text:
Talk:John M. Ford

Page history
Please note that the original version of this article was set up by Deb using text from John Ford, and she turned John Ford into a disambiguation page. Please see the page history of John Ford for attributions of authorship. -- Oliver P. 20:47, 6 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Update: The page referred to above is now John Ford (disambiguation). Please see that page's history for attributions of authorship. --Paul A 03:56, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * A side-note for those unfamiliar with his works: John M. Ford's works included sly references to the other John Fords, e.g. one novel opens with a quote from the Jacobean play Perkin Warbeck and ends with a quote from the movie Stagecoach — in neither case mentioning the playwright or movie director by name. Characteristically, he left making the connection as an exercise for the reader. – SAJordan talkcontribs 08:20, 17 Nov 2006 (UTC).

The juveniles were written under the name Milo Dennison; Ford only wrote the first two books, later books were by others using the Dennison name. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.116.166.115 (talk • contribs) 04:35, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

Subject's death
It is with regret that I set the subject's "living" flag to "no". ACW 18:47, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Will Shetterly's Introduction to John M. Ford
Will Shetterly moved his web pages off of apocalypse.org to blogspot. Please see the parent directory of that page, http://www.apocalypse.org/pub/flash/ While the maintainers of apocalypse.org haven't removed the content, it would be courteous to not needlessly use their bandwidth. Will Shetterly is maintaining content at qwertyranch.blogspot.com, and in fact referred to that address recently: http://shetterly.blogspot.com/2006/09/bit-more-about-john-m-ford.html 70.181.146.182 22:49, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

More bio needed
The only really biographical information here is about Ford's illness and death. When I split the long lede into sections, I reluctantly called that section "Death". Somebody who knows more about Ford's life should change the section title to "Life" and add enough info to merit the name. ACW 17:03, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Removing refs
Citation removal is a good reason all by itself to revert; if an editor made a bunch of other edits along with it, he'd be welcome to make your other edits again, but making a bunch of edits while removing correct refs does not mean making other editors do the work of restoring those refs. Undisputed facts can (and should) be cited when citations exist. You can't tell by looking at him that he died on any particular date. But I'm at the limit of my reverts for the day, so I'll stop watching this page for a while. -- JHunterJ 17:01, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

 * The death-date ref would be the Making Light thread (John M. Ford, 1957-2006) already in the external links list. The entry is dated September 25 and refers to JMF's partner Elise finding his body that morning. -- SAJordan 03:01, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

 * I've added that death-date citation, new "References" section at bottom. -- SAJordan 08:05, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

 * As I've tried to explain in edit summaries, I don't see any need to include a particular citation for the death date: it's a general biographic datum, easily verifiable, and the footnote and Reference section just complicate the article's layout, because the Making Light post is already included in External links as being of general interest on Ford's person, not just one particular detail.
 * More later, if needed and when I have the time. --Malyctenar 16:01, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

 * JHunterJ and Malyctenar, would you two please settle this with each other? -- SAJordan 17:46, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

 * I'd say that by letting the article go REF-less, JHunterJ tacitly accepted my arguments. --Malyctenar 10:17, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

"Work" description
Left intact from the earliest version of this page is the claim that "Ford's works are characterised by an aversion to doing things that have been done before." This is true in a sense, and false in a sense. Mike wrote several novels of the Bildungsroman (coming-of-age) type; although the entry attaches that label only to Growing Up Weightless, it could also be fairly applied to Web of Angels, The Final Reflection, Princes of the Air, and even somewhat to The Last Hot Time. Put another way, Mike repeatedly wrote on the theme of growing up, learning about one's world and one's place in it, and taking responsibility for it — which involves taking on the power and wisdom to influence events, to help make the world a better place. This is a significant commonality, and I think worth mentioning. I am adding a paragraph to that effect, but not altering the prior existing text. This will result in a slight contradiction between paragraphs, which probably should be resolved. I'm just reluctant to alter someone else's argument. -- SAJordan 03:15, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Anonymous unexplained deletion
At [ 09:06, 8 November 2006], User:68.40.161.247 deleted the following sentence from John M. Ford: "He is survived by his partner since the mid-1990s, Elise Matthesen." No edit summary, no explanation here. That IP has no other contribs. I'm requesting an explanation, else I intend to revert that deletion.  – SAJordantalkcontribs 06:29, 9 Nov 2006 (UTC).

 * Whois lookup says that the IP belongs to the Michigan Comcast (I don't know how much one can trust the Ann Arbor location). I think that it is possible to revert with boldness without waiting for an explanation (and I doubt that the drive-by deleter would provide one, or even check Wikipedia again): their relationship is public knowledge and I can't see how anybody concerned might object. --Malyctenar 13:26, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

My immediate temptation was to immediately revert. I am trying, not only for my health, to learn to resist immediate temptations. :)  More, I had to at least consider the possibility of good faith, if not necessarily assume it: might the deletion have been at the request of a family member or Elise herself? I've paused to allow such an explanation, if it's forthcoming.  – SAJordan talkcontribs 19:54, 9 Nov 2006 (UTC).

 * My thoughts too. Revert - maybe add an obit. as a source.  Maybe he's survived by others as well.  But perhaps Elise or a family member did the deletion.  I wouldn't want to put it there against their will.  Appraiser 20:41, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

 * The line about him being survived by his long-term partner Elise Matthesen should certainly be restored. I am a close friend of Elise's and I was a friend of John M. Ford's for decades, and I can tell you with utter confidence that Elise would want that line in and Mike would have wanted it too.  I am restoring it immediately.  Pnh 22:49, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you, Pnh! Note in the history that User:68.40.161.247 once again deleted that specific sentence (only), with again no edit summary or or comment; and Appraiser has restored it. (Thank you, Appraiser!) We may need to protect this page from anonymous edits. – SAJordan talkcontribs 23:18, 10 Nov 2006 (UTC).

In its third edit, IP 68.40.161.247 has made its third identical deletion here, still with no explanation, even in response to a request on its talk page. I've reverted it. – SAJordan talkcontribs 15:17, 15 Nov 2006 (UTC).

-unhappy- eek! I'm from Michigan Fandom myself, and I can't grasp why someone would keep ripping that out, over and over. I'm glad that all of you have been fixing it.

=Chica= 01:38, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

 * Elise was Mike's partner, his friends and hers know this, and there is no good reason for deleting that fact, anonymously or otherwise. I agree with Appraiser that we may need to protect from anonymous edits. Vicki Rosenzweig 20:12, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

 * I have made a request for semi-protection of John M Ford. Vicki Rosenzweig

 * The semi-protection was turned down for now, with instructions to put a warning template on the anonymous IP's talk page if it happened again. It happened again overnight. Someone else reverted, I have placed the warning template and updated Requests for page protection. [Vicki Rosenzweig 18 Nov 2006]

Anonymous editor speaks, sort of
The anonymous editor from IP 68.40.161.247 has, for the first time, actually said something. The anon chose to communicate by making resultless edits to the main article (making an edit and undoing it before saving), and leaving opinions in the comment field. I would guess from this that our anon doesn't know how to use a talk page.

The first comment reads:

 * Who found a dead author is irrelevant. Is who found Mark Twain dead listed or of note?  Perhaps Elise just needs to see her name in print.  SELF SERVING SH

And the second one:

 * Per request of family, no further edits will be made. The family wants nothing to do either with rabid fans nor pathetic hanger-ons.

In case this editor happens to read the talk page, permit me a measured answer. I have read one novel and one poem by Mr. Ford, and am not a fan or a hanger-on, but merely a Wikipedia editor; I have no dog in this hunt.

The person who discovers the subject dead is an incident in the subject's biography. Names of wives, partners, parents, and children are also completely standard biographical material. Mentioning the name of a decade-long partner seems entirely appropriate to me. I had never heard of Ms. Mattheson before, but her mention seems to fit into a biographical precis with no strain whatever. I would like (as I mentioned above) to see more biographical incident in this article, which seems barely above stub-quality to me at the moment. Wikipedia does not risk running out of storage because there is too much detail in this article.

If Mr. Ford's family has an opinion in this matter, there are numerous channels by which they may express it. Their opinions would carry much more weight if they were signed. As the statement stands, it is impossible to tell whether it represents the true wishes of the family or not. But even if this description of the family's wishes were verified, it would have no legal force. Though we might sometimes wish it otherwise, people are free to write what they like about each other. The family of Alan Turing attempted for many years to suppress biographical claims that Turing was homosexual. These attempts were unsuccessful; biographers enjoy freedom of expression.

On second reading, the statement is ambiguous: perhaps it means that the anonymous editor intends to make no further edits. If that was what was meant, I have almost equal regret. What would be ideal would be for this anonymous editor to come out of the closet and be constructive. Sir or madam: it appears you know something about Mr. Ford. Will you not consider actually contributing to the article?

ACW 05:10, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

 * At some point, I'd like to add more biographical information, and clarify bits of what's there, but I want it to be specific. I could, now, write "worked for companies in the gaming industry," but I'd like to find company names, and ideally dates and what games he worked on in addition to what's already listed. Similarly, I have a query in to try to find out exactly what year Mike moved to Minneapolis.Vicki Rosenzweig 14:15, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

 * The gaming companies include FASA and Steve Jackson Games, at least. In the external links "About Ford", Steve Jackson's website is listed, as is Eric Burns (who also wrote for FASA). They might be able to fill in whatever blanks were left by John M. Ford. – SAJordan talkcontribs 15:34, 21 Nov 2006 (UTC).

Deletion of biographical detail resumed
At 05:56, 30 November 2006 (UTC), Sjmac999 erased the sourced phrase "by his partner since the mid-1990s, Elise Matthesen" from John M. Ford. (This is the same text repeatedly deleted by IP 68.40.161.247, who like Sjmac999 -contribs has edited no other text than this one phrase.) That deletion has been reverted. A test1a warning has been placed on Sjmac999's talk page. A checkuser has been requested.

Note: Sjmac999 had earlier [ changed] the word "partner" to "friend", which was also reverted. (I challenge anyone to interpret this as a declaration merely of friendship.)

Thank you, 216.243.177.140 and 70.181.146.182, for your restorations. – SAJordan talkcontribs 09:32, 30 Nov 2006 (UTC).

 * Thanks. (Having not done a lot of Wikipedia stuff in the last year or two, I wasn't even aware of "checkuser".) Vicki Rosenzweig 15:27, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

24.253.70.106 04:32, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

 * Now filed as a vandalism report, following the checkuser discussion. – SAJordan talkcontribs 04:55, 2 Dec 2006 (UTC).

 * Blocks in place, 24 hours for IP, indef (with appeal option) for username. Let's see whether the deletions cease. – SAJordan talkcontribs 06:08, 2 Dec 2006 (UTC).

 * Unfortunate that this was needed, but thanks for keeping on it, SAJordan. Vicki Rosenzweig 14:52, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

I would also like to see the word "partner" changed, just because I've always hated that word for lover. But that's neither here nor there--the word "partner" is in general use, and I think that fight is lost. What is more important is that there is no question that the reference to Elise should be included here, out of respect for Mike's memory as well as out of common decency to Elise. Thanks for your work in restoring it. -- Steven Brust 5-Jan-07

 * The Pioneer Press article uses the word partner and I suspect that is the word Elise used when interviewed. It would be presumptive for anyone to change it, except Elise, herself. Whether you like it or not isn't really germane. Appraiser 15:22, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

 * As you know, Steven, Elise said (and says) "partner," and Mike used "companion."
 * Appraiser, Elise hasn't been editing here, and I don't think she intends to.Vicki Rosenzweig 01:11, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

I've heard Elise use the label "partner" myself, and many of us in the Poly community use that term. I use it myself, even though it is not ideal. I oce preferred "spouse", but apparently that has a legal definition not consistent with what Elise would intend. Atom 15:48, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Request
I don't know how to do Meta-wiki. I began a section today for Mike's shorter works. I'd be obliged if some more wiki-savvy person created a meta-file for those. I plan to keep adding to the shorter works as I can.

Thanks!

=Chica= 01:43, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

 * Rather than recreate the work NESFA has done, maybe a better think to do would be to better emphasize the NESFA biblio. (currently mentioned as an external link) and supplement it here with the short works post 1997? 65.161.195.226 21:41, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

 * That seems sensible. NESFA are pretty good about keeping information online. Vicki Rosenzweig 03:54, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Okay. Thanks. :) I'll also check and see whether we've got any of the post-1997 works around.

=Chica= 22:31, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Any comments on which shorter works should be singled out? The Alternities quartet? Erase/Record/Play? Fugue State? Winter Solstice? How to best mention the Speculative Engineering chapbooks of which I have only heard about? 70.181.146.182 06:24, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

NPOV
The first paragraph of this article is unduly fawning and adulatory, replete with positive adjectives. I added the NPOV flag. A lizard 06:39, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Critiques?
Could any critiques be added to this page? Rvo91 22:11, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
 * It's gonna be hard to make the article less elegaic, as it is (to the best of my knowledge) impossible to find anybody who's ever written anything bad about the guy. Please let us know what can be done to meet your concerns. -- Orange Mike 13:34, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Several things need change in my view. The opening sentence needs to have real world context. It currently reads "Ford was regarded (and obituaries, tributes and memories describe him) as an extraordinarily intelligent, erudite and witty man. He was a popular contributor to several online discussions". It needs to be replaced with something like:

 * 1) "Ford was the author of intelligent and critically acclaimed books/short stories/articles in which the major themes included....
 * 2) He was a regular contributor to several blog/webzine/forums where he cultivated a following who apprecitated his wit and erudite comments about such topics as....

As the article stands, there is no context, and the opening comments read like a tomb stone.

Also, I also think the comments about his death too morbid; it should just read that "He died in 2007 after a life long struggle with Diabetes. The rest of the detail is not appropriate for WP, and reads like ambulance chasing.--Gavin Collins 17:06, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

 * First off, there is something more than a little weird about people in an online encyclopedia dismissing other online activity as not being "real-world content." I'd not object to emphasizing the fiction and poetry first, but note that even there, some of the poetry appeared on a Weblog, and he won a World Fantasy Award for a poem that he published as a Christmas card. The categories are not hard-and-fast.
 * Second "after a life-long struggle with diabetes" is misleading: I don't think there was an autopsy, so the cause of death isn't known, but it may well have been a heart attack rather than the diabetes. I don't see what you consider "ambulance chasing" about describing the man's health problems--which he did not keep secret, and which nobody is suggesting any kind of lawsuit about. Vicki Rosenzweig 00:54, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Making Light is not an attack site
I don't know what an "attack site" is, but Making Light, a notable website edited by prominent professionals in the science fiction field, is most certainly the place on which Mr Ford's death was first reported. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Doctorow (talk • contribs) 23:36, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

 * I've replied on your user talk page. ·:·Will Beback  ·:· 23:48, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

 * See my essay for commentary on the whole contentious "attack sites" issue. *Dan T.* 04:18, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

 * The discussion, then, is on User talk:Doctorow. See also the discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents, which led to the part of rules Will Beback tries to use as justification being disputed, with explanation at Wikipedia talk:No personal attacks. --Malyctenar 10:04, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

 * Some parallel discussions of this were led at Talk:Teresa Nielsen Hayden and User talk:JulesH. --Malyctenar 12:53, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Publication rights
As I understand it: after Ford's death, rights to his work passed not to his partner (to whom he was not married; oops; c.f. Stieg Larsson for another example of this sort of clusterfuck) but to his parents, who very much disliked SF/F and with whom he was on extremely poor terms. Consequently they have refused any and all requests to reprint his work, and therefore all Ford material is out of print (exception: The Dragon Waiting, which has not gone out of print and therefore the rights to it will not revert to Ford's parents until-and-unless it does go out of print, which it apparently won't, specifically for this reason).

Any thoughts on whether there should be a section about this in the article? DS (talk) 13:38, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

 * The Dragon Waiting is now out of print, apparently. No reprints since 2009.
 * However, the collection Heat of Fusion And Other Stories and the novel The Last Hot Time are both still in print, from Tor Books. --Rpresser 17:21, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
 * This is a widely-known tragic fact, and was indeed mentioned in a book review today by James Nicoll; but I fear it may not have been reported in reliable sources which would be recognized by Wikipedians ignorant of the SF field. -- Orange Mike |  Talk  20:00, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Tor is going to be republishing all of Ford's works, according to an article in Slate. I dropped a mention of this into the article, but am not sure where exactly it belongs. If anyone else is watching the page, please improve this. (I'm also rusty on Wikipedia reference formatting.) Vicki Rosenzweig (talk) 15:37, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Removal of content
User:SteamboatPhilly has been edit warring to remove content from the stable version of this article that is sources to www.websnark.com, with edit summaries such as "sourced to an open web forum" and "Never use self-published sources as third-party sources about living people." However, as the discerning reader will gather from the lede of this article, it is not a BLP, and the source in question is not a forum.

Per WP:SPS, the relevant policy, "Self-published expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established expert on the subject matter, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable, independent publications." This is precisely the case with websnark, as has been noted with respect to a related domain here. SteamboatPhilly needs to discuss their removal of sourced. material, rather than allowing IDONTLIKEIT to get the better of them. Newimpartial (talk) 00:59, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
 * www.websnark.com is a self-published source. According to WP:RSSELF, that disqualifies it as a reliable source. It doesn't matter if the subject is dead or alive, it's just not a reliable source, period. WP:Webcomic sources isn't relevant at all; the source is, which is clearly not a webcomic. This is black-and-white. SteamboatPhilly (talk) 17:24, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
 * WP:RSSELF is a content guideline, which does not trump WP:SPS, which is a policy. WP:Webcomic sources is a selection discussing reliable sources (from the perspective of sourcing WP articles on wrbcomics), it is not primarily about articles that are, themselves, webcomics. It would be preferable for all editors to read the provided sources rathet than engaging in ICANTHEARYOU crusades. Newimpartial (talk) 17:52, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Okay, WP:SPS is a policy, and it says basically the same thing: "Anyone can create a personal web page or publish their own book, and also claim to be an expert in a certain field. For that reason, self-published media, or user-generated sources, such as... personal websites,... are largely not acceptable as sources." It goes on to say "Self-published expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established expert on the subject matter, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable, independent publications." - well, Eric Burns does not appear to qualify for that. For all I know, you're Eric Burns; how would anyone be able to prove otherwise? He's not notable. His opinions shouldn't be printed as fact in a Wikipedia article, and this article shouldn't be used as a place to promote his blog. As for WP:Webcomic sources, it's still not relevant because you're not talking about a webcomic, and what is that page anyway? It's certainly not a policy or guideline. It's totally irrelevant. SteamboatPhilly (talk) 18:10, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
 * It is a page that discusses the reliability of Eric Burns and websnark as a source. Before you venture an opinion on that issue, maybe you should, you know, read the actual evidence. Newimpartial (talk) 18:12, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
 * It says Eric Burns can be considered an expert on web comics. Is John M. Ford a webcomic? SteamboatPhilly (talk) 18:19, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Since you have not answered this last question, I can only assume you agree with the assessment that the self-published source on Ford should be removed. SteamboatPhilly (talk) 12:40, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
 * That is absurd. As Burns is a published authority in the domain of Science Fiction and Fantasy and Role-playing Games, as well as Webcomics, there is no reason Websnark should not be cited in all three areas. Newimpartial (talk) 13:16, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
 * You literally just made that up out of thin air. The source is 100% self-published. The author is not notable, and even the wikipedia page saying he is an authority on webcomics is written by one person, and is not even a policy or guideline. Given that you refuse to acknowledge all of that, I am left with no choice but to remove the material. SteamboatPhilly (talk) 18:56, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

Nope, I read his publication record. Please don't stoop to personal attacks, per WP:NPA. And stop edit warring against the stable version until consensus is reached. Newimpartial (talk) 23:16, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Have been lurking/watching the article, but now I'm adding an un-requested third opinion here. I know I haven't been involved in editing this page before this (and I count at least 3 editors involved in removing/re-adding the material), so this will be my single revert until consensus is reached. Burns does not qualify as RS on areas besides webcomics.  The material should be removed.  Claiming he has expertise in sci-fi and fantasy generally is a stretch.  His publications (besides his webcomic) are in magazines, tertiary sources, not the academic sphere (despite his education).  More importantly, though, they are focused on boardgames and RPGs, not reviewing sci-fi and fantasy literature.  Moreover, this entire discussion, including the kind of evidence I just cited, is about making an exception, a deviation from policy, with us, as editors, deciding what counts as reliable as far as we are concerned.  If we just go by policy, which we should, he would be disqualified as self-published. If you want to look for a different (fifth?) opinion from a relevant wikiproject or even an RfC, that might be a good thing to do if we are at an impasse.--MattMauler (talk) 16:35, 26 April 2019 (UTC)
 * I was actually going to let Matt's revert stand pending discussion, since in my opinion there might be UNDUE reasons to leave these details out, as I have said before. However, I will not let the revert stand with an invalid rationale, and the stated rationale - that using SPS represents a deviation from policy - is simply not what WP:SPS, the relevant policy, actually says, as I have quoted above.
 * Also note that SteamboatPhilly has already asked about SPS in the Teahouse and has been pointed to the relevant policy by others as well as myself. If the question is, on what subjects should websnark be considered reliable, the correct forum for that question would be RSN. Newimpartial (talk) 02:15, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
 * I understand, and I agree completely that the question directly in dispute is "on what subjects should websnark be considered reliable." I am not saying that all use of SPS means deviating from policy.  WP:SPS clearly states that SPS can be used if the source is an expert in the relevant field.  In my comment I was adding to the case that Websnark should be considered expert in the field of webcomics (per WP:webcomic sources) and (maybe/probably?) boardgames and RPGs, on which he has published work, but not in reviewing Ford's novels as he does here.--MattMauler (talk) 03:43, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
 * So the "exception" or "deviation" to which I referred would be using self-published work by an author writing outside of his expertise. I grant that I should have worded it better.  The disagreement is as you describe it.--MattMauler (talk) 03:48, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
 * It's nice to see another editor, who was not really involved in being a major contributor to the article (like myself), voice an opinion. I do think being a little too emotionally attached to the article's contents has clouded the judgement of the two editors in favor of including the material sourced to a personal web page. As MattMauler said, the author is considered an expert on webcomics (even that is dubious to me - the page cited was written by one editor, but it's irrelevant so I don't feel like going on a tangent), but John M. Ford is not a webcomic, nor did he write webcomics, so the source is quite unacceptable. There's an UNDUE argument as well, a concept I was not familiar with until it was brought up here. Either argument seems like it's enough to justify striking the material, but when you put both together, obviously it's open-and-shut. SteamboatPhilly (talk) 01:36, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
 * That's still not how it works. I was the one who mentioned the UNDUE argument, but someone would actually have to make the argument to justify removal, which nobody has done. And Burma's professional publications in SciFi and gaming absolutely make him a relevant RS on Ford, who wrote in precisely these two areas. Unless consensus is achieved, I will continue to object to removal made on this (non-policy-compliant) basis. Scholarly publications are by no means required by WP:SPS - and you, SteamboatPhilly, nominated for deletion an article that does cite scholarly publications, so it seems, erm, hypocritical for you to hold that up as a relevant standard here. Which it is not. Newimpartial (talk) 02:47, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Everything you just typed is wrong: Burns is held up (BY ONE EDITOR) as an expert on webcomics. That is all. Not sci-fi, not gaming, and certainly not John Ford. Even the premise that he is a reliable source on webcomics is suspect, as it's not a Wikipedia policy, and written by ONE EDITOR on some obscure article on who is reliable on webcomics. This isn't even close and consensus is clearly against you here. SteamboatPhilly (talk) 04:26, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Nonsense. Look at Burma's professional publications, please, which span all these fields. There is one editor agreeing with you, and one agreeing with me, so the policy-compliant course is to retain the stable version. Please don't Edit War, and don't be sore that your AfD failed, per policy. Newimpartial (talk) 05:18, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
 * I have brought the matter to the RSN.--MattMauler (talk) 17:08, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

"Ford avoided repetition not only of the work of others, but also of his own work."
This text: "Ford avoided repetition not only of the work of others, but also of his own work. Where many writers make a name for themselves by developing a known style that repeats in many books, Ford always surprised with his ability to use a variety of styles that best suited the world, characters, and situations he had chosen to write about. (John Clute expressed this in 1993 The Encyclopedia of Science Fiction as "Two decades into his career, there remains some sense that JMF remains unwilling or unable to create a definitive style or mode; but his originality is evident, a shifting feisty energy informs almost everything he writes, and that career is still young.") This might have limited his readership, however he was much respected by his fellow writers, editors, critics and fans. "

Is unsourced. Therefore, it must be removed. SteamboatPhilly (talk) 20:05, 2 May 2019 (UTC)
 * That text was added here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=John_M._Ford&diff=5765280&oldid=5580007
 * Please stop re-adding it. It is clearly one editor's opinion that was added completely unsourced. SteamboatPhilly (talk) 20:09, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

The source is literally in the text you deleted. If you don't like the paraphrase, fix it. Also you have violated 3RR with your latest reversion, which is kind of a big deal. I suggest that you revert. Newimpartial (talk) 20:16, 2 May 2019 (UTC)
 * That text I deleted is NOT in the source. You just made that up. SteamboatPhilly (talk) 20:31, 2 May 2019 (UTC)
 * The quotation is in the text you deleted. Also, "you just made that up" is a personal attack, contrary to policy. Newimpartial (talk) 20:35, 2 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Uh fine, I take back "you just made that up." How about this instead: You are incorrect when you say that the quotation is in the text I deleted. See above. That text was added in 2004, and was largely unchanged until I removed it for not having a source. If you have a source, you should add it. Because the source for the rest of that paragraph only included the quotes from Jordan, Gaiman, and Hayden, and that is still there, since it is sourced. SteamboatPhilly (talk) 20:41, 2 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Could you please explain how The Encyclopedia of Science Fiction is not a source? Newimpartial (talk) 20:50, 2 May 2019 (UTC)
 * I didn't say it's not a source and I'd appreciate it if you would stop putting words in my mouth. I said that the text "Ford avoided repetition not only of the work of others, but also of his own work" and the fluff that follows that was added 2004 without a source, and was just the opinion of whoever typed that in off the top of their add. I provided the link above of when that was added, and who added it. Again, if you have a source for that specific text, you should add it in, but you don't, because that was original work by that editor that added it. SteamboatPhilly (talk) 20:56, 2 May 2019 (UTC)
 * I have re-added the Encyclopedia source BUT kept out the "fluff" you mention. You're right; much of it sounds like puffery.  The part that I put back in was about him using a variety of styles, which the quote from the Encyclopedia establishes pretty clearly.--MattMauler (talk) 21:11, 2 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you, MattMauler. SteamboatPhilly, you might want to follow their example and avoid removing sourced content, edit warring, and misleading edit summaries. Newimpartial (talk) 21:17, 2 May 2019 (UTC)
 * That's rich. Matt literally agreed with me that there was a bunch of unsourced fluff that YOU kept re-adding, and you're thanking him for saying I was right while simultaneously attempting to save face with your condescending tone towards me. I'm satisfied with the knowledge that you've finally accepted you were wrong all along. SteamboatPhilly (talk) 05:37, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

There is no reliable source for "Ford participated in several online discussions"
This may be true, who knows. But without a reliable source, it cannot be included in the encyclopedia. Therefore, I am removing it. I would appreciate it if anyone who feels like re-inserting it would come up with a real reason for doing so, BEFORE they do so. SteamboatPhilly (talk) 12:25, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Actually, the source for this was already in the article, so I have added a cite. I also added three entirely new RS for other passages. I did not restore the "avoided repetition" bit, however, because it seemed to be both inelegant and UNDUE. Newimpartial (talk) 17:47, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
 * If you're relying on self-published web pages as sources again, I suggest you re-read WP:RS. SteamboatPhilly (talk) 20:02, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
 * There is no ban on the use of self-published sources, per SPS, as you were repeatedly told in Teahouse discussions. In this case, the source provides access to links documenting Ford's presentation, so that neither Primary research not SYNTH is required in the WP article. No reliance on the judgment of the source is required.
 * Please note that this content is not only sourced: it has controversially been part of the stable part of the article for years. It must therefore remain per BRD unless there is policy-compliant consensus for removal. Newimpartial (talk) 20:45, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

Will Shetterly as a source on Ford
Please note that, per WP:SPS, "Self-published expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established expert on the subject matter, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable, independent publications". There had been some dispute about whether websnark met this criterion, but there should be home about Shetterly: in addition to all of his other qualifications, he published on John M. Ford in the reliable, print publication Locus (#550; November 2006), when it was under the editorship of Charles N. Brown. I do not have access to the piece published in Locus, which is why I used the self-published one, but this is literally exactly the case that the SPS policy is meant to include as RS. Removal of the source or of claims in the articledocumenteded in this source are therefore contrary to policy. Newimpartial (talk) 21:00, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Shetterly aside for the moment, would you care to state why you included all of the other material that is sourced to self-published sources in your mass reverts? Also, I'd like to see a community opinion on this assertion you make about Shetterly - there are 14 citation in the reference section and not one mention of Shetterly in it. SteamboatPhilly (talk) 21:38, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
 * There was no Shetterly in the Reference list only because you removed it, SteamboatPhilly. I have restored the stable version content and the Shetterly source, which you should not per policy have removed. Newimpartial (talk) 21:43, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
 * We'll get back to that. Why did you re-add the other self-published sources without any discussion, knowing full well they don't belong in an encyclopedia? SteamboatPhilly (talk) 21:45, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
 * I added back exactly one self-published source, namely Shetterly. I also restored content that is in the stable version, which is now sourced to Shetterly and to Sleight (not a self-published source). Newimpartial (talk)
 * Also please note that, in spite of your previous comment, Shetterly is actually cited in the other references as well. Newimpartial (talk) 21:53, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

The Shetterly source appears to be valid for the information it is citing. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 22:33, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm talking about using a web forum as a source for justification of stating that Ford was "a contributor to several online discussions". If a reliable secondary reported this, then fine, I would have no problem with it. But this is literally something the creator of the material wrote up on their own, with no source, because someone going by the handle of "John M. Ford" posted somewhere on a web forum. That's not a reliable source. SteamboatPhilly (talk) 12:44, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Will Shetterly and John M. Ford knew each other for years, both active in Minneapolis SF, so Will had every opportunity to confirm that "handle" if there had been any doubt. (Note that Shetterly and his wife edited the books featuring most of the Ford short-stories and poems listed in this very article.) As the forum owners are also SF book publishers and knew Ford personally as did other forum participants (SF writers and fans; his own partner Elise Matthesen posted his death notice there), the suggestion of that "handle" being a long-term impersonation has minimal, roughly zero, plausibility. – •Raven .talk 18:04, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

title: Talk:John M. Ford


text:
John Newlove (poet)

John Newlove (June 13, 1938 – December 23, 2003) was a Canadian poet who was considered to be one of the dominant voices of prairie poetry, though he lived most of his adult life in British Columbia and Ontario.

Life
Born in Regina, Saskatchewan, Newlove lived in a variety of small Saskatchewan towns, in particular Kamsack. He attended the University of Saskatchewan for a year, worked briefly as a social worker, a teacher and at a radio station before embarking on a cross-Canada trip which eventually landed him in Vancouver, British Columbia.

He came to prominence in the 1960s as various collections of his poetry were published to critical acclaim. He left Vancouver in May 1967 and took his family to Deep Springs College in California where composer friend Barney Childs was a professor. After several more moves, he and his family ended up in Toronto by 1970 where he worked as senior editor for McClelland and Stewart. It was during this period that he won the 1972 Governor General's Award for "Lies."

Various writer-in-residence stints followed his 1974 departure from McCelland and Stewart, including at Concordia University in Montreal, the University of Toronto and University of Western Ontario in London. He lived for several years in Regina in the early 1980s where he served as writer-in-residence at the public library, then in Nelson, British Columbia, where he taught at David Thompson University. Finally, he moved to Ottawa in 1986 and took a position as an editor with the federal Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages; he would spend the rest of his life in that city.

His 1986 collection, The Night the Dog Smiled, was short-listed for that year's English language poetry Governor General's Award, and he won the 1984 Saskatchewan Writers' Guild Founders Award.

Newlove suffered a stroke in 2001 and died in 2003.

Newlove was the subject of two documentaries: New Canadian Writers: John Newlove (1971) which was broadcast on TVO, and ''What to Make of It All? The Life and Poetry of John Newlove'' (2006) which was broadcast on Bravo! in 2007.

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

title: John Newlove (poet)


text:
Rail transport in Norway

The Norwegian railway system comprises 4,109 km of (standard gauge) track of which 2,644 km is electrified and 274 km double track. There are 697 tunnels and 2,760 bridges.

The Norwegian Railway Directorate manages the railway network in Norway on behalf of the Ministry of Transportation. Bane NOR is a state enterprise which builds and maintains all railway tracks, while other companies operate them. These companies include Vy and subsidiaries Vy Gjøvikbanen and CargoNet, Flytoget, Go-Ahead, SJ Norge, Green Cargo, Grenland Rail and Hector Rail.

Norway is a member of the International Union of Railways (UIC). The UIC Country Code for Norway is 76.

History
[[File:Norwegian railway lines electrified.svg|thumb|Map of the railway lines in Norway.

— electrified lines

— non-electrified lines

— disused or heritage lines ]] The first railway in Norway was the Hoved Line between Oslo and Eidsvoll and opened in 1854. The main purpose of the railway was to move lumber from Mjøsa to the capital, but passenger service was also offered. In the period between the 1860s and the 1880s Norway saw a boom of smaller railways being built, including isolated railways in Central and Western Norway. The predominant gauge at the time was (narrow gauge), but some lines were built in  (standard gauge). The height of the era came in 1877 when the Røros Line connected Central Norway to the capital. In 1883 the entire main railway network was taken over by Norwegian State Railways (NSB), though a number of industrial railways and branch lines continued to be operated by private companies.

Three urban railways, in Oslo, Bergen and Trondheim, were started as in 1875 (Oslo), 1897 (Bergen) and Trondheim (1901). Oslo's system, as the only one, started with horse cars, the others were electrified from the beginning. Electric cars were introduced in Oslo in 1894 and the last horse car operated in 1900.

Bergen closed down its first generation system between 1944 and 1965, but (re-)introduced light rail transit (LRT) in 2006.

The second construction boom of the main railway arose in the 1910s and included the Bergen Line across Finse to Bergen, connecting Eastern and Western Norway. A number of other larger projects were also built in the 1920s, including a second line, the Dovre Line, to Trondheim. This period also saw the first electrified railways and a steady conversion from narrow gauge to standard gauge. Norway chose to electrify its network at.

During World War II there was a massive construction by the German Forces as part of creating Festung Norwegen, including large sections of the Nordland Line and the completion of the Sørland Line. After the war the main effort was to complete the Nordland Line (which reached Bodø in 1962) and the decision to electrify 50% of the network, a task not completed until 1970. This allowed the retirement of steam locomotives, which were replaced with electric engines like the El 11 and El 13 or the diesel powered Di 3. In 1966 Norway's only rapid transit, Oslo T-bane was opened, but in the same decade the Bergen tramway was closed. In the 1970s and 80s many branch lines were also abandoned.

In 1980 the massive project of connecting the eastern and western railway networks around Oslo was completed with the opening of the Oslo Tunnel and Oslo Central Station. In 1996 NSB was split into the Norwegian Railway Inspectorate, Jernbaneverket and an operating company NSB BA. Since then, the companies have been split into 10 separate corporations. In 1998 the first new line in 36 years was opened when the high-speed Gardermoen Line was opened to allow travel at 210 km/h between Oslo, Oslo Airport and Eidsvoll. The 1990s also saw the massive introduction of multiple units on passenger trains. In the 2000s the freight segment was deregulated and a number of freight companies have started competing with the NSB subsidiary CargoNet.

The national main routes in Norway are considered to be among the slowest in Europe, and slower than parts of East Africa, with average speeds below 80 km/h.

Track
The main railway network consists of 4,087 km of lines, of which 262 km is double track and 60 km high-speed rail (210 km/h). In addition there is 225 km of urban railways, of which 218 km is double track. In addition there are some industrial tracks and minor branch lines and some abandoned and heritage railways. The entire main network is (standard gauge),  as are the urban railways in Oslo and Bergen. Of the operational railways in Norway, only the Trondheim Tramway has a different gauge, the meter gauge,. Some heritage railways, though, operate with various kinds of narrow gauge.

The Kirkenes–Bjørnevatn Line used to be the northernmost railway in the world, but was in 2010 beaten by the Obskaya–Bovanenkovo Line in Russia. Still, Narvik is one of the northernmost towns in the world to have a railway connection, as the terminus for the Ofoten Line. It connects to Kiruna, Sweden, but not to Bodø, the northern terminus of the Norwegian railway network. Kiruna is, however, connected to the Swedish railway network, which again is connected to the Norwegian network at the Swedish stations of Charlottenberg, Storlien and Kornsjø.

Traction
2,622 km (64%) of the railway network is electrified, all of it at with overhead wires. The only sections that are not electrified are the lines north of Mjøsa, with the sole exception of the Dovre Line and the Ofoten Line. On non-electrified sections diesel locomotives are used. All of the urban railways use 600 or 750 V DC, via overhead wires on the tramways and via third-rail on the Oslo T-bane.

Future expansion plans
In its plans, Bane NOR will concentrate its expansions primarily on the cramped network around Oslo and the larger cities.

 * New tunnel under Oslo city center.
 * Vestfold Line: A new alignment between Larvik and Porsgrunn ca 23 km, cut 22 minutes of travel time. Double track between Drammen and Tønsberg is under construction and due by 2025. The plan is to make the whole line double tracked from Drammen to Porsgrunn.
 * Sørland Line: Plans may include between Porsgrunn and Skorstøl, which would realign trains to southern Norway via Vestfold.
 * Østfold Line: The Østfold Line is today double track both north and south of Moss, but in Moss 10 km remains as a single track bottleneck. Plans is to realign the railway through Moss, with double track through two tunnels.
 * Ringerike Line is a planned railway between Sandvika and Hønefoss that will reduce travel time between Oslo and Hønefoss/Bergen by 50 minutes. Construction is postponed indefinitely.
 * Bergen Line: Double track from Bergen to Arna. Later plans call for double track further east to Stanghelle and Voss.
 * Dovre Line: Expanding the rest of the line between Eidsvoll and Hamar to double track by 2027. Realignment of Dovrebanen south of Trondheim may be done together with relocating of Trondheims freight terminal.
 * Nordland Line/Meråker Line: Electrifying of the Meråker Line and the Nordland Line up to Stjørdal is planned to be finished by 2024. Later plans may include double tracking between Trondheim and Stjørdal, and a new tunnel between Stjørdal and Levanger.
 * The Bergen Light Rail was opened in 2010, and extensions are being built.
 * The Oslo T-bane will be expanded, as will the Trondheim tramway.

 * High speed rail

The question about building a high-speed railway between the largest Southern Norwegian cities has been discussed at political level, and a report was ready by the end of 2007. Advocates for rail transport and environmentalists have wanted to build high speed railways, including upgrades to 250 km/h on the Sørland Line, Bergen Line, and Dovre Line while others, including Norsk Bane, have suggested construction of a new line through Haukeli to Stavanger, Haugesund and Bergen.

Heritage
There are also several operational museum railways in Norway, including the Krøder Line, Setesdal Line, Urskog–Høland Line, Thamshavn Line, Rjukan Line, Valdres Line, Nesttun–Os Railway and Old Voss Line. The Norwegian Railway Museum is located in Hamar and includes exhibits of train hardware, related objects, as well as document and photography archives.

Urban railways

 * Holmenkoll Line (Oslo T-bane) (1898)
 * Gråkallen Line (Trondheim Tramway) (to Ila 1893, Lian 1933)
 * Røa Line (Oslo T-bane) (1912)
 * Fløibanen (Bergen) (1914)
 * Lilleaker Line (Oslo Tramway) (1919)
 * Sognsvann Line (Oslo T-bane) (1933)
 * Kjelsås Line (Oslo Tramway) (1934)
 * Kolsås Line (Oslo T-bane) (1924)
 * Østensjø Line (Oslo T-bane) (1926)
 * Lambertseter Line (Oslo T-bane) (1957)
 * Grorud Line (Oslo T-bane) (1966)
 * Furuset Line (Oslo T-bane) (1970)
 * Bybanen (Bergen Light Rail) (2010)

Railway links with adjacent countries
Sweden is the only country with which Norway shares railway borders. Sweden and Norway share gauge, loading gauge, signaling system, electric system, GSM-R and automatic trains stop systems. Most rolling stock can cross the border. There are four border crossings: the Østfold Line–Norway/Vänern Line, the Kongsvinger Line–Värmland Line, the Meråker Line–Central Line and the Ofoten Line–Iron Ore Line. All crossings have electric traction on the Swedish side, but the Meråker Line lacks it on the Norwegian side. There have previously been operational train ferries to Denmark.

There are proposals to connect Northern Norway to Finland (the planned Arctic Railway) and Russia. At Kirkenes, the Kirkenes–Bjørnevatn Line is proposed to be connected to Russia's Murmansk–Nikel Railway, and the line is also proposed for connection to the Finnish network in Rovaniemi (there has been a line between Rovaniemi and the Murmansk railway). Russia has generally dismissed this proposal in favour of using Russian ports instead of Kirkenes. Another proposal has been to build a line from Kolari to Skibotn and Tromsø, even if connecting to the existing line to Narvik is the main suggestion.

Railway companies
Traditionally, all trains were operated by Vy (formerly NSB), but the deregulation in the 2000s has led to the introduction of a number of new freight operators, including CargoNet, Hector Rail, Tågåkeriet and Ofoten Line. The conservative-liberal government tried to introduce public service obligation bids on subsidized passenger routes in 2005, but the contract was won by the NSB subsidiary NSB Anbud and the following red-green government has cancelled further PSO contracting. Also the Airport Express Train has been made a separate company.

In 2017 Norway's Ministry of Transport and Communications decided to develop tenders for the operation of passenger rail services. On 4 February 2018, it launched a tender to deliver Traffic Package 1 that will commence on 15 December 2019, comprising long-distance services on the Sørlandet Line from Oslo to Stavanger. In October 2018 this package was awarded to Go-Ahead Norge.

In March 2018, the Norwegian Railway Directorate launched tenders for Traffic Package 2, passenger services on the Røros Line, Meråker Line, Rauma Line, and Nordland Line, plus regional services in Trøndelag county. SJ will commence operating the package on 7 June 2020.

On 21 December 2018, the Norwegian Railway Directorate launched tenders for Traffic Package 3, passenger services on the Oslo to Bergen line starting on 13 December 2020.

Passenger rolling stock
Until the 1990s only commuter and regional trains were operated with multiple units, but since then Vy has ordered numerous multiple units for its regional and express lines. Express trains are operated with 16 BM 73 units with tilting technology, regional trains with 16 BM 70, 6 BM 73b (both electric) and 15 BM 93 (diesel) units while the local trains are operated by 71 BM 69 and 36 BM 72 (both electric) while the local trains around Trondheim, Trøndelag Commuter Rail, uses 14 BM 92 diesel multiple unit. The Airport Express Train uses 16 BM 71 and Vy Gjøvikbanen operates 9 BM 69g units. The Ofoten Line operates three BM 68 electric multiple units.

Vy still uses locomotive hauled passenger trains on a few of the long-distance lines. For this task they use 22 El 18s and 5 Di 4s in addition to six El 17 on the Flåm Line. Most of the cars are B7 on long-distance services and B5 on regional services. Most of the locomotives have been transferred to the freight division CargoNet.

Freight rolling stock
CargoNet uses a combination of 30 El 14, 15 El 16, 19 Di 8 and 6 CD66. The other companies use stock retired by NSB, including the Ofoten Line's 7 El 13, 5 Di 3 and 2 T43, HectorRail's 6 El 15 (now known as 161) and Tåkåkeriet's Rc2.

Abandoned railways
See Chronology of Norwegian railway lines.

 * Losbylinja (Østmorksaga–Fjellhamar) (1861–ca 1940)
 * Kalvskinnet-Heimdallinjen (Kalvskinnet–Heimdal) (1864–1884)
 * Krøder Line (Vikersund–Krøderen) (1872–1985)
 * Sulitjelma Line (Finneid–Sulitjelma) (1892–1972)
 * Nesttun–Os Railway (Nesttun–Os) (1894–1935)
 * Setesdal Line (Kristiansand–Byglandsfjord) (1896–1962)
 * Urskog–Høland Line (Sørumsand–Skulerud) (1896–1960)
 * Lillesand–Flaksvand Line (Lillesand–Flaksvann) (1896–1953)
 * Hafslund Line (Hafslund–Sundløkka) (1898–1973)
 * Tønsberg–Eidsfoss Line (Tønsberg–Eidsfoss) (1901–1938)
 * Holmestrand–Vittingfoss Line (Holmestrand–Vittingfoss) (1902–1938)
 * Skreia Line (Reinsvoll–Skreia (1902–1987)
 * Lier Line (Lier–Svangstrand) (1904)
 * Flekkefjord Line (Sira–Flekkefjord) (1904–1990)
 * Valdres Line (Eina–Fagernes) (1906–1988)
 * Grimstad Line (Grimstad–Rise) (1907–1961)
 * Oslo Port Line (Loenga–Filipstad) (1907–1983)
 * Thamshavn Line (Løkken–Thamshavn) (1908–1974)
 * Rjukan Line (Rjukan–Mæl) (1908–1991)
 * Tinnos Line (Tinnoset–Notodden) (1908–1990)
 * Kirkenes–Bjørnevatn Line (Kirkenes–Bjørnevatn) (1910–1997)
 * Treungen Line (Nelaug–Treungen) (1913–1967)
 * Vestmarka Line (Skotterud–Vestmarka) (1918–)
 * Solbergfoss Line (Askim–Solbergfoss) (1918–)
 * Ålgård Line (Ganddal–Ålgård) (1924–1988)
 * Sperill Line (Hen–Sperillen) (1926–1957)
 * Numedal Line (Kongsberg–Rødberg) (1927–1988)
 * Kragerø Line (Neslandsvatn–Kragerø) (1927–1988)
 * Namsos Line (Grong–Namsos) (1933)
 * Hardanger Line (Vossevangen–Granvin) (1935)
 * Røykenvik Line (Jaren–Røykenvik)
 * Ilsvika Line (Skansen–Fagervika)
 * Hauerseter–Gardermoen Line (Hauerseter–Gardermoen)

Abandoned urban railways

 * Lade Line (Trondheim Tramway) (1901–1988)
 * Elgeseter Line (Trondheim Tramway) (1913–1983)
 * Singsaker Line (Trondheim Tramway) (1927–1968)

title: Rail transport in Norway


text:
User:K1Bond007

Hello
My name is Kevin and I've been with Wikipedia since August of 2003. I became an administrator on August 19, 2005. My main contributions deal with the James Bond series of films and novels. I have also done a lot of work with computer and video game related articles and am a participant with WikiProject Video games where I am the co-creator along with Mrwojo, of the current infobox found on all computer and video game articles.

I am also an editor at CommanderBond.net

Collaborations

 * GCOTW
 * VG IDRIVE
 * Cinema COTW

title: User:K1Bond007


text:
Biometrics

Biometrics are body measurements and calculations related to human characteristics and features. Biometric authentication (or realistic authentication) is used in computer science as a form of identification and access control. It is also used to identify individuals in groups that are under surveillance.

Biometric identifiers are the distinctive, measurable characteristics used to label and describe individuals. Biometric identifiers are often categorized as physiological characteristics which are related to the shape of the body. Examples include, but are not limited to fingerprint, palm veins, face recognition, DNA, palm print, hand geometry, iris recognition, retina, odor/scent, voice, shape of ears and gait. Behavioral characteristics are related to the pattern of behavior of a person, including but not limited to mouse movement, typing rhythm, gait, signature, behavioral profiling, and voice. Some researchers have coined the term behaviometrics to describe the latter class of biometrics.

More traditional means of access control include token-based identification systems, such as a driver's license or passport, and knowledge-based identification systems, such as a password or personal identification number. Since biometric identifiers are unique to individuals, they are more reliable in verifying identity than token and knowledge-based methods; however, the collection of biometric identifiers raises privacy concerns about the ultimate use of this information.

Biometric functionality
Many different aspects of human physiology, chemistry or behavior can be used for biometric authentication. The selection of a particular biometric for use in a specific application involves a weighting of several factors. Jain et al. (1999) identified seven such factors to be used when assessing the suitability of any trait for use in biometric authentication. Biometric authentication is based upon biometric recognition which is an advanced method of recognising biological and behavioural characteristics of an Individual.
 * Universality means that every person using a system should possess the trait.
 * Uniqueness means the trait should be sufficiently different for individuals in the relevant population such that they can be distinguished from one another.
 * Permanence relates to the manner in which a trait varies over time. More specifically, a trait with good permanence will be reasonably invariant over time with respect to the specific matching algorithm.
 * Measurability (collectability) relates to the ease of acquisition or measurement of the trait. In addition, acquired data should be in a form that permits subsequent processing and extraction of the relevant feature sets.
 * Performance relates to the accuracy, speed, and robustness of technology used (see performance section for more details).
 * Acceptability relates to how well individuals in the relevant population accept the technology such that they are willing to have their biometric trait captured and assessed.
 * Circumvention relates to the ease with which a trait might be imitated using an artifact or substitute.

Proper biometric use is very application dependent. Certain biometrics will be better than others based on the required levels of convenience and security. No single biometric will meet all the requirements of every possible application.

The block diagram illustrates the two basic modes of a biometric system. First, in verification (or authentication) mode the system performs a one-to-one comparison of a captured biometric with a specific template stored in a biometric database in order to verify the individual is the person they claim to be. Three steps are involved in the verification of a person. In the first step, reference models for all the users are generated and stored in the model database. In the second step, some samples are matched with reference models to generate the genuine and impostor scores and calculate the threshold. The third step is the testing step. This process may use a smart card, username, or ID number (e.g. PIN) to indicate which template should be used for comparison. Positive recognition is a common use of the verification mode, "where the aim is to prevent multiple people from using the same identity".

Second, in identification mode the system performs a one-to-many comparison against a biometric database in an attempt to establish the identity of an unknown individual. The system will succeed in identifying the individual if the comparison of the biometric sample to a template in the database falls within a previously set threshold. Identification mode can be used either for positive recognition (so that the user does not have to provide any information about the template to be used) or for negative recognition of the person "where the system establishes whether the person is who she (implicitly or explicitly) denies to be". The latter function can only be achieved through biometrics since other methods of personal recognition, such as passwords, PINs, or keys, are ineffective.

The first time an individual uses a biometric system is called enrollment. During enrollment, biometric information from an individual is captured and stored. In subsequent uses, biometric information is detected and compared with the information stored at the time of enrollment. Note that it is crucial that storage and retrieval of such systems themselves be secure if the biometric system is to be robust. The first block (sensor) is the interface between the real world and the system; it has to acquire all the necessary data. Most of the times it is an image acquisition system, but it can change according to the characteristics desired. The second block performs all the necessary pre-processing: it has to remove artifacts from the sensor, to enhance the input (e.g. removing background noise), to use some kind of normalization, etc. In the third block, necessary features are extracted. This step is an important step as the correct features need to be extracted in an optimal way. A vector of numbers or an image with particular properties is used to create a template. A template is a synthesis of the relevant characteristics extracted from the source. Elements of the biometric measurement that are not used in the comparison algorithm are discarded in the template to reduce the file size and to protect the identity of the enrollee. However, depending on the scope of the biometric system, original biometric image sources may be retained, such as the PIV-cards used in the Federal Information Processing Standard Personal Identity Verification (PIV) of Federal Employees and Contractors (FIPS 201).

During the enrollment phase, the template is simply stored somewhere (on a card or within a database or both). During the matching phase, the obtained template is passed to a matcher that compares it with other existing templates, estimating the distance between them using any algorithm (e.g. Hamming distance). The matching program will analyze the template with the input. This will then be output for a specified use or purpose (e.g. entrance in a restricted area), though it is a fear that the use of biometric data may face mission creep. Selection of biometrics in any practical application depending upon the characteristic measurements and user requirements. In selecting a particular biometric, factors to consider include, performance, social acceptability, ease of circumvention and/or spoofing, robustness, population coverage, size of equipment needed and identity theft deterrence. The selection of a biometric is based on user requirements and considers sensor and device availability, computational time and reliability, cost, sensor size, and power consumption.

Multimodal biometric system
Multimodal biometric systems use multiple sensors or biometrics to overcome the limitations of unimodal biometric systems. For instance iris recognition systems can be compromised by aging irises and electronic fingerprint recognition can be worsened by worn-out or cut fingerprints. While unimodal biometric systems are limited by the integrity of their identifier, it is unlikely that several unimodal systems will suffer from identical limitations. Multimodal biometric systems can obtain sets of information from the same marker (i.e., multiple images of an iris, or scans of the same finger) or information from different biometrics (requiring fingerprint scans and, using voice recognition, a spoken passcode).

Multimodal biometric systems can fuse these unimodal systems sequentially, simultaneously, a combination thereof, or in series, which refer to sequential, parallel, hierarchical and serial integration modes, respectively. Fusion of the biometrics information can occur at different stages of a recognition system. In case of feature level fusion, the data itself or the features extracted from multiple biometrics are fused. Matching-score level fusion consolidates the scores generated by multiple classifiers pertaining to different modalities. Finally, in case of decision level fusion the final results of multiple classifiers are combined via techniques such as majority voting. Feature level fusion is believed to be more effective than the other levels of fusion because the feature set contains richer information about the input biometric data than the matching score or the output decision of a classifier. Therefore, fusion at the feature level is expected to provide better recognition results.

Furthermore, the evolving biometric market trends underscore the importance of technological integration, showcasing a shift towards combining multiple biometric modalities for enhanced security and identity verification, aligning with the advancements in multimodal biometric systems.

Spoof attacks consist in submitting fake biometric traits to biometric systems, and are a major threat that can curtail their security. Multi-modal biometric systems are commonly believed to be intrinsically more robust to spoof attacks, but recent studies have shown that they can be evaded by spoofing even a single biometric trait.

Performance
The discriminating powers of all biometric technologies depend on the amount of entropy they are able to encode and use in matching. The following are used as performance metrics for biometric systems:
 * False match rate (FMR, also called FAR = False Accept Rate): the probability that the system incorrectly matches the input pattern to a non-matching template in the database. It measures the percent of invalid inputs that are incorrectly accepted. In case of similarity scale, if the person is an imposter in reality, but the matching score is higher than the threshold, then he is treated as genuine. This increases the FMR, which thus also depends upon the threshold value.
 * False non-match rate (FNMR, also called FRR = False Reject Rate): the probability that the system fails to detect a match between the input pattern and a matching template in the database. It measures the percent of valid inputs that are incorrectly rejected.
 * Receiver operating characteristic or relative operating characteristic (ROC): The ROC plot is a visual characterization of the trade-off between the FMR and the FNMR. In general, the matching algorithm performs a decision based on a threshold that determines how close to a template the input needs to be for it to be considered a match. If the threshold is reduced, there will be fewer false non-matches but more false accepts. Conversely, a higher threshold will reduce the FMR but increase the FNMR. A common variation is the Detection error trade-off (DET), which is obtained using normal deviation scales on both axes. This more linear graph illuminates the differences for higher performances (rarer errors).
 * Equal error rate or crossover error rate (EER or CER): the rate at which both acceptance and rejection errors are equal. The value of the EER can be easily obtained from the ROC curve. The EER is a quick way to compare the accuracy of devices with different ROC curves. In general, the device with the lowest EER is the most accurate.
 * Failure to enroll rate (FTE or FER): the rate at which attempts to create a template from an input is unsuccessful. This is most commonly caused by low-quality inputs.
 * Failure to capture rate (FTC): Within automatic systems, the probability that the system fails to detect a biometric input when presented correctly.
 * Template capacity: the maximum number of sets of data that can be stored in the system.

History
An early cataloguing of fingerprints dates back to 1885 when Juan Vucetich started a collection of fingerprints of criminals in Argentina. Josh Ellenbogen and Nitzan Lebovic argued that Biometrics originated in the identification systems of criminal activity developed by Alphonse Bertillon (1853–1914) and by Francis Galton's theory of fingerprints and physiognomy. According to Lebovic, Galton's work "led to the application of mathematical models to fingerprints, phrenology, and facial characteristics", as part of "absolute identification" and "a key to both inclusion and exclusion" of populations. Accordingly, "the biometric system is the absolute political weapon of our era" and a form of "soft control". The theoretician David Lyon showed that during the past two decades biometric systems have penetrated the civilian market, and blurred the lines between governmental forms of control and private corporate control. Kelly A. Gates identified 9/11 as the turning point for the cultural language of our present: "in the language of cultural studies, the aftermath of 9/11 was a moment of articulation, where objects or events that have no necessary connection come together and a new discourse formation is established: automated facial recognition as a homeland security technology."

Adaptive biometric systems
Adaptive biometric systems aim to auto-update the templates or model to the intra-class variation of the operational data. The two-fold advantages of these systems are solving the problem of limited training data and tracking the temporal variations of the input data through adaptation. Recently, adaptive biometrics have received a significant attention from the research community. This research direction is expected to gain momentum because of their key promulgated advantages. First, with an adaptive biometric system, one no longer needs to collect a large number of biometric samples during the enrollment process. Second, it is no longer necessary to enroll again or retrain the system from scratch in order to cope with the changing environment. This convenience can significantly reduce the cost of maintaining a biometric system. Despite these advantages, there are several open issues involved with these systems. For mis-classification error (false acceptance) by the biometric system, cause adaptation using impostor sample. However, continuous research efforts are directed to resolve the open issues associated to the field of adaptive biometrics. More information about adaptive biometric systems can be found in the critical review by Rattani et al.

Recent advances in emerging biometrics
In recent times, biometrics based on brain (electroencephalogram) and heart (electrocardiogram) signals have emerged. An example is finger vein recognition, using pattern-recognition techniques, based on images of human vascular patterns. The advantage of this newer technology is that it is more fraud resistant compared to conventional biometrics like fingerprints. However, such technology is generally more cumbersome and still has issues such as lower accuracy and poor reproducibility over time.

On the portability side of biometric products, more and more vendors are embracing significantly miniaturized biometric authentication systems (BAS) thereby driving elaborate cost savings, especially for large-scale deployments.

Operator signatures
An operator signature is a biometric mode where the manner in which a person using a device or complex system is recorded as a verification template. One potential use for this type of biometric signature is to distinguish among remote users of telerobotic surgery systems that utilize public networks for communication.

Proposed requirement for certain public networks
John Michael (Mike) McConnell, a former vice admiral in the United States Navy, a former Director of U.S. National Intelligence, and Senior Vice President of Booz Allen Hamilton promoted the development of a future capability to require biometric authentication to access certain public networks in his keynote speech at the 2009 Biometric Consortium Conference.

A basic premise in the above proposal is that the person that has uniquely authenticated themselves using biometrics with the computer is in fact also the agent performing potentially malicious actions from that computer. However, if control of the computer has been subverted, for example in which the computer is part of a botnet controlled by a hacker, then knowledge of the identity of the user at the terminal does not materially improve network security or aid law enforcement activities.

Animal biometrics
Rather than tags or tattoos, biometric techniques may be used to identify individual animals: zebra stripes, blood vessel patterns in rodent ears, muzzle prints, bat wing patterns, primate facial recognition and koala spots have all been tried.

Human dignity
Biometrics have been considered also instrumental to the development of state authority (to put it in Foucauldian terms, of discipline and biopower ). By turning the human subject into a collection of biometric parameters, biometrics would dehumanize the person, infringe bodily integrity, and, ultimately, offend human dignity.

In a well-known case, Italian philosopher Giorgio Agamben refused to enter the United States in protest at the United States Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator (US-VISIT) program's requirement for visitors to be fingerprinted and photographed. Agamben argued that gathering of biometric data is a form of bio-political tattooing, akin to the tattooing of Jews during the Holocaust. According to Agamben, biometrics turn the human persona into a bare body. Agamben refers to the two words used by Ancient Greeks for indicating "life", zoe, which is the life common to animals and humans, just life; and bios, which is life in the human context, with meanings and purposes. Agamben envisages the reduction to bare bodies for the whole humanity. For him, a new bio-political relationship between citizens and the state is turning citizens into pure biological life (zoe) depriving them from their humanity (bios); and biometrics would herald this new world.

In Dark Matters: On the Surveillance of Blackness, surveillance scholar Simone Browne formulates a similar critique as Agamben, citing a recent study relating to biometrics R&D that found that the gender classification system being researched "is inclined to classify Africans as males and Mongoloids as females." Consequently, Browne argues that the conception of an objective biometric technology is difficult if such systems are subjectively designed, and are vulnerable to cause errors as described in the study above. The stark expansion of biometric technologies in both the public and private sector magnifies this concern. The increasing commodification of biometrics by the private sector adds to this danger of loss of human value. Indeed, corporations value the biometric characteristics more than the individuals value them. Browne goes on to suggest that modern society should incorporate a "biometric consciousness" that "entails informed public debate around these technologies and their application, and accountability by the state and the private sector, where the ownership of and access to one's own body data and other intellectual property that is generated from one's body data must be understood as a right."

Other scholars have emphasized, however, that the globalized world is confronted with a huge mass of people with weak or absent civil identities. Most developing countries have weak and unreliable documents and the poorer people in these countries do not have even those unreliable documents. Without certified personal identities, there is no certainty of right, no civil liberty. One can claim his rights, including the right to refuse to be identified, only if he is an identifiable subject, if he has a public identity. In such a sense, biometrics could play a pivotal role in supporting and promoting respect for human dignity and fundamental rights.

Privacy and discrimination
It is possible that data obtained during biometric enrollment may be used in ways for which the enrolled individual has not consented. For example, most biometric features could disclose physiological and/or pathological medical conditions (e.g., some fingerprint patterns are related to chromosomal diseases, iris patterns could reveal sex, hand vein patterns could reveal vascular diseases, most behavioral biometrics could reveal neurological diseases, etc.). Moreover, second generation biometrics, notably behavioral and electro-physiologic biometrics (e.g., based on electrocardiography, electroencephalography, electromyography), could be also used for emotion detection.

There are three categories of privacy concerns:
 * 1) Unintended functional scope: The authentication goes further than authentication, such as finding a tumor.
 * 2) Unintended application scope: The authentication process correctly identifies the subject when the subject did not wish to be identified.
 * 3) Covert identification: The subject is identified without seeking identification or authentication, i.e. a subject's face is identified in a crowd.

Danger to owners of secured items
When thieves cannot get access to secure properties, there is a chance that the thieves will stalk and assault the property owner to gain access. If the item is secured with a biometric device, the damage to the owner could be irreversible, and potentially cost more than the secured property. For example, in 2005, Malaysian car thieves cut off a man's finger when attempting to steal his Mercedes-Benz S-Class.

Attacks at presentation
In the context of biometric systems, presentation attacks may also be called "spoofing attacks".

As per the recent ISO/IEC 30107 standard, presentation attacks are defined as "presentation to the biometric capture subsystem with the goal of interfering with the operation of the biometric system". These attacks can be either impersonation or obfuscation attacks. Impersonation attacks try to gain access by pretending to be someone else. Obfuscation attacks may, for example, try to evade face detection and face recognition systems.

Several methods have been proposed to counteract presentation attacks.

Surveillance humanitarianism in times of crisis
Biometrics are employed by many aid programs in times of crisis in order to prevent fraud and ensure that resources are properly available to those in need. Humanitarian efforts are motivated by promoting the welfare of individuals in need, however the use of biometrics as a form of surveillance humanitarianism can create conflict due to varying interests of the groups involved in the particular situation. Disputes over the use of biometrics between aid programs and party officials stalls the distribution of resources to people that need help the most. In July 2019, the United Nations World Food Program and Houthi Rebels were involved in a large dispute over the use of biometrics to ensure resources are provided to the hundreds of thousands of civilians in Yemen whose lives are threatened. The refusal to cooperate with the interests of the United Nations World Food Program resulted in the suspension of food aid to the Yemen population. The use of biometrics may provide aid programs with valuable information, however its potential solutions may not be best suited for chaotic times of crisis. Conflicts that are caused by deep-rooted political problems, in which the implementation of biometrics may not provide a long-term solution.

Cancelable biometrics
One advantage of passwords over biometrics is that they can be re-issued. If a token or a password is lost or stolen, it can be cancelled and replaced by a newer version. This is not naturally available in biometrics. If someone's face is compromised from a database, they cannot cancel or reissue it. If the electronic biometric identifier is stolen, it is nearly impossible to change a biometric feature. This renders the person's biometric feature questionable for future use in authentication, such as the case with the hacking of security-clearance-related background information from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) in the United States.

Cancelable biometrics is a way in which to incorporate protection and the replacement features into biometrics to create a more secure system. It was first proposed by Ratha et al.

"Cancelable biometrics refers to the intentional and systematically repeatable distortion of biometric features in order to protect sensitive user-specific data. If a cancelable feature is compromised, the distortion characteristics are changed, and the same biometrics is mapped to a new template, which is used subsequently. Cancelable biometrics is one of the major categories for biometric template protection purpose besides biometric cryptosystem." In biometric cryptosystem, "the error-correcting coding techniques are employed to handle intraclass variations." This ensures a high level of security but has limitations such as specific input format of only small intraclass variations.

Several methods for generating new exclusive biometrics have been proposed. The first fingerprint-based cancelable biometric system was designed and developed by Tulyakov et al. Essentially, cancelable biometrics perform a distortion of the biometric image or features before matching. The variability in the distortion parameters provides the cancelable nature of the scheme. Some of the proposed techniques operate using their own recognition engines, such as Teoh et al. and Savvides et al., whereas other methods, such as Dabbah et al., take the advantage of the advancement of the well-established biometric research for their recognition front-end to conduct recognition. Although this increases the restrictions on the protection system, it makes the cancellable templates more accessible for available biometric technologies

Proposed soft biometrics
Soft biometrics are understood as not strict biometrical recognition practices that are proposed in favour of identity cheaters and stealers.

Traits are physical, behavioral or adhered human characteristics that have been derived from the way human beings normally distinguish their peers (e.g. height, gender, hair color). They are used to complement the identity information provided by the primary biometric identifiers. Although soft biometric characteristics lack the distinctiveness and permanence to recognize an individual uniquely and reliably, and can be easily faked, they provide some evidence about the users identity that could be beneficial. In other words, despite the fact they are unable to individualize a subject, they are effective in distinguishing between people. Combinations of personal attributes like gender, race, eye color, height and other visible identification marks can be used to improve the performance of traditional biometric systems. Most soft biometrics can be easily collected and are actually collected during enrollment. Two main ethical issues are raised by soft biometrics. First, some of soft biometric traits are strongly cultural based; e.g., skin colors for determining ethnicity risk to support racist approaches, biometric sex recognition at the best recognizes gender from tertiary sexual characters, being unable to determine genetic and chromosomal sexes; soft biometrics for aging recognition are often deeply influenced by ageist stereotypes, etc. Second, soft biometrics have strong potential for categorizing and profiling people, so risking of supporting processes of stigmatization and exclusion.

Data protection of biometric data in international law
Many countries, including the United States, are planning to share biometric data with other nations.

In testimony before the US House Appropriations Committee, Subcommittee on Homeland Security on "biometric identification" in 2009, Kathleen Kraninger and Robert A Mocny commented on international cooperation and collaboration with respect to biometric data, as follows: To ensure we can shut down terrorist networks before they ever get to the United States, we must also take the lead in driving international biometric standards. By developing compatible systems, we will be able to securely share terrorist information internationally to bolster our defenses. Just as we are improving the way we collaborate within the U.S. Government to identify and weed out terrorists and other dangerous people, we have the same obligation to work with our partners abroad to prevent terrorists from making any move undetected. Biometrics provide a new way to bring terrorists' true identities to light, stripping them of their greatest advantage—remaining unknown.

According to an article written in 2009 by S. Magnuson in the National Defense Magazine entitled "Defense Department Under Pressure to Share Biometric Data" the United States has bilateral agreements with other nations aimed at sharing biometric data. To quote that article: Miller [a consultant to the Office of Homeland Defense and America's security affairs] said the United States has bilateral agreements to share biometric data with about 25 countries. Every time a foreign leader has visited Washington during the last few years, the State Department has made sure they sign such an agreement.

Likelihood of full governmental disclosure
Certain members of the civilian community are worried about how biometric data is used but full disclosure may not be forthcoming. In particular, the Unclassified Report of the United States' Defense Science Board Task Force on Defense Biometrics states that it is wise to protect, and sometimes even to disguise, the true and total extent of national capabilities in areas related directly to the conduct of security-related activities. This also potentially applies to Biometrics. It goes on to say that this is a classic feature of intelligence and military operations. In short, the goal is to preserve the security of 'sources and methods'.

Countries applying biometrics
Countries using biometrics include Australia, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Cyprus, Greece, China, Gambia, Germany, India, Iraq, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Malaysia, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nigeria, Norway, Pakistan, Poland, South Africa, Saudi Arabia, Tanzania, Turkey, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United States and Venezuela.

Among low to middle income countries, roughly 1.2 billion people have already received identification through a biometric identification program.

There are also numerous countries applying biometrics for voter registration and similar electoral purposes. According to the International IDEA's ICTs in Elections Database, some of the countries using (2017) Biometric Voter Registration (BVR) are Armenia, Angola, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Bolivia, Brazil, Burkina Faso, Cambodia, Cameroon, Chad, Colombia, Comoros, Congo (Democratic Republic of), Costa Rica, Ivory Coast, Dominican Republic, Fiji, Gambia, Ghana, Guatemala, India, Iraq, Kenya, Lesotho, Liberia, Malawi, Mali, Mauritania, Mexico, Morocco, Mozambique, Namibia, Nepal, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Panama, Peru, Philippines, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Solomon Islands, Somaliland, Swaziland, Tanzania, Uganda, Uruguay, Venezuela, Yemen, Zambia, and Zimbabwe.

India's national ID program
India's national ID program called Aadhaar is the largest biometric database in the world. It is a biometrics-based digital identity assigned for a person's lifetime, verifiable online instantly in the public domain, at any time, from anywhere, in a paperless way. It is designed to enable government agencies to deliver a retail public service, securely based on biometric data (fingerprint, iris scan and face photo), along with demographic data (name, age, gender, address, parent/spouse name, mobile phone number) of a person. The data is transmitted in encrypted form over the internet for authentication, aiming to free it from the limitations of physical presence of a person at a given place.

About 550 million residents have been enrolled and assigned 480 million Aadhaar national identification numbers as of 7 November 2013. It aims to cover the entire population of 1.2 billion in a few years. However, it is being challenged by critics over privacy concerns and possible transformation of the state into a surveillance state, or into a Banana republic. § The project was also met with mistrust regarding the safety of the social protection infrastructures. To tackle the fear amongst the people, India's supreme court put a new ruling into action that stated that privacy from then on was seen as a fundamental right. On 24 August 2017 this new law was established.

Malaysia's MyKad national ID program
The current identity card, known as MyKad, was introduced by the National Registration Department of Malaysia on 5 September 2001 with Malaysia becoming the first country in the world to use an identification card that incorporates both photo identification and fingerprint biometric data on a built-in computer chip embedded in a piece of plastic.

Besides the main purpose of the card as a validation tool and proof of citizenship other than the birth certificate, MyKad also serves as a valid driver's license, an ATM card, an electronic purse, and a public key, among other applications, as part of the Malaysian Government Multipurpose Card (GMPC) initiative, if the bearer chooses to activate the functions.

title: Biometrics


text:
Scribus

Scribus is free and open-source desktop publishing (DTP) software available for most desktop operating systems. It is designed for layout, typesetting, and preparation of files for professional-quality image-setting equipment. Scribus can also create animated and interactive PDF presentations and forms. Example uses include writing newspapers, brochures, newsletters, posters, and books.

Scribus is written in Qt and released under the GNU General Public License. There are native versions available for Unix, Linux, BSD, macOS, Haiku, Microsoft Windows, OS/2 (including ArcaOS and eComStation) operating systems.

General feature overview
Scribus supports most major bitmap formats, including TIFF, JPEG, and PSD. Vector drawings can be imported or directly opened for editing. The long list of supported formats includes Encapsulated PostScript, SVG, Adobe Illustrator, and Xfig. Professional type/image-setting features include CMYK colors and ICC color management. It has a built-in scripting engine using Python. It is available in 60 languages.

High-level printing is achieved using its own internal level 3 PostScript driver, including support for font embedding and sub-setting with TrueType, Type 1, and OpenType fonts. The internal driver supports full Level 2 PostScript constructs and a large subset of Level 3 constructs.

PDF support includes transparency, encryption, and a large set of the PDF 1.5 specification including layers (OCG), as well as PDF/X-3, including interactive PDFs form fields, annotations, and bookmarks.

The current file format, called SLA, is XML. Old versions of SLA were based on XML. Text can be imported from OpenDocument (ODT) text documents (such as from LibreOffice Writer), OpenOffice.org XML (OpenOffice.org Writer's SXW files), Microsoft Word's DOC, PDB, and HTML formats (although some limitations apply). ODT files can typically be imported along with their paragraph styles, which are then created in Scribus. HTML tags which modify text, such as bold and italic, are supported. Word and PDB documents are only imported as plain text.

ScribusGenerator is a mail merge-like extension to Scribus.

Forthcoming Scribus 1.6 (by way of Scribus 1.5 development branch)
Scribus 1.5.1 added PDF/X-4 support.

Initially, Scribus did not properly support complex script rendering and so could not be used with Unicode text for languages written in Arabic, Hebrew, Indic, and Southeast Asian writing systems, even though it supported Unicode character encoding. In August 2012, it was announced that a third party had developed a system to support complex Indic scripts. In May 2015 it was announced that the ScribusCTL project had started to improve complex layout by integrating the OpenType text-shaping engine HarfBuzz into the official Scribus 1.5.1svn branch. In July 2016 it was announced that the text layout engine had been rewritten from scratch in preparation for support of complex scripts coming in Scribus 1.5.3 and later. In December 2016 Scribus announced they got support for OpenType advanced feature in 1.5.3svn, as well as complex script and RTL direction.

Scribus 1.4.7 did not have OpenType alternative glyph support, so ligatures, for example, were not inserted automatically; this became available from v1.5.3.

Support for other programs and formats
Scribus cannot read or write the native file formats of other desktop publishing programs such as QuarkXPress or InDesign; the developers consider that reverse engineering those file formats would be prohibitively complex and could risk legal action from the makers of those programs.

Due to licensing issues, the software package does not include support for the Pantone color matching system (PMS), which is included in some commercial desktop publishing applications. Pantone colors can be obtained and incorporated within Scribus without licensing issues. Scribus is shipped with more than 100 color palettes, most donated by various commercial color vendors, but also including scientific, national, and government color standards.

Forthcoming Scribus 1.6 (by way of Scribus 1.5 development branch)
Support for importing Microsoft Publisher is incorporated into version 1.5, and QuarkXPress Tag files, InDesign's IDML, as well as InCopy's ICML formats were added to the development branch.

Scribus 1.5.3 onwards contains more than 300 color palettes.

German Organisation freieFarbe e.V. built last HLC Colour Atlas for real colours based on CIELAB. This free Colour Palette is also available in Scribus 1.5.4+.

Scribus 1.5.6 supports native pdf export with embedded open type fonts and pdf 1.6. Python 3 is now default in scripts. Scribus 1.5.7 improves undo and redo action. Qt 5.14 is new base for compilation and 3rd party components have newer versions. Next version is 1.5.8 as perhaps last step before 1.6.0.

From view of developers Version 1.5.7 is stable. There are no new Versions in pipe with Backports for the 1.4 tree with the near end of QT4 support in most systems.

Scribus 1.5.8 supports full Python 3 support also for MacOS and modern UI features like Dark Mode.

Books
Books about Scribus are available in several languages, as is a manual for using Scribus 1.3 in desktop publishing.

Significant users
Janayugom, a Malayalam daily newspaper in Kerala, India, migrated all desktop publishing to Scribus and Gimp in November 2019, saving over 10 million Indian rupees (approximately US$130,000).

Tutorials

 * From Jacci Howard Bear at LifeWire
 * Book_HowToSCRIBUS-Digital.pdf
 * For Scribus 1.4 from American Amateur Press Association
 * Scribus 2013 hexagon
 * Scribus 1.5.5 create a book cover
 * scribus 1.4.6 A. J. Publishing using scribus by Dave Tribby
 * scribus 1.5.5 path and Bézier curves

Articles

 * Free Desktop Publishing with Scribus at World Label. A blog post on using Scribus 1.3.5 to create labels.
 * Open source desktop publishing with Scribus by William von Hagen, from IBM site.

title: Scribus


text:
Game six

Game six is a shorthand reference to a sixth game of a sports playoff series. Several World Series have had sixth games that were especially memorable, and were referred to by this shorthand expression. Some of them are:

 * 1975 World Series
 * 1985 World Series
 * 1986 World Series
 * 1992 World Series
 * 1993 World Series
 * 2011 World Series

title: Game six


text:
Peerless Records

Peerless Records was a record label based in Mexico.

Peerless was founded in 1921 in Mexico City by E. Baptista. Early pressings of their gramophone record were made under contract by Gennett Records. By 1933, Peerless was pressing its own records in Mexico. The Peerless label mostly released popular Mexican music; some popular dance bands and tunes from the United States of America also appeared on Peerless in the 1920s.

In addition to Mexico, Peerless Records were sold in other parts of Latin America and in some communities in the Southwest United States. The labels sometimes have text in both English and Spanish.

Peerless was considered a "major label" in Mexico during the 1940s and 1950s.

Peerless issued some long-playing vinyl records starting in 1951. During the years, Peerless has been the record label for many well-known artists, such as Pedro Infante and Los Apson. Peerless remained an independent label until 2001, when it merged with its subsidiary MCM (Metro Casa Musical), becoming Peerless-MCM S.A. de C.V., which was later bought by Warner Music Mexico

title: Peerless Records