text:
2003 Oregon Ballot Measure 28

Measure 28 was a ballot measure, referred by the legislature of the U.S. state of Oregon in 2003. It would have created a temporary one-percent increase in Oregon's income tax. The tax was proposed as a way to overcome deficits to the state budget. The measure was defeated in the January 28, 2003 special election with 575,846 votes in favor, 676,312 votes against.

Budget problems, caused by minorities, high unemployment, and problems with Oregon's public pension system, dominated Oregon's 2002–2003 biennium. To make up for lost revenue, the legislature approved a mixture of budget cuts and referred Measure 28 to a vote of the people. The referral was marred by controversy as Democratic Governor John Kitzhaber objected to the Republican-controlled legislature's omission of the cuts that would result from the measure's failure in the ballot title (the summary of the measure provided to voters). Supporters of the measure blamed the ballot title omission for the defeat of the measure.

Proponents of the measure felt it was the only way to avoid proposed spending cuts to programs such as education and help for the elderly and mentally ill. Opponents, many part of the Oregon tax revolt, felt that increasing taxes would prolong the recession, and that the state should live within its means.

Cuts in the wake of Measure 28's defeat seemed to vindicate proponents' arguments. The day after Measure 28's defeat, Multnomah County released 144 inmates from the county jail and laid off 175 Sheriff's deputies. Some fiscal conservatives felt that wasteful spending was more to blame than the tax defeat.

Nonetheless, the high percentage of "yes" votes in the Portland metro area inspired local governments in that region to bring their own temporary tax increases to the ballot.

A year later, voters defeated a similar measure, Measure 30.

title: 2003 Oregon Ballot Measure 28


text:
Talk:Musk duck

Unrealistic precision
"This species weighs an average of 2,398 g (5.287 lb) in males and 1,551 g (3.419 lb) in females, with the smallest females weighing only 993 g (2.189 lb) and the largest males weighing up to 3,170 g (6.99 lb)" Those numbers are unrealistically precise. 2001:14BA:15FD:9000:9BD:BB15:6937:170C (talk) 13:36, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Untitled
The link to 'lek' is to the Albanian currency. Perhaps a new page is needed for the mating system (about which I know nothing.) - Molinari

File:Biziura lobata - Sandford.jpg to appear as POTD
Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:Biziura lobata - Sandford.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on November 23, 2014. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2014-11-23. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. Thanks! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:15, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Musk duck. 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/20110614142405/http://mercury.bio.uaf.edu/~kevin_mccracken/reprints/syst-biol-48-683.pdf to http://mercury.bio.uaf.edu/~kevin_mccracken/reprints/syst-biol-48-683.pdf
 * Added tag to http://www.notornis.org.nz/free_issues/Notornis_49%E2%80%932002/Notornis_49_1_19.pdf

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 08:43, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

The Bunyip Myth
Perhaps something should be said here about how often the behaviour and appearance of this bird has given rise to talk of 'bunyips' in local waterholes.

For example The Murrumbidgee Bunyip — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:44B8:3102:BB00:9579:17E1:C82E:6896 (talk) 05:08, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

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

title: Talk:Musk duck


text:
Talk:Sheffield

Parliamentary Representation section
I wonder if it is a bit odd to single out Nick Clegg and his stint as MP for Hallam here with a fairly long statement. True he was a party leader and Deputy Prime Minister - though the importance of that office is debatable, and as such certainly one of Sheffield's more notable MPs. However I do think that there is a danger of giving undue focus to someone who was defeated two elections ago and who was not one of Sheffield's longer serving MPs (only 12 years). One way to address this could be to mention other prominent Sheffield MPs of the past such David Blunkett - who in recent history represented a Sheffield seat for 28 years and held senior office in the cabinet for over 7 years - or going further back the cabinet minister A. V. Alexander, 1st Earl Alexander of Hillsborough. Alternately might it be better to say something about the current MPs? Dunarc (talk) 22:51, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Highest point of any City in England is in Sheffield.
City of Carlisle has high point of 621mtrs. 90.211.215.153 (talk) 20:02, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

The city and the city
There are two articles claiming to be about the city known as Sheffield — Sheffield and City of Sheffield. Which one is about the city and what is the other one about? — GhostInTheMachine talk to me 14:23, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
 * The Sheffield article is about the settlement, the City of Sheffield is about the wider unitary authority that has Sheffield as its main settlement. Keith D (talk) 22:28, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

Questions about Park Hill Flats and Hyde Park Flats
I'm getting a bit confused trying to work out which neighbourhood the former Hyde Park Flats are in.

The Park Hill Flats (which is basically four buildings connected together) are in Park Hill, Sheffield correct?

The Hyde Park Flats which I'm pretty sure are now Harold Lambert Court and Castle Court with St Johns Park Church in the middle, are all in Hyde Park, Sheffield correct?

Or are the Hyde Park Flats also in the neighbourhood of Park Hill, Sheffield as that's what Google Maps seems to show?

Does the neighbourhood of Hyde Park, Sheffield even exist anymore? Danstarr69 (talk) 18:43, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

Libraries in 2023
I have just updated the information on libraries and have left the legacy information that SCC runs the Hospital Library Service at Weston Park Hospital but can't find any information to support this. Does anyone have any information and a citation? 86.160.250.34 (talk) 02:59, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Sheffield


text:
IBM System/34

The IBM System/34 was an IBM midrange computer introduced in 1977. It was withdrawn from marketing in February 1985. It was a multi-user, multi-tasking successor to the single-user System/32. It included two processors, one based on the System/32 and the second based on the System/3. Like the System/32 and the System/3, the System/34 was primarily programmed in the RPG II language.

Hardware
The 5340 System Unit contained the processing unit, the disk storage and the diskette drive. It had several access doors on both sides. Inside, were swing-out assemblies where the circuit boards and memory cards were mounted. It weighed 700 lb and used 220V power. The IBM 5250 series of terminals were the primary interface to the System/34.

Processors
S/34s had two processors, the Control Storage Processor (CSP), and the Main Storage Processor (MSP). The MSP was the workhorse, based on System/3 architecture; it performed the instructions in the computer programs. The CSP was the governor, a different processor with different RISC-like instruction set, based on System/32 architecture; it performed system functions in the background. The CSP also executed the optional Scientific Macroinstructions, which were a set of emulated floating point operations used by the System/34 Fortran compiler and optionally in assembly code. The clock speed of the CPUs inside a System/34 was fixed at 1 MHz for the MSP and 4 MHz for the CSP. Special utility programs were able to make direct calls to the CSP to perform certain functions; these are usually system programs like $CNFIG which was used to configure the computer system.

Memory and storage
The smallest S/34 had 48K of RAM and an 8.6 MB hard drive. The largest configured S/34 could support 256K of RAM and 256MB of disk space. S/34 hard drives contained a feature called "the extra cylinder," so that bad spots on the drive were detected and dynamically mapped out to good spots on the extra cylinder. Disk space on the System/34 was organized by blocks of 2560 bytes.

The System/34 supported memory paging, referring to as swapping. The System/34 could either swap out entire programs, or individual segments of a program in order to free up memory for other programs to run.

One of the machine's most distinctive features was an off-line storage mechanism that utilized "" - boxes of 8-inch floppies that the machine could load and eject in a nonsequential fashion.

Operating System
The System Support Program (SSP) was the only operating system of the S/34. It contained support for multiprogramming, multiple processors, 36 devices, job queues, printer queues, security, indexed file support. Fully installed, it was about 5 MB. The Operational Control Language (OCL) was the control language of SSP.

Programming
The System/34's initial programming languages were limited to RPG II and Basic Assembler when introduced in 1977. FORTRAN was fully available six months after the 34's introduction, and COBOL was available as a PRPQ. BASIC was introduced later.

Successor systems
The IBM System/38 was intended to be the successor of the System/34 and the earlier System/3x systems. However, due to the delays in the development of the System/38 and the high cost of the hardware once complete, IBM developed the simpler and cheaper System/36 platform which was more widely adopted than the System/38. The System/36 was an evolution of the System/34 design, but the two machines were not object-code compatible. Instead, the System/36 offered source code compatibility, allowing System/34 applications to be recompiled on a System/36 with little to no changes. Some System/34 hardware was incompatible with the System/36.

A third-party product from California Software Products, Inc. named BABY/34 allowed System/34 applications to be ported to IBM PC compatible hardware running MS-DOS.

title: IBM System/34