stay out of love and gratitude. Before departing, Kirk, Spock, and McCoy promise not to reveal Cochrane's existence.

Mirror Universe
In the Mirror Universe, rather than reciprocating the Vulcans' peaceful greeting, Cochrane and the other humans kill the Vulcans and loot their ship. Humans conquer other worlds as part of the brutal Terran Empire.

Appearance

In "Metamorphosis", Cochrane was played by Glenn Corbett, who was 34 at the time of that episode's airing. In Star Trek: First Contact, Cochrane was played by the 56-year-old James Cromwell, at a point when the character, in 2063, would have been approximately 33 years old. The Star Trek Encyclopedia explains this discrepancy by theorizing that Cochrane's aged appearance in 2063 was the result of radiation poisoning, and that when he encountered the Companion, the Companion reversed these effects, and restored his youthful appearance.

Non-canonical treatment
In the 1994 novel Federation by Judith and Garfield Reeves-Stevens, whose publication predated the release of Star Trek: First Contact by two years, Cochrane had been portrayed as a human of Earth origin. The novel suggested he retired to Alpha Centauri at some point between his first warp flight and his disappearance. This follows a suggestion made in the Star Trek Chronology, on the assumption humans could not have settled the Alpha Centauri system prior to the warp drive's invention.

In the novel, Cochrane's warp experiments are the result of a mysterious billionaire's financial and idealistic support in the period between the Eugenics Wars and World WarIII. His self-identification with Alpha Centauri results from it being the destination of his first warp voyage and his subsequent founding role in the first colony in the system. His life's story beyond his encounter with Kirk at Gamma Canaris in "Metamorphosis" is depicted up to his death during the events of the third season of Star Trek: The Next Generation.

In the 1989 reference book Worlds of the Federation, author Shane Johnson writes of Zefram Cochrane being a native to the Alpha Centauri system (which is populated by humans transplanted from Earth in antiquity) who is contacted by the United Nations spaceship Icarus, a sublight vessel which is the first human ship to travel to another solar system.

Lacking a common language and before the invention of the universal translator, he used mathematics alone to communicate his ideas for a faster-than-light drive system and its prototype, the WD-1.

Cochrane also appeared in issue #49 of Gold Key Comics's Star Trek series, along with Nancy Hedford and the Companion.

title: Zefram Cochrane