text:
User talk:Pakaran/Archive 2

← Archive 1 | Archive 3 →

It does link to the subpage, but that is an interwiki-redirect, so it's actually quite hard to edit the original (not that I would mind if someone did). I only kept it as that link instead of a direct Meta link because I thought it looked nicer in purple than that light blue of external links. Kind of silly, but I figured I'd get it away with it on my own user page. It used to be a subpage of mine until I moved it to Meta. Angela. 03:53, 11 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Sorry, I have no tolerance for vandals. RickK 05:01, 11 Dec 2003 (UTC)

 * I think sometimes it's ok to leave a stronger message for such edits, but that's just my opinion. I replied at Rick's talk page too. Angela. 06:02, 11 Dec 2003 (UTC)

I corrected your wiki-link on Wikipedia talk:MediaWiki custom messages because it was broken: hope that's OK. Phil 16:29, Dec 11, 2003 (UTC)

Hey Pakaran, that vandal struck again under a slightly diff. IP address. http://en2.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=United_States&action=history WhisperToMe 23:57, 11 Dec 2003 (UTC)

What's wrong with  ? If you take if off the main page, the Anniversaries line just stretches the screen out rather than being in two rows. I've reverted it for now as it looked dreadful and the br has always been there. Perhaps a better solution can be found but I think it is designed for a minimum 800*600. I'm surprised anyone's still using 640x480! Angela. 23:39, 12 Dec 2003 (UTC)

On the requested articles page, you reverted an edit earlier today (by 142.177.92.201) that looked fine by me. Why did you do that? --Raul654 07:05, 13 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Re all this Silesian nonsense, I wouldn't say that 24.2.whatever is a vandal, but he/she is certainly a problematical user. Besides getting repeatedly into edit wars with Nico, 24.2 (and Caius2ga) are simply rude and unproductive in terms of trying to work out problems on the talk page, and uses rather nasty ad hominem attacks. As far as which version is better, I'd say Nico's is slightly better, in that it reads a bit better, but in this instance I'm not really sure I understand what the edit war is about. john 03:16, 14 Dec 2003 (UTC)

I just read the article memory manager; you were the only non-anonymous edit. Anyway, I wasn't sure what the article is about. Hate to bother you, but I thought you'd be qualified to translate it into non-tech-speak. For instance, what does it mean to allocate or deallocate memory? What function in the program does this accomplish? Etc. Thanks. Meelar 04:32, Dec 15, 2003 (UTC)

Linux User Group
Pakaran, it sounds like you are editorializing on Linux User Group about the GNU/Linux vs. Linux issue. Try to remember to keep a NPOV stance on it. Dori | Talk 16:39, Dec 15, 2003 (UTC)

 * That'll work I think. Dori | Talk 21:42, Dec 15, 2003 (UTC)

Nevermind. I was just surprised that the article hadn't existed previously. When it was deleted I thought it must be a mistake, but apparently not. Cheers, Evercat 00:31, 16 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Is that really a good reason to block someone? I wrote the entire US 7th Army article with incorrect information, and that was like 5 paragraphs, instead of two dates on his December 6 edit... it was more likely an honest mistake, and should simply be corrected and explained, not causing a block warning. ugen64 02:21, Dec 17, 2003 (UTC)

 * Yeah, I didn't really think you would block him, I was just wondering. ugen64 02:23, Dec 17, 2003 (UTC)

He had done it like 20 times, so I assumed there was a reason for not banning him... guess not. ugen64 02:30, Dec 17, 2003 (UTC)

 * I also noticed... is that User:Michael? Similar IPs on the block log... interesting. ugen64 02:33, Dec 17, 2003 (UTC)

Hi, regarding the copyvio page - no votes can be taken as no objections, so those are ok to delete. Until fairly recently there was very rarely any comment or vote made about any of them. It's only now that Jamesday is arguing for fair use that the page has more traffic. Angela. 03:08, 17 Dec 2003 (UTC)

No, that's fine. It was just his own talk page I thought I might as well leave. Angela. 03:23, 17 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Hi, looked at your contributions to the article on Internet-Encyclopedia. Of course there are alternative sympathetic points of view on some matters, for example the article, Continuation War can have two sympathetic views, a Finnish view and a Soviet view. On Internet-Encyclopedia I put them both up, here the partisans, one a group of Finns and a Soviet apologist are fighting it out. On subjects such as Nazism or slavery no attempt is made to present the subject in a positive light, any concept has its limits. Fred Bauder 13:26, 17 Dec 2003 (UTC)

agreed. Secretlondon 21:49, Dec 17, 2003 (UTC)

Regarding the Lord Hailsham of St Marylebone: the answer to your question is that the Sovereign makes individuals life peers, though all such appointments are political and therefore are made on the binding "advice" of the Prime Minister. Quintin McGarel Hogg was made a life peer so that he could hold the office as Lord Chancellor.

On a separate note, I am flattered that you should choose to contact me about the issue regarding peerage. I thank you for your kindness. -- Lord Emsworth 22:34, Dec 17, 2003 (UTC)

I have a feeling that User:What most surprised me was the arrogance of the administration may be a previously-banned user. RickK 05:00, 18 Dec 2003 (UTC)

I don't know, really, though EoT was just re-banned yesterday, but he/she came out of nowhere and immediately zeroed in on VfD. RickK 05:05, 18 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Mormons as transhumanist, theists
Not particularly relevant, just a point of interest: in some sense, it's almost fair to characterize Mormons as transhumanist, theists given their belief in exaltation or theosis...AND as a Latter-day Saint myself, I find it ironic that transhumanists are generally agnostic or atheist. B 01:46, Dec 19, 2003 (UTC)

Time to unprotect Golan Heights? --Zero 02:00, 20 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Why are you reverting unoffensive edits by anonymous users on other people's talk pages? I find it a rude disrespect of User:Angela for you to censor what she reads. -- Waveguy 22:26, 21 Dec 2003 (UTC)

 * The edit I reverted to Angela's talk page was by a banner user, EoT. All edits by banned users are to be reverted. Pakaran 22:35, 21 Dec 2003 (UTC)

 * I am bewildered. On what basis do you conclude the identiy of the user? What due process has been satisfied? Waveguy 22:42, 21 Dec 2003 (UTC)

 * Hello. This is wikipedia. We don't have due process - we have itchy trigger fingers. Your friend, Morwen 23:06, Dec 21, 2003 (UTC)

Thanks for looking after my talk page. :) Angela. 23:43, 21 Dec 2003 (UTC)

 * 216.254.160.220 made these statements 21 Dec 2003 (UTC):
 * You changed the user's page and began reverting articles. Where is the justification?
 * I don't think these are the same people. Please state justification and link to some evidence of this.
 * Policy requesting "Please do not reinstate any edits made by this user" is problematic and controversial.
 * Based on above, Pakaran concludes 216.254.160.220 is EofT ? I don't see the connection. please inform me. -- Waveguy 03:05, 22 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Pakaran - is moving the question to my talk page (that you asked me) a way of telling me you no longer wanted an answer? If so, saying so is clearer. Thanks, The Fellowship of the Troll 02:11, 15 Jan 2004 (UTC)

 * Which question? Pakaran 02:12, 15 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Fair enough, that clarifies it for me. The Fellowship of the Troll 02:13, 15 Jan 2004 (UTC)

THANK YOU. Edit warring with religious cranks is so tiresome. —MIRV (talk) 02:15, 15 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Cosmotheism
I'd kinda prefer if you left this page protected for a bit, and give us some time to decide in talk what changes should be made, etc... before unprotecting. The page has had a horrid past (take a look at the page history!) and seems ever so much better at the moment :). If nothing else, I'd like to have a couple of people (not ONLY mr. vogel) request it unprotected before you make such a decision. Thanks, Jack 04:30, 15 Jan 2004 (UTC)

You tolerant, mecrank, thank you !
Thank you for letting me breathe while editing my non nocere stuff. At least now you have something to cut or redirect. Thank you, thank you ! Crank irismeister 18:46, 2004 Jan 20 (UTC)

I'm the one who should be sorry, I missed the incorrect caps. Always nice to meet a fellow Atheist. Bmills 16:36, 26 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Haggii
No, there isn't a haggis animal, and the plural of haggis is haggises. We do, however, like to kid tourists that a haggis is a elusive mountain dwelling ducklike animal, with one leg shorter than the other (to allow it to run along a sloped mountainside). The truth, however, is far worse. -- Finlay McWalter 17:39, 26 Jan 2004 (UTC)

No, go ahead. :) Angela. 20:45, Jan 27, 2004 (UTC)

Sorry... :-/
OK, sorry, I'll stop... I had just discovered the wiki project and I wanted to try its seriousness. I could see it is quite well protected against vandalism : well done !

Putamadre
I only know Puta as "whore", but I suppose it could be bitch, too. RickK 04:13, 29 Jan 2004 (UTC)

The Wall
I have no familiarity with the subject; I was just doing minor editing, not giving the interpretation my stamp of approval. Revert if necessary. Cheers, Cyan 04:44, 29 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Angela's advice for the day
Never get in a move war at 4am.

It's very confusing. I completely lost where the ridiculous page had gone! :) Angela. 04:56, Feb 3, 2004 (UTC)

Hi, I hope you don't mind but I moved some of your text from The Wrong Version to Edit wars as the issues of religion etc apply much more widely than page protection. :) I couldn't think of a good section heading for it. It's just under alternative view on that page at the moment so if you have any better ideas, you might want to change that. Angela. 19:52, Feb 3, 2004 (UTC)

protect msg
Oops, forgetful me. I'm glad one of us knows what they're doing :) Thanks!-- Finlay McWalter | Talk 02:56, 5 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Muslim
Well. he DID change Makkah to Mecca, which is right, but he misspelled it. I didn't think the Arabic invocation that's used after Muhammad's name was appropriate, so I did delete that. RickK 04:28, 6 Feb 2004 (UTC)

1735
Hi, I had the exact same feeling as you on 1735 as vandalism, but there is indeed a Diana Spencer who was not Lady Di, who did die then so I've reverted. Fuzheado 18:52, 6 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Wikibooks
Thanks for the information on the administratorship. -- Emsworth 13:25, Feb 7, 2004 (UTC)

our anon friend
I don't want to name names, but could our anon friend be someone rather familiar? Dysprosia 05:53, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC)

dreadful misuse of admins powers
Tsk tsk. Banning logged in users... really. You should be de-admined forced to work with Wik. ;) I don't believe no one unblocked me. Lir was unblocked in minutes! Angela. 08:18, Feb 9, 2004 (UTC)

Re:Michael
I agree something should be done, but blocking aol proxies for any length of time is not it. Blocking them is fine if it gets rid of Michael, but they need to be unblocked not long after to avoid inconviencing other wikipedians who are unfortunate enough to choose AOL as their ISP. Blocking Michael is like playing whack a mole. Maximus Rex 00:17, 10 Feb 2004 (UTC)
 * It was definately Michael. I've made a list of banned users that includes information such as their IP address(es) if known. It is useful to have such information located in one place. It's at User:Maximus Rex/banned users. Maximus Rex 00:21, 10 Feb 2004 (UTC)

You stole Paul Levesque from my Dad! Compare and. :) Angela. 17:58, Feb 10, 2004 (UTC)

Re: DNA
[Peak:] Since you have become involved (if not yet embroiled) in the sad events at DNA (of all places!), I thought you might be interested to know that I just posted this note for User:Angela:

 * Your help is requested, since a Sysop of whom you are aware has alas abused his sysop powers.

 * In summary, the 168.../Lir edit war restarted at DNA, but this time with the unfortunate twist that 168... has protected the page at his preferred version. (In case you haven't followed this particular saga at all, there was a series of three votes taken about which version of the two opening paragraphs should be used, and a version emerged which has the support of 6 out of the 8 participants. Basically, 168... and Lir insisted on their own versions.)

 * It is fine for the page to be protected (against Lir), but the "frozen version" should be the one that was agreed to by the community. (If you look at the edits, you will see that many people besides me have reverted back to this near-consensus version.) Thanks!

I am somewhat unclear about the "correct procedures" to be followed in cases like this (and in any case, my limited experience is that even when they're followed, the results can be disappointing), so any help you may be able to offer would be appreciated. Peak 01:34, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Peak hasn't looked up the word "consensus" in the dictionary lately, and omitted to refer to voting as his "preferred version" of resolution, in contrast to reasoned discussion, which is mine. The "consensus version" does not reflect even a consensus of voters and is Peak's preferred version, because it was produced by the process he initiated and has a stake in. 168...|...Talk 01:40, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)

sorry
I am very sorry for my childish behavior. I take full responsibility for my actions, and I am extremely sorry for any harm I may have caused you. Please forgive me, as all I can do now is to promise that I will not repeat my past mistakes. Once again, I am truly sorry. Sincerely, AlexPlank

168
Hi, you voted on the issue of whether 168... should be desysoped. Following this, he was temporarily desysopped. Please participate in the new vote as to whether that temporary desysopping should now be reversed until the committees can deal with it properly. Thank you. Angela. 00:45, Feb 22, 2004 (UTC)

What did you do??
People have been asking to delete the "List of numbers that are always odd" page at Wikipedia. I deleted all the text, but then you put it back!

And I was just about to thank you...
...for blocking User:205.213.111.54. But let's see if they are done with their foolishness for now. -- BCorr ¤ Брайен 21:05, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Not sure that I understand you. --Michael Snow 23:46, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)

 * No offense taken. I understand there was somebody named Michael who caused problems in the past. FYI, the reverts are all being done by 168.... I would prefer for him to join the discussion on Wikipedia talk:Main Page rather than just making this an edit war. --Michael Snow 23:51, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)

hey pak this the 'red faction'/ 'jesus christ'/mr natural health (im not really but i told you that in my when imed you as joke) guy (sorry) i don't use disscussion pages...um i will stop my war againest wiki (i have declared a truce). Peace brother

PS you got one less vandel to worry about

A request from BCorr ¤ Брайен
Hi Pakaran,

You're a level-headed sort, so I'd like to ask you to weigh in at the new discussion of related matters that have come up in the last few days. There's a discussion starting at Wikipedia_talk:Naming_conventions_(places). See the intro paragraph for Boris Yeltsin to see an example of what's been going on with articles on Russians and places in Russia...

Also, if you haven't already done so, please take a look through User:Cantus's contributions.

Thanks, BCorr ¤ Брайен 06:55, Feb 28, 2004 (UTC)

Positive attitude
Pakaran, just wanted to tell you I like the positive attitude you display on the membership page of AMA. Lately this place is getting complex due to the need for structure (becoming a not-for-profit organization for example) so keeping that commmunity spirit alive is important and that was why I started the AMA, to help foster that kind of interest rather than the interest in the various "official" committees of Wikipedia. If you ever have any questions about the process of advocacy don't hesitate to ask me for my opinion and any contributions you can make to the association pages will surely help other gain in the kind of positive spirit we need more of around here. [[User:Alex756|— Alex756 talk]] 07:09, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)

You are now a bureaucrat. Please use this power wisely. --Uncle Ed 15:34, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)

22:40, Feb 27, 2004, Pakaran blocked Michael (expires 22:40, Feb 27, 2014) (contribs) (unblock) (Adding last few forgotten PHP blocks...)
 * LOL. →Raul654 23:56, Mar 1, 2004 (UTC)

 * The expiration date - that's why I bolded it ;) →Raul654 01:16, Mar 2, 2004 (UTC)

 * It's probably just me being stupid. I found it funny because for all intents and purposes, 10 years might as well be infinite. →Raul654 01:23, Mar 2, 2004 (UTC)

Regarding DXM: The DXM page is getting a bit long now, I think it would benefit from a bit of reorginazation with headers and maybe a bit of history about recreational and medicinal use of DXM. Do you think this is worthwhile? I volunteer to do a rewrite to cleanup the page a bit. I appreciate your changes regarding CCC; recreational users should really consider downing Robo maximum strength or their newest CoughGels (comes in 20 caps of 15mg each), or buying bulk powder. ElBenevolente 03:54, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

hey Pak, im the old 'red faction' user i got my own wiki page. User:Jesus Chirst

Pakaran, any idea who Chirst is? At first I thought it was Michael, but he writes too well. He's about to be blocked if he really decides to start vandalizing. RickK 04:01, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)

--- Regarding your message to User:RickK to "feel free to block all addreses adding communist POV to the wikipedia," you ought to be aware that the ideological censorship of users that you're advocating constitutes a blatant abuse of admin powers. I'm going to direct a developer, who are responsible for suspending admin powers in the event of such overt abuse, to the note that you left on RickK's page. 172 11:01, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * I'm a developer and a Mediator, and I see no cause to suspend Pakaran for anything. The note is a bit puzzling, but all users have free speech on talk pages. Before submitting a complaint or raising an alarm, you ought to ask Pakaran what he meant by that comment. --Uncle Ed 15:20, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I think you must have meant something different or just been joking, but of course you can't block people for ideological reasons. Jimbo Wales 18:01, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * Again, I'm sorry about all of this. The issue in question was a "red faction" vandal.  He wasn't just adding communist POV, he was replacing tons of pages with the words "RED FACTION" and simple variations.  I would never suggest blocking people for being Communist/Christian/What have you.  Pakaran. 18:11, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)

He didn't block me for my beliefs (which are odd) but for vandelism..which I used to do. User:Jesus Chirst

 * Actually, I never did block you. I've stated the opinion that you should maybe be blocked, but I'm emotionally involved to the extent that I wouldn't block you.  I'd let someone else do it.  Pakaran. 02:19, 5 Mar 2004 (UTC)

well..i must have forgot User:Jesus Chirst

I note you added me to vandelism in progress what is you goal in doing this are you trying to crucify me?? (not joking) I told you i was reformed, now I want to be your friends. User:Jesus Chirst

-- Hi! Thanks for your edit to electronic voting; it spurred me on to re-write the entire overview. I hope you don't mind. That one sentence seemed too hard on management: I also question the integrity of the developers of proprietary voting software and the entire chain from developer's keyboard to voting system. Then again, the rest of the overview seemed to cover important issues, but in no particular order, and it had too much of a slant in the order it was presented, so I re-wrote the whole thing. -- Ke4roh 20:01, 6 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Why must I not criticize?
Why are my disclosures of Randi's statements removed? If you are honest you edit and add them. I think they are important. I have nothing against atheism. But what about bigotry? charlesturek@comcast.net Magician, Order of Merlin IBM

- I'm forwarding this e-mail to you:

"[edit]Your user name or IP address has been blocked by Pakaran. The reason given is this: Sorry, this range has been used by Bird a LOT."

This is the message I am getting despite not being bird I am a registered user and have come online to edit MY user page and continue working on articles. My current IP is 67.74.109.180 but it is dynamic so Pakaran is going nail different users like me and many others as long as he blocks everyone with those intial digits. I have e-mailed him twice but gotten no response your the first administrator on the list please help me. Thanks

In case this is a trick, I'd like to let you handle it. 172 13:05, 14 Mar 2004 (UTC)

AMA Election
Pakaran, I've taken the liberty of adding links at Announcements and Goings-on that the Association of Members' Advocates is searching for a Coordinator and I have started a new page dealing with the election. See: AMA Coordinator Election. You editing, comments and participation as an AMA member would be appreciated. [[User:Alex756|— Alex756 talk]] 20:30, 21 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Hi, there have been some suggestions that we need to start cleaning out the old requests posted to Peer review. You are receiving this because you have posted one or more requests that have been there a long time. When you have a moment, please check it out and remove the request(s), along with any related material, if you have received adequate feedback. Thanks! -- Wapcaplet 23:22, 25 Mar 2004 (UTC)

The April Fools page (via MyRedDice) was both stunning and spectacular. Something to keep current on meta. -Stevertigo 17:23, 8 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Sorry - I just noticed the vandalism by anon 64.12.116.74 - I have wiped some of it, but more may be there. You should take a closer look. I will block him, if someone else hasnt. -Stevertigo 18:26, 8 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Navarone
I'm sorry? What have I done that you would need to block me? I am not a user who has been previously banned. Thanks for your concern, The Trolls of Navarone 15:24, 9 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * Are you sure they are the same user? The Trolls of Navarone 15:42, 9 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Troll ban
Please go to Quickpolls re 66.2.156.69 and 216.99.245.135 ThanksAndyL 02:53, 14 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Thanks, I've just signed it. Dunno if quickpoll is the way to go. I couldn't find a "Request to ban anonymous user" page or anything like that AndyL 03:15, 14 Apr 2004 (UTC)

AMA co-ordinator election is now on
You may now vote for user:Ed_Poor or user:Alex756 in the first ever AMA co-ordinator election. Follow the instructions on AMA Coordinator Election Procedure for more details.

AMA members who wish to abstain from voting must also e-mail wikipedia_ama_voting@yahoo.co.uk with notice of that intent.

To clarify anything before voting, ask user_talk:Zanimum or user_talk:Jwrosenzweig on their talk pages.

AMA members have until April 30, at 11:00:00 EST to vote. -- user:zanimum

Sock check
Teehee. I know what you mean, but I'm picturing a line of girls in kilts while the nun checks that the socks come up high enough... moink 00:46, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Award
To Comrade Nathan Russell, in recognition of his services to the Police-State the Red Faction awards you!

Hey remember me? I decided to award you! see the Red faction's main page for the reason why. Comrade Nick
 * I think you could construe this as a personal attack. - Fennec 12:46, 28 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * Yeah, but what should I do about it? Pakaran. 14:54, 28 Apr 2004 (UTC)

AMA Coordinator election closing
This "form letter"-style notice is being sent to you, to notify you that voting for AMA Coordinator will close at April 30, at 16:00:00 UTC, a little over 48.5 hours from the time this message was posted on your talk page. If you do not vote, following the instructions at AMA Coordinator Election Procedure, your vote will be void. Contrary to concern, members who abstain from voting and notify the Inspectors of the Election, as well as members who abstain from voting and do not notify the Inspectors of the Election, will still be AMA full members. -- user:zanimum

Request for AMA assistance
We have received an anonymous request for AMA assistance from an IP address, I have directed that individual to contact me if they wish not to create a Wikipedia account. If you are interested in helping please let me know and if I hear from this individual I will try and put you in contact. See AMA Requests for Assistance. Thank you. — ©   Alex756   03:11, 18 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Hello
I just saw your name and realized I hadn't seen you around much. I came here to ask where you'd got to, but I see from your user contribs that you appear to be returned after a fairly long hiatus. Just thought you should know that I always liked what you did here, both in contributions and in policy discussions, and I hope you're back for good. :-) If there's anything going on here that's driving you away, I hope you'll let me know -- I'd want to see if we could clear it up.  We need good contributors like you. Happy editing, Jwrosenzweig 19:25, 24 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * I think you've returned with the right attitude - I took my own wikiholiday recently and feel refreshed by it. If trouble comes looking for you, please let some of us know so we can help.  I don't know much about the Unification Church, but I'll gladly offer what I can. :-) Happy editing, Jwrosenzweig 16:22, 28 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Range blocks
Hi I'm trying to figure out range blocks but I can't follow the explanation at range blocks at all :-( I noticed that you recently blocked 203.166.96.232/29 Now why the 29? ( I understand 8, 16, 24 ,well i think I do anyhow it's the in between numbers I can't figure out) theresa knott 16:30, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)

This is what I'm not sure about. You said "So /28 blocks all users with the address listed, and the 24 -1 = 15  ###.###.###.194

According to you I just block ###.###.###.187/29 right? But if we write 187 out in binary we get 10111011. Setting the last 32-N bits equal to zero gives 10111000 which equals 184. So it looks to me like the above range block would actially block .184 -.191 Is this correct? theresa knott 12:10, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for your help. I understand it now, i was just being extra overly careful to make sure I "got it" I don't want to go around blocking huge swathes of people by mistake (presumably I could block everyone in the entire internet by ###.###.###.###/1 ?)

PP
Can you watch the personal insults in edit summaries in articles like Gdansk? Calling others Nazis is not acceptable. Pakaran. 01:21, 20 Jul 2004 (UTC)

In my opinion the Nazis should be called the Nazis. The problem is some editors spread the Neo-Nazi ideas in Wikipedia, and they should be stopped somehow. The example is profanating Polish cities with the Nazi names, another example is calling the Nazi atrocities during WWII, the legal action of the legal German government. The Nazi atrocities should be called Nazi atrocities, people speading Nazi propaganda should be called the Nazis, don't you agree??? PolishPoliticians 01:32, 20 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Thanks. I was looking for him on RFC because I knew I'd seen it somewhere. Where's his RFA? RickK 04:19, Jul 22, 2004 (UTC)

I've just blocked him for 24 hours. He was arbitrarily moving articles to Polish names without discussion and refused to stop. I'm sure somebody like Guanaco will come around and unblock him, though. RickK 05:40, Jul 22, 2004 (UTC)

English and Nazi city names
Yes, the Nazis liked certain city names. They also liked blonde hair and Protestants. This does not make Hillary Clinton a Nazi symbol. Pakaran. 04:31, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Blondes are not offensive, swastika and Danzig are offesive - that's the difference. PolishPoliticians 04:35, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)

STOP HARASSING ME
For several weeks now I have been recieving messages and vague threats from Wikipedia editors and moderators accusing me of vandalizing certain pages of Wikipedia. I am contacting you because you were the first of several moderators who 'sent me a message' today, so take this as a curt notice. I HAVE NEVER VANDALIZED A WIKIPEDIA PAGE OR MADE AN EDIT OF ANY KIND. I have nothing but respect and admiration for wikipedia and its caretakers and would never deface it consciously. I can also respect your position trying to protect this resource from vandals, but if you cannot accurately accuse a user of wrongdoing, you SHOULD NOT ACCUSE AN INNOCENT MAN who happens to share a similar IP address with a genuine vandal. This would be like arresting the neighbor of a thief if the thief himself is not available to arrest. Kindly get your facts straightened out in the future and cease this harrassement. Understand that I mean no disrespect by this notification. If you wish to contact me personally in regards to this matter, I can be reached at elcolo9@hotmail.com. Thank you, Sincerly, Col

diabetes edit
Thanks for the contribution to diabetes concerning candy. It's such a point of controversial minutia that it makes me guess you have some personal experience? However, there are at least two arguments that can be made for the opposite tactic (1) if following the traditional practice of completely forbidding candy except for treating lows, some families would allow it as a minor compensation for the unpleasantness of the hypoglycemia, and (2) some people actually get contrary and uncooperative when low and so family will often want to offer what they know will be accepted. In other words, your advice is what some families agree with for exactly the temptation reason implied by your sentence, and others would not. I would classify it as what the theologians call adiaphora-- things to be neither recommended nor condemned, and would be inclined to change the specific recommendation to a more general one about individualizing hypoglycemia management. But if you know more about this please contribute some more. Regards. Alteripse 01:46, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Capitals
Pakaran, you asked (at Weed) if an article name should be capitalized. The answer is: yes, the first (or only) title word is always capitalized when making a new article. Subsequent words follow standard rules, for example: "United States" but "Mushroom album". As for whether "Giant Hogweed" or "Giant hogweed" is correct, that is an issue concerning common names of plants that is unresolved here at Wikipedia (although I may be unaware that progress towards a decision has been made). Hope that answers your question? - Marshman 18:10, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Paul Vogel blocks
I reiterated your block of 63.159.0.0/17 with somewhat more detailed explanatory text - since it's a range block, any number of Qwest dialup users may see it, and I thought they'd appreciate the detail :-) - David Gerard 15:04, 28 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Asperger's syndrome
The removal of the "Portrayal in the media" section of Asperger's Syndrome has been in the discussion for several days. There were no objections.

If you object, bring it up in the discussion, don't just revert it.

Thanks, Kundor 22:13, Oct 9, 2004 (UTC)

To keep Wiki sane you need health. To hire firemen you don't need arsonists
RE: Please see No legal threats before I feel a need to refer you to the AC (again). Pakaran. 19:33, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I did. I always do. Please see Justice before I feel that urge to remind you too the absolute need for Justice! Especially in an increasingly disoriented society, with fake anchors, fake ideals and fake idols. Justice is never a threat, dummy! It's just that - Justice - jay, u, es, te, eye, see, eee flat - or we won't need it at all! If justice is a threat, we'll call war peace, idiots genii and yourself a white dove. Threaten me with your  feelings  of silencing me using a pack of dovish wolfs as you did in the past, and you know, in the same breath we'll call primesters by their name of pacifying nocular terrosts ! - irismeister 20:15, 2004 Oct 11 (UTC)

A good candidate for Bad jokes and other deleted nonsense...

AM page
Use caution in mixing wolves with lambs, graduate! Remember this from an old university teacher: Whoever is gentle with the wolf is cruel to the lamb. You'll need it in your job search - irismeister 20:19, 2004 Oct 11 (UTC)

Neutrality
Thanks for the note. I'm also going to leave Neutrality alone for a day, but I think I'll post a comment to that effect. This is a tough one, because there are a huge number of votes, but many reasoned opposes. 24 hour extension sound good to you? -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 04:21, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Well, if you're in the mood, and awake, Slowking Man will be ripe around six-ish, NY time ;-) -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 04:27, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Sorry!

 * Sorry - there appears to be a misunderstanding - I just discovered the 'user contributions' button, and was experimenting with it. I did not intend to 'stalk' anyone. Appologies. Also, there seems to be suspicion that I am someone else masquerading as a new user. Let me assure you I am not - please forgive my not understanding how odd looking at all of someone's edits and then editing them would look! The Recycling Troll 17:05, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Request for evidence or remarks
I have posted comments and evidence at Requests for arbitration/Irismeister_3/Evidence and named you as a fellow complainant. If you would like your name removed, or if you want to add your own comments or evidence, I encourage you to do so. Thanks! :-) Jwrosenzweig 22:14, 22 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Don't be sorry about Robert
Check out his latest revision.

He's been crusading "against the anti-circumcision agenda" in this article. He flatly refuses to believe anything referenced by anti-circumcision organizations. Heck, read his comments on Talk:Circumsision.

Our Formal Resignation
We, the people of 168.11.167.56 resign from vandalism. :-)

Keeping "In the news" NPOV and credible
Following various attempts to add partisan and fringe stories to Template:In the news, I've proposed a new criterion to keep such stuff out. Could you please take a look at Wikipedia talk:In the news section on the Main Page and let me know what you think? -- ChrisO 17:19, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Empire of Atlantium
Protecting the article is fine, but stating that we both violated 3RR when neither of us did isn't. Very Verily 01:49, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * Unprotect it or don't, I don't care; I have other problems right now. Protecting was questionable, but if you unprotect it is almost certain the edit war will resume.  Your call. Very Verily  12:18, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * Yes, but the 3RR says no more than three reverts. Very Verily 14:07, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Botulin toxin
Would you mind citing that souce where you found that the "lethal dose of about 300 pg/kg, meaning that somewhat over a hundred grams (the mass of a few shots of booze) could kill everyone on earth."? Thank in advance! ClockworkTroll 23:22, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)

SPUI
Thanks very much for your help,I'll let you know if he's being troublesome. by the way can you think up an anagram I could use in my signature? My full u/name is User:Honeycake. Thanks,--[[User:Honeycake|Honeycake (mad scientist)]] 17:24, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Great, I've got a nice one now!!--Honeycake17:30, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)

NPOV dispute on Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence
As the most recent editor of the page I have tried to address your concerns here: Talk:Singularity_Institute_for_Artificial_Intelligence

Usurpator
Please do not replace Wikipedia pages with blank content. Blank pages are harmful to Wikipedia because they have a tendency to confuse users... and so on, and so forth. :-) Seriously, though, I don't think protected, blanked articles are the way to go here. If people are consistently moving the article, just block them. Otherwise, where is the end? Creating blank, protected articles for usurper, imperialist moron and who knows what other (in)appropriate potential aliases for Bush? JRM 15:30, 2004 Nov 23 (UTC)
 * I have to agree, Pakaran. You should delete your protected blank article at Usurpator, as it is both confusing and non-standard.  If a particular user is looking to vandalize this page, the correct action is listing him on WP:VIP and then a IP block/ban.  Cheers.  --DropDeadGorgias (talk) 16:10, Nov 23, 2004 (UTC)

The Humungous Image Tagging Project
Hi. You've helped with the WikiProject Wiki Syntax, so I thought it worth alerting you to the latest and greatest of Wikipedia fixing project, User:Yann/Untagged Images, which is seeking to put copyright tags on all of the untagged images. There are probably, oh, thirty thousand or so to do (he said, reaching into the air for a large figure). But hey: they're images ... you'll get to see lots of random pretty pictures. That must be better than looking for at at and the the, non? You know you'll love it. best wishes --Tagishsimon (talk)

Article Licensing
Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 1000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:
 * Multi-Licensing FAQ - Lots of questions answered
 * Multi-Licensing Guide
 * Free the Rambot Articles Project

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

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

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

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

Admins and edit history
So what's this super-kool n3w pow3rz admins have to revert to earlier versions in the History? I don't see anything new in the listing (but I am using the Nostalgia skin, maybe that's it). Noel (talk) 18:41, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Noel (talk) 18:41, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * Ah, got it. Thanks! Noel (talk) 18:59, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Thanks!
Hello Pakaran,

Thanks for the information. I know I must have made some noob mistakes. I only had the best intentions in mind. Thanks for the links again :). I'm looking forward to being as active a member as possible. Vivin 00:33, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Biased Author Re: Torture
Pakaran,

Are you the cat that insists on writing biased reports regarding the U.S., the U.K. and Isreali use of torture, which is the exception not the rule? If so, why are you biased? You don't even mention the use of torture in other countries, where the use of torture is the rule and not the exception. You don't give me time to create these articles. Are you Muslim or something?

I resent your reports. They are propaganda and you are a fool, especially since you apparently benefit from the U.S.

S Huff B.S., M.C.S.E., M.S.

Arbitration re Ciz
The matter is now being dealt with, can I ask if you could check the evidence page for this POV vandal, and just see if it looks good, make sure the links all work and its clear whats being said? Many thanks FT2 04:21, Dec 18, 2004 (UTC)

RFA thanks
Salve, Pakaran! I wanted to drop you a line to thank you for your support in my successful RFA candidacy. It was very gratifying to see the kind remarks posted in the debate. Ave! PedanticallySpeaking 17:44, Dec 21, 2004 (UTC)

title: User talk:Pakaran/Archive 2


text:
James Rainwater

Leo James Rainwater (December 9, 1917 – May 31, 1986) was an American physicist who shared the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1975 for his part in determining the asymmetrical shapes of certain atomic nuclei.

During World War II, he worked on the Manhattan Project that developed the first atomic bombs. In 1949, he began developing his theory that, contrary to what was then believed, not all atomic nuclei are spherical. His ideas were later tested and confirmed by Aage Bohr's and Ben Mottelson's experiments. He also contributed to the scientific understanding of X-rays and participated in the United States Atomic Energy Commission and naval research projects.

Rainwater joined the physics faculty at Columbia in 1946, where he reached the rank of full professor in 1952 and was named Pupin Professor of Physics in 1982. He received the Ernest Orlando Lawrence Award for Physics in 1963 and in 1975 was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics, "for the discovery of the connection between collective motion and particle motion in atomic nuclei and the development of the theory of the structure of the atomic nucleus based on this connection".

Early life
Leo James Rainwater was born on December 9, 1917, in Council, Idaho, the son of a former civil engineer who ran the local general store, Leo Jaspar Rainwater and his wife Edna Eliza née Teague. He never used his first name and was always referred to as James or Jim. His father died in the great influenza epidemic of 1918 and Rainwater and his mother moved to Hanford, California, where she married George Fowler, a widower with two sons, Freeman and John. In time he also acquired a half-brother, George Fowler Jr., who became naval officer. At high school he excelled in mathematics, chemistry and physics and was admitted to the California Institute of Technology on the strength of a chemistry competition. He received his Bachelor of Science degree as a physics major in 1939.

Manhattan Project
Rainwater then chose to undertake postgraduate studies at Columbia University. At the time this was an unusual move for a scholar from California, as Columbia was not then renowned for its physics; but this had recently changed. George B. Pegram had recently built up the physics department, and hired scientists like Enrico Fermi. At Columbia Rainwater studied under Isidor Isaac Rabi, Enrico Fermi, Edward Teller and John R. Dunning. Fermi was engaged in neutron moderator studies that would lead to the construction of the first nuclear reactor, while Dunning and Eugene T. Booth had built Columbia's first cyclotron, in the basement of the Pupin Physics Laboratories. Rainwater received his Master of Arts in 1941. For his Doctor of Philosophy thesis on "Neutron beam spectrometer studies of boron, cadmium, and the energy distribution from paraffin", written under Dunning's supervision, he built a neutron spectrometer and developed techniques for its use. Rainwater married Emma Louise Smith in March 1942. They had three sons, James, Robert and William and a daughter, Elizabeth Ann, who died from leukaemia when she was nine.

Fermi's reactor group moved to the Metallurgical Laboratory at the University of Chicago in 1942. Rainwater remained at Columbia, where he joined the Manhattan Project's Substitute Alloy Materials (SAM) Laboratories. The Manhattan Project was the Allied effort during World War II to develop atomic bombs. The SAM Laboratories' primary task was the development of gaseous diffusion technology for uranium enrichment, to produce fissile uranium-235 for use in atomic bombs. Rainwater worked with William W. Havens Jr. and Chien-Shiung Wu, mostly on studies of neutron cross sections, using the neutron spectrometer. After the war, a dozen papers by Dunning, Havens, Rainwater and Wu would be declassified and published. So too was his thesis, published in the Physical Review in two parts with Havens's thesis, and he was awarded his doctorate in 1946. In 1963 he was awarded the United States Atomic Energy Commission's Ernest Orlando Lawrence Award, for his work on the Manhattan Project.

Later life
Rainwater remained at Columbia as an instructor. In 1948, he began teaching courses on nuclear structure. Niels Bohr and John Wheeler had developed a theoretical treatment for nuclear fission in 1939 that they based on the liquid drop model of the nucleus. This was superseded in 1949 by Maria Goeppert Mayer's nuclear shell model, which could explain more about the structure of heavy elements than the older theory but it still had limits. At a colloquium at Columbia in 1949, Charles H. Townes reported experimental results that indicated quadrupole moments greater than those indicated by the shell model. It occurred to Rainwater that this could be explained and the differences between the liquid drop and nuclear shell models could be reconciled, if the atomic nucleus were not spherical, as had been assumed but could assume other shapes. Rainwater published his theoretical paper in 1950. By chance, that year he was sharing an office with Aage Bohr, who took up the challenge of experimentally verifying Rainwater's theory. Bohr and Ben Mottelson published their results in three papers in 1952 and 1953 that conclusively confirmed the theory. Rainwater felt that his model was overlooked. He later recalled that:

"When I made my proposal for use of a spheroidal nuclear model, it seemed to be an obvious answer which would immediately be simultaneously suggested by all theorists in the field. I do not understand why it was not. I was also surprised and dismayed to hear one or more respected theorists announce in every Nuclear Physics Conference which I attended through 1955 some such comment as, "Although the Nuclear Shell Model seems empirically to work very well, there is at present no theoretical justification as to why it should apply.""

With funding from the Office of Naval Research, Rainwater built a synchrotron, which became operational in 1950, at the Nevis Laboratories, on an estate on the Hudson River at Irvington, New York, willed to Columbia University by the DuPont family. He became a full professor in 1952 and was the director of Nevis Laboratories from 1951 to 1954 and again from 1957 to 1961. He worked with his student Val Fitch on studies of muonic atoms, atoms where an electron is replaced by a muon. After 1965, he worked on turning the Nevis synchrotron into a meson facility. When a reporter rang in 1975 to inform him that he had won the Nobel Prize in Physics, he initially thought that it was for his work on muonic atoms. Several hours passed before he discovered that it was for his work on nuclear structure, the Nobel Prize being shared with Bohr and Mottelson.

He was a fellow of the American Physical Society, the New York Academy of Sciences and the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, and was a member of the National Academy of Sciences, the American Institute of Physics, the American Association of Physics Teachers and the Optical Society of America.

Rainwater succeeded Robert R. Wilson as Michael I. Pupin Professor of Physics in 1983.

Rainwater collapsed after a lecture at the Pupin Laboratories in 1985 but was revived by a student who knew how to administer CPR. In declining health, he retired and became a professor emeritus in February 1986. He died from cardiopulmonary arrest at St. John's Riverside Hospital in Yonkers, New York on May 31, 1986. He was survived by his wife, three sons and half-brother George.

Related archival collections

 * Haskell A. Reich collection of student notes, circa 1945-1954, Niels Bohr Library & Archives (includes lecture notes from James Rainwater's courses at Columbia University)

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

title: James Rainwater


title: File:WikiNoëlAnglais1.png


text:
Talk:The Scream

Edison lamp
I added the following:
 * Kelly Grovier has suggested that another exhibit at the Paris exposition may have inspired the head of the figure. A collection of 20 000 light bulbs in the shape of a giant bulb was in the pavilion celebrating Thomas Edison's inventions.

but User:Oknazevad has deleted it with:
 * The Kelly Grovier theory has little evidence and seems to be not widely supported.

I leave it here in case someone finds it interesting or wants to explore further support. --Error (talk) 19:07, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for restoring the definition of the theory. It’s harmless. Marty Mangold (talk) 12:42, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

The German title
Why is the German title given so prominently in the lead and the infobox picture caption? In the lead it even takes precedence over its Norwegian name. I can't find anything in the article to suggest why a German title is important, was given by Munch etc. It seems a weird irrelevance. Either if it was relevant, it should be explained why it is relevant, or removed - this is English Wikipedia, not German Wikipedia after all. 86.129.171.122 (talk) 10:03, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Tend to agree, given that the title Der Schrei der Natur is not mentioned at either the de.wiki Der Schrei or at the no.wiki Skrik. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:33, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
 * It's mentioned because it's the original title. The work was created while Munch was living in Berlin and made its public debut at a Berlin gallery show. Munch titled it in German. This has been discussed previously (see the archives) and the full German title is sourced in the article. That the German and Norwegian articles miss that detail is if no bearing in the facts. oknazevad (talk) 15:22, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
 * thanks for reminding me. I looked in the Talk page archive, but could not find any previous discussion. Which source is that? Do you think it's fully justified in the infobox? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:50, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I couldn't find it in this article's talk page archives either, nor in the FAC discussions. I think this should be explained and sourced more clearly in our article. German Wikipedia's article writes that it was "Geschrei" originally (see also this lithography which has both "Geschrei" and "Ich fühlte das große Geschrei durch die Natur" written on it, but not "Schrei der Natur"). Not doubting what Oknazevad wrote, but obviously it's confusing readers, and it's hard to see which sources apply here. ---Sluzzelin talk  15:50, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I see that User:Pnyeg has now simplified the opening line. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:45, 8 July 2022 (UTC)
 * No, what he did was completely remove the title in Danish and German completely, despite it being sourced. It was not an improvement on the least and I'm reverting it outright. oknazevad (talk) 20:54, 8 July 2022 (UTC)
 * We best not forget this is en.wiki? But I agree those other, sourced, titles should certainly not be removed. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:56, 8 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Native language titles are included for artworks even when there's a common name in English. Just as foreign language films include the title in the original language, or pretty much anything that has a non-English native name. No one is proposing moving the article, so omitting the native titles (which again are the title under which it was first exhibited in Berlin, and the artist's native language) removes key information. So, yeah, definitely do not remove them. oknazevad (talk) 21:02, 8 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I used to add the fact that he created the series in Berlin some time ago but it was deleted, though I believe for several reasons the location of the creation of a work is in deed relevant for its reception. Seoulmate1 (talk) 10:26, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

Who is screaming?
In Britain at least, most people and the media seem to think that the *woman* is screaming. As we see from Munch's title this is completely wrong, it is the surrounding Nature that is screaming, and the woman is covering her ears not to hear it; her mouth is only open in horror. I think this misapprehension should be more clearly brought out and corrected in the the article, as it is a very commonly held belief. 86.187.236.58 (talk) 16:17, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Seems pretty clear from the text and Munch's quotes that it is nature that is screaming. Wikipedia works on sources, so if an art critic, historian, or author has further comment on this it can be used to clarify. The human figure, though, is part of nature, and could be seen as joining with the rest of nature in its scream. Randy Kryn (talk) 16:57, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Plus the figure is not a woman. Not inherently, anyway. oknazevad (talk) 17:42, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Well, as you say, *careful* reading shows 'seems pretty clear. . . that it is Nature that is screaming' - I don't think any extra sources need to be referenced. It is just that a lot of people (especially those with pre-conceived ideas) *don't* read things carefully. I was merely suggesting slightly more emphasis on it. And yes - I had the preconceived idea the figure was a woman! Along with a lot of other people, so perhaps this should be more emphasised as well. I really don't think they are joining in, why cover the ears if that is the case?86.187.169.16 (talk) 14:33, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

 * Yes, as mentioned above, the original title, in German, was Der Schrei der Natur. But I don't see how The Scream can be "completely wrong " if Munch himself also also used the title Skrik for later versions. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:53, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

Date of creation
Are there any sources for the date this was painted? I was expecting to see one alongside the year "1893". But I can't see any. I tried to add some "citation needed" tags. But I've now been told I'm a vandal who is "too lazy to click on a reference." Apparently it's "sourced at least a dozen times in the article". Was also interested in what date it was first exhibited. Article just says "1893". 205.239.40.3 (talk) 14:53, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

And I'm not too sure that "Like every reference mentions the date." The lead section has two references: the first is this book (why archived in Slovenian exactly?), which gives no dates, and does not even appear to be searchable online. The second ref is the geographical Lat/Long of Oslo (which to me really looks a little irrelevant to this article). 205.239.40.3 (talk) 15:31, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

 * Ok, first off, the first source is sufficient, as there is zero requirement that sources be online sources. There's additional sources in the body of the article, including the museum that holds the very painting. That alone would be sufficient; please read WP:LEADCITE.
 * As for the coordinates, that's the location of the spot depicted in the painting. It's a fairly famous vista in part because of the painting. oknazevad (talk) 16:07, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I've now added two sources in the main body. But note this source says: (emphasis added): "In 1892, Edvard Munch had been invited to exhibit his paintings in Berlin, long before the start of the Secession there. When that exhibition opened in November, his work was considered so shocking that it provoked outrage, and the exhibition had to close prematurely after only one week." That seem to mean November 1892? 205.239.40.3 (talk) 16:15, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Same source says "From Despair came The Scream, shown here in its first version of 1893..." Schazjmd   (talk)  16:18, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Seems to contradict itself. Unfortunate that no month is given. 205.239.40.3 (talk) 16:19, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * How does it contradict itself? The Scream was not Munch's only "shocking" painting. Nothing in that source indicates that The Scream was part of the 1892 exhibition. Schazjmd   (talk)  16:21, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Oh, I see. So we can say it was first shown in 1893 in Berlin? We just don't know when the exhibition was or for how long it lasted? 205.239.40.3 (talk) 16:26, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Huh? That source doesn't say when or where 1893 The Scream was first shown. Schazjmd   (talk)  16:35, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Oh, so "shown here" means "shown in this image above", not in a particular city. So it's another good source for it having been created in 1893. But we still don't know where or exactly when it was first exhibited. 205.239.40.3 (talk) 16:40, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * This source says "This is by far the best-known version of The Scream. It was first exhibited in 1893 in a solo exhibition of Munch's work in Berlin. It was purchased by Norwegian industrialist and artist Olaf Schou, who in turn donated the work to Norway’s National Museum in 1910." Is that a reliable source for use in the article? Perhaps those details are all given somewhere in the 1984 Arne Eggum book. 205.239.40.3 (talk) 17:04, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

 * WP:LEADCITE seems to say that claims should be sourced in the main body, not the lead. If the supporting detail is not even visible in a reference, a quote from the book could be given, or even a page number? Do you have that book? 205.239.40.3 (talk) 16:18, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * And you're sure that the book supports the entire contents of the first paragraph? I don't know without going to get a copy from the library or buying one. But WP:LEADCITE seems to say that unless material is contentious, there's no need to put the source in the lead section. 205.239.40.3 (talk) 16:36, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Art historian Michelle Facos (2011, page 361) says: "Having already produced works entitled Melancholy and Jealousy for "The Frieze of Life", Munch added Despair, now known as The Scream, in 1893." Shouldn't this be added? There is no mention of "The Frieze of Life" at all in the article. Perhaps it first exhibited in Berlin under the title Despair? . 205.239.40.3 (talk) 09:36, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

 * Despair is a different painting. Facos is plainly incorrect. It's obviously related, featuring the same background of a vivid abstract sunset overlooking Oslo, but the central figure is entirely different. There are two versions of it with rather differently featured central figures, one from 1892, the year before The Scream debuted, and another from 1894, the year after The Scream. The latter was accompanied by Anxiety which also draws on the same background introduced in Despair. Here's the three of them for comparison:
 * oknazevad (talk) 17:12, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

 * Thank you for clarifying that. I'm really surprised that a respected art historian like Facos has got that wrong. Perhaps it was a misprint? But I still think that maybe "The Frieze of Life" should be mentioned. It was obviously a set of connected paintings. 205.239.40.3 (talk) 19:48, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

 * There is no doubt that the first painting was created in 1893. My copy of Ydstie (2008) says, on page 77: "The first is signed and dated 'E. Munch 1893'." It's the second version (the one in the Munch Museum) that has no date. And it is no surprise that it was shown first in Berlin, as that was where Munch was mainly living at that time. He painted a portrait if Strindberg, in Berlin, in December 1892 (Ydstie 2008, p. 18). Martinevans123 (talk) 17:44, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:The Scream


text:
File talk:WikiNoëlAnglais1.png

No!!! Don't do it!!! -- Tim Starling 23:13, Dec 10, 2003 (UTC)

Hurts. :)

title: File talk:WikiNoëlAnglais1.png


text:
Talk:Lists of film topics

Untitled
Do you think there should be a list of glossary terms, or should they all go under the "Business and Industry" heading?

WHO vandalized this page, and film, over night??? Rich Wannen (aka 12.73.194.204) 13:51, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Cinema of China
See talk:cinema of China. — Instantnood 16:18, July 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * Let's keep the controversy confined to one place. There is no reason to repeat the discussions on this page, so I am just going to list the China related pages in one place, arranged alphabetically without a hierarchy, and I added a note under China to "See also: Cinema of Hong Kong and Cinema of Taiwan".  If the debate reaches consensus on other pages, this page can be rearranged to conform with the results of the debate. --Samuel Wantman 19:26, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Thank you Samuel. — Instantnood 19:36, July 26, 2005 (UTC)

Merge
List of basic film-related topics is nigh on identical to this list. Garglebutt / (talk) 23:49, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

 * Done in the meantime. Motion picture terminology is also very similar. Merge as well? Peter S. 15:55, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

title: Talk:Lists of film topics


text:
Modoc people

The Modoc are an Indigenous American people who historically lived in the area which is now northeastern California and central Southern Oregon. Currently, they include two federally recognized tribes, the Klamath Tribes in Oregon and the Modoc Tribe of Oklahoma, now known as the Modoc Nation.

Language
The Modoc, like the neighboring Klamath, spoke dialectic varieties of the Klamathan/Lutuamian language, a branch of the Plateau Penutian language family. Both peoples called themselves maklaks, meaning "people". To distinguish between the tribes, the Modoc called themselves Moatokni maklaks, from muat meaning "South". The Achomawi, a band of the Pit River tribe, called them Lutuami, meaning "Lake Dwellers".

Current population and geography
About 600 Modoc live in Klamath County, Oregon, in and around their ancestral homelands. This group includes those who stayed on the reservation during the Modoc War, as well as the descendants of those who chose to return in 1909 to Oregon from Indian Territory in Oklahoma or Kansas. Since that time, many have followed the path of the Klamath. The shared tribal government of the Klamath, Modoc and Yahooskin in Oregon is known as the Klamath Tribes.

Two hundred Modoc live in Oklahoma on a small reservation in Ottawa County, Oklahoma, that the federal government purchased for them. Originally they were placed on the Quapaw Indian Reservation in Oklahoma's far northeast corner. They are descendants of the band Captain Jack (Kintpuash) led during the Modoc War. The federal government officially recognized the Modoc Tribe of Oklahoma in 1978, and its constitution was approved in 1991.

Early population
Estimates for the pre-contact populations of most native groups in California have varied substantially. James Mooney put the aboriginal population of the Modoc at 400. Alfred L. Kroeber estimated the Modoc population within California as 500 at the year 1770. University of Oregon anthropologist Theodore Stern suggested that there had been a total of about 500 Modoc. In 1846, the population may have included "perhaps 600 warriors (an overestimate, probably)".

Pre-contact
Until the 19th century, when European explorers first encountered the Modoc, like all Plateau Indians, they caught salmon during salmon runs and migrated seasonally to hunt and gather other food. In winter, they built earthen dugout lodges shaped like beehives, covered with sticks and plastered with mud, near lake shores with reliable sources of seeds from aquatic wokas plants and fishing.

Neighboring groups
In addition to the Klamath, with whom they shared a language and the Modoc Plateau, the groups neighboring the Modoc home were:
 * Shasta on the Klamath River;
 * Rogue River Athabaskans and Takelma west over the Cascade Mountains;
 * Northern Paiute east in the desert;
 * Karuk and Yurok further down the Klamath River; and
 * Achomawi or Pit River to the south, in the meadows of the Pit River drainages.

The Modoc, Northern Paiute, and Achomawi shared Goose Lake Valley.

Settlements
The known Modoc village sites are Agawesh, where Willow Creek enters Lower Klamath Lake, of the Gombatwa·s or Lower Klamath Lake People Band; Kumbat and Pashha on the shores of Tule Lake of the Pasganwa·s or Tule Lake People Band; and Wachamshwash and Nushalt-Hagak-ni on the Lost River of the Goġewa·s or Lower Lost River People Band. The Modoc have also been known as the Modok (Brandt and Davis-Kimball xvi).

First contact
In the 1820s, Peter Skene Ogden, an explorer for the Hudson's Bay Company, established trade with the Klamath people north of the Modoc.

Applegate Trail established
Brothers Jesse and Lindsay Applegate, accompanied by 13 other white settlers, established the Applegate Trail, or South Emigrant Trail, in 1846. It connected a point on the Oregon Trail near Fort Hall, Idaho, and the Willamette Valley in western Oregon. The new route was created to encourage European-Americans to come to western Oregon, and to eliminate the hazards encountered on the Columbia Route. Since the Hudson's Bay Company controlled the Columbia Route, development of an alternate route enabled migration even if there was trouble between the United States and the United Kingdom. The Applegate brothers became the first known white people in present-day Lava Beds National Monument.

The opening of the Applegate Trail appeared to bring the first regular contact between the Modoc and the European-American settlers, who had largely ignored their territory before. Many of the events of the Modoc War took place along the trail.

Emigrant invasion
From 1846 to 1873, thousands of emigrants entered the Modoc territory. Beginning in 1847, the Modoc raided the invading emigrants on the Applegate Trail under the leadership of Old Chief Schonchin.

In September 1852, the Modoc destroyed an emigrant train at Bloody Point on the east shore of Tule Lake, killing all but three of the 65 people in the party. The Modoc took two young girls as captives. One or both of them may have been killed several years later by jealous Modoc women. The only man to survive the attack made his way to Yreka, California. After hearing his news, Yreka settlers organized a militia under Sheriff Charles McDermit, Jim Crosby, and Ben Wright. They went to the scene of the massacre to bury the dead and avenge their deaths. Crosby's party had a skirmish with a band of Modoc and returned to Yreka.

Wright and a small group stayed on to avenge the deaths. He was a notorious Indian hater. Accounts differ as to what took place when Wright's party met the Modoc on the Lost River, but most agree that Wright planned to ambush them, which he did in November 1852. Wright and his forces attacked, killing approximately 40 Modoc, in what came to be known as the "Ben Wright Massacre."

Treaty with the United States
The United States, the Klamath, the Modoc, and the Yahooskin band of Snake tribes signed a treaty in 1864 that established the Klamath Reservation. It required the tribes to cede the land bounded on the north by the 44th parallel, on the west and south by the ridges of the Cascade Mountains, and on the east by lines touching Goose Lake and Henley Lake back up to the 44th parallel.

In return, the United States was to make a lump sum payment of $35,000, and annual payments totaling $80,000 over 15 years, as well as provide infrastructure and staff for a reservation. The treaty provided that if the Indians drank or stored intoxicating liquor on the reservation, the payments could be withheld and that the United States could locate additional tribes on the reservation in the future.

The treaty required that the Modoc surrender their lands near Lost River, Tule Lake, and Lower Klamath Lake in exchange for lands in the Upper Klamath Valley. They did so, under the leadership of Chief Schonchin. The Indian agent estimated the total population of the three tribes at about 2,000 when the treaty was signed.

The land of the reservation did not provide enough food for both the Klamath and the Modoc peoples. Illness and tension between the tribes increased. The Modoc requested a separate reservation closer to their ancestral home, but neither the federal nor the California government approved it.

In 1870 Kintpuash (also called Captain Jack) led a band of Modoc to leave the reservation and return to their traditional homelands. They built a village near the Lost River. These Modoc had not been adequately represented in the treaty negotiations and wished to end the harassment by the Klamath on the reservation.

Modoc War

In November 1872, the U.S. Army was sent to Lost River to attempt to force Kintpuash's band back to the reservation. A battle broke out, and the Modoc escaped to what is called Captain Jack's Stronghold in what is now Lava Beds National Monument, California. The band of fewer than 53 warriors was able to hold off the 3,000 U.S. Army troops for several months, defeating them in combat several times. In April 1873, the Modoc left the Stronghold and began to splinter. Kintpuash and his group were the last to be captured, on June 4, 1873, when they voluntarily gave themselves up. U.S. government personnel had assured them that their people would be treated fairly and the warriors would be allowed to live on their own land.

The U.S. Army tried, convicted and executed Kintpuash and three of his warriors in October 1873 for the murder of Major General Edward Canby earlier that year at a parley. Canby had violated agreements made with the Modoc. The Army sent the rest of the band to Oklahoma as prisoners of war with Scarfaced Charley as their chief. The tribe's spiritual leader, Curley Headed Doctor, was also forced to remove to Indian Territory.

In the 1870s, Peter Cooper brought Indians to speak to Indian rights groups in eastern cities. One of the delegations was from the Modoc and Klamath tribes. In 1909, the group in Oklahoma was given permission to return to Oregon. Several people did, but most stayed at their new home.

Culture

The religion of the Modoc is not known in detail. The number five figured heavily in ritual, as in the Shuyuhalsh, a five-night dance rite of passage for adolescent girls. A sweat lodge was used for purification and mourning ceremonies.

Namesakes
Modoc Plateau, Modoc National Forest, Modoc County, California; Modoc, Indiana; and numerous other places are named after this group of people.

title: Modoc people


text:
Sancho VII of Navarre

Sancho VII (Antso VII.a; c. 1157 –7 April 1234) called the Strong (Azkarra, el Fuerte) was King of Navarre from 1194 until his death in 1234. He was the son and heir of Sancho VI, whom he followed as the second king to hold the title of King of Navarre. Sancho VII was the first to use the chains of Navarre as his blazon, a symbol that later would become the main one of Navarre, and the last member of the Jiménez dynasty, which had ruled since the 9th century.

Youth
Sancho was probably the eldest child of Sancho VI and Sancha, daughter of Alfonso VII of León, born soon after their marriage, probably in Tudela, their usual residence.

Sancho's younger sister Berengaria was married to Richard I of England in 1191 on the island of Cyprus on the way to the Holy Land for the Third Crusade. Sancho and Richard were reputed to have been good friends and close allies, even before the marriage brought them together. The French took advantage of Richard's captivity in Germany and captured certain key fortresses of the Plantagenet dominions including Loches. When Richard returned to his continental lands in 1194, the knights of Sancho were besieging the castle for him. As soon as Richard arrived though, Sancho was forced to return to Navarre at the news of the death of his father. He was crowned in Pamplona on 15 August.

Reign

Sancho arrived late at the Battle of Alarcos in 1195 and thus ruined good relations with Alfonso VIII of Castile. The ensuing confrontation resulted in Sancho devastating Soria and Almazán and Alfonso accepted the Peace of Tarazona.

Sancho made expeditions against Murcia and Andalusia, and, between 1198 and 1200, he campaigned in Africa, probably in the service of the Almohads, whose help he wanted against Castile. Taking advantage of his absence, Alfonso VIII of Castile and Peter II of Aragon invaded Navarre, which lost the provinces of Álava, Guipúzcoa, and Biscay to Castile. These conquests were subsequently confirmed by the Treaty of Guadalajara (1207).

Sancho's leadership was decisive in the Battle of Las Navas de Tolosa in the year 1212. In that engagement, the Christian forces of Sancho, Alfonso, Afonso II of Portugal, and Peter II of Aragón allied to defeat the forces of the Almohad Caliph Muhammad an-Nasir. Sancho's troops cut the chains guarding the tent and Slavic guards ring of the Miramamolín, supreme commander of the Al-Andalusian Forces. For this, it is believed the chains became the symbol of Navarre and replaced the sable eagle on a golden field with a golden chain on a gules field in the Navarrese coat of arms. But others suspect they represented the Basques' star-like Sun of Death seen on their Hilarri (Basques' Stelae) or houses traditionally for protection, and perhaps painted on their shields too with the same religious purpose, meaning of Life or Death, or the new Imagery used for Jesus or Christianity as for others were the Christi Anagram or plain Cross on the shield.

Sancho's relations with the countries north of the Pyrenees were notably better than his Castilian ones. Several Pyrenean counties declared themselves his vassals and he concluded treaties with John, King of England, and the various Aragonese kings of his time, the aforementioned Peter II and James I. With the latter he signed at Tudela, in 1231, which was never finished, a treaty stating that whoever survived the other would inherit unopposed the other's kingdom.

Sancho continued the construction of a new cathedral in Pamplona, as begun by his father and to be finished by his successor. The construction of a certain Gothic bridge over the Ebro in Tudela has also been attributed to him.

Succession
Sancho VII was married twice. His first wife was Constance, daughter of Raymond VI of Toulouse and Beatrice of Béziers, whom he married in 1195. He repudiated her a few years later. The identity of his second wife is disputed; some sources mention her as Clemence, daughter of Frederick I, Holy Roman Emperor, while other sources claim she was the daughter of Yusuf II, an emir from Morocco. Sancho VII had no known children by either wife. According to Charles of Viana, however, he had a son with his second wife, who died in an accident when he was 15 years old.

As the result of prolonged and painful illness, starting with a varicose ulcer on his right leg and ashamed of it and his consequent obesity, Sancho went into retirement at Tudela at some point, when his youngest sister Blanche came from Champagne and took administration of the kingdom until she died in 1229. His eldest sister, Berengaria, Queen of England, died in 1230, thus leaving Sancho alone among the children of Sancho VI. When he died in his castle at Tudela, probably of complications related to the varicose ulcer in his leg, his only nephew and Blanche's son Theobald IV of Champagne was recognized as his successor.

Legacy
According to Alberic de Trois-Fontaines, Sancho left a large library, although the number of 1.7 million books is clearly exaggerated. The cultural contacts with the Muslim Kingdoms that he visited and battled with, his friendship with his brother-in-law King Richard, and his sister Blanche's court of Troyes, at the time the most refined in Europe, must have left an important influence on the King's personal intellect, bringing to him an advantageous outlook from the one well set already by their father at his youth, full however with peccadilloes and other impetuous extravaganza.

Sancho left the kingdom with a wealthy treasury and improved communications was in his day one of the most advanced in human rights, and its Jewish community enjoyed the best standing in Christian Europe, which after all had been the work and result of the Jimenez royal house for centuries. He was originally interred in the church of San Nicolás, but was later moved to Roncesvalles after much resistance from the local Clergy. His remains have since been exhumed for study and examined by the physician Luis del Campo, also the king's biographer, who measured him at 2.20 metres tall (7'3"), probably the basis for his "strength" epitaph.

title: Sancho VII of Navarre


text:
Talk:St Ives, Cambridgeshire

Untitled
I'm worried about this historical county thing. Surely this article should be helping people to understand St Ives as it is today; to tell them it's in Huntingdonshire is very misleading. It was in Huntingdonshire (the county). it is in Cambridgeshire (the county) and also in Huntingdonshire (the district).

By all means the article can mention that St Ives used to be in Huntingdonshire. But it should be perfectly clear in telling the reader that the modern town is in the modern county of Cambridgeshire. Even the article title is misleading and out of date!

Even more worrying is that someone appears to be going around changing a pile of articles on places in Huntingdonshire District to appear as if they're in the county of that name. They are not.

Is there an agreed policy on this? If so I can't agree with it but will accept a majority view. If not, can we please stop wholesale changing of articles and discuss a policy first. Chris Jefferies 10th December 2003

 * St Ives is both currently in the traditional county of Huntingdonshire and within the area administered by Huntingdonshire council (which covers virtually the same area as the County does). The article clearly states that it does not currently lie within an administrative county of that name. However, it is very likely that the next boundary review will make current Huntingdonshire district a Unitary Authority Area, so this will also save movong the article when this occurs. Since administrative counties have this propensity to change, it is far more sensible to list places by traditional County. The title is neither misleading nor out of date. St. Ives is currently in the traditional County of Huntingdonshire - it has never moved from this; it is not currently in an administrative county of this name - and this is clearly stated. In short, all information is current and correct.
 * On the question of policy: I've many times requested that an 'official' policy be discussed and created for such matters, but other people tend, on the whole, to be more interested in edit wars than sensible discussion! 80.255 00:09, 11 Dec 2003 (UTC)

The policy on county names (mentioned in the paragraph above) does now exist and was voted on. It is very clear - 'We should use the current, administrative, county. E.g. Eton is in Berkshire, not Buckinghamshire. and We should mention historic counties in articles about places and in references to places in a historic context, but only as an afternote.'

Surely then, in this article, the opening paragraph should read 'St Ives is in Cambridgeshire'. Additional details should be added in the main body of the article as an afterthough - if at all. The article should be relevant to people wanting to know about the town of St Ives, if they want to know county history they can read it from the links provided. Please restore the wording Owain.

Thanks Chris Jefferies 16:01, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * It just seems silly to me to go on about St. Ives being in Cambridgeshire and in the 'local government district' of Huntingdonshire and then contradict it in the Infobox. It's no good pretending there is one definitive unit that you can call a county, as in "St. Ives is in the county of Cambridgeshire", when information on the very same page lists three things called counties. I haven't removed any information, I have just clarified it. "St. Ives is in the county of Cambridgeshire" is clearly ambiguous at best, and disingenuous at worst. Owain 18:29, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I accept that it seems silly to you Owain, that much is clear enough. Your opinion is expressed very clearly in the policy discussion where you were outvoted. There is no point in going over that ground again here. What is not clear to me is whether you will now abide by the majority decision. That is why I am asking you yet again to please restore the wording in the St Ives article so that it complies with agreed policy. Chris Jefferies 00:27, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I'd like to publicly thank Owain for his latest change to the text, a partial revert which he's labelled a compromise. It is a step in the right direction (towards accepting the agreed convention). But, my own feelings are that it is wrong in principle to agree to a compromise between an agreed policy and some alternative position. I'm going to give myself time to think this through, but I'm not inclined to compromise over Wikipedia conventions. That would be wrong. If we compromise, what was the purpose of the discussion and the vote? Chris Jefferies 15:52, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Good point - what is the point on voting on facts? They can't be changed. The vote was on presentation, not about supressing facts. Wording to the effect of "X is traditionally in Y" is perfectly fine according to the policy. Owain 17:28, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * What the policy states is 'We should mention historic counties in articles about places and in references to places in a historic context, but only as an afternote' (my emphasis). The current article wording is fine, but it would be best to put the historic county details into the main body of the article, not in the first paragraph.

 * See Guide_to_writing_better_articles for details. According to this, the lead section should briefly define and describe the most important features of the topic. In the case of a town this would include things like the type of town (market town), size, where it's located, age, and main industries. The more detailed stuff (including historical county) should appear further down the page. If there's a section or paragraph on the town's history it would be appropriate to put it there.

 * So how about this for the opening paragraph? ... 'St Ives is a medium-sized market town in Cambridgeshire, England. It lies on the River Great Ouse and has a history of about 1000 years.'

 * The second paragraph already deals with various aspects of the town's history, so this would be an appropriate place to mention that it was in Huntingdonshire prior to the local government changes.

 * Would that be OK with you Owain? Chris Jefferies 21:26, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on St Ives, Cambridgeshire. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110721232441/http://saint-ives.info/history/Floods/ to http://saint-ives.info/history/Floods/

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

Cheers. —cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 22:35, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 one external links on St Ives, Cambridgeshire. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added tag to http://neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk/dissemination/LeadTableView.do?a=7&b=11128855&c=PE27+6SB&d=16&e=61&g=6406250&i=1001x1003x1032x1004&m=0&r=0&s=1403712447580&enc=1&dsFamilyId=2491/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110609185118/http://www.cambridgeshire.gov.uk/NR/rdonlyres/346A6FC8-8095-471B-88CB-41DCAB168459/0/GBnewsletterOct08hires.pdf to http://www.cambridgeshire.gov.uk/NR/rdonlyres/346A6FC8-8095-471B-88CB-41DCAB168459/0/GBnewsletterOct08hires.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110609185202/http://www.cambridgeshire.gov.uk/NR/rdonlyres/3D59D72B-2A13-49A7-869E-62DB5CDC0629/0/CGBGreenUpdate.pdf to http://www.cambridgeshire.gov.uk/NR/rdonlyres/3D59D72B-2A13-49A7-869E-62DB5CDC0629/0/CGBGreenUpdate.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110605141735/http://www.highways.gov.uk/roads/documents/A14_Ellington_to_Fen_Ditton_Public_Exhibition_Leaflet.pdf to http://www.highways.gov.uk/roads/documents/A14_Ellington_to_Fen_Ditton_Public_Exhibition_Leaflet.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 09:46, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

Move Doomsday Book details to the Doomsday Book page
Is it really necessary to have detailed discussion of the origin and methods of the Doomsday Book on ever page mentioned in the Doomsday book? Perhaps the contents that are not specific to St Ives can be moved to the Doomsday Book page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.225.76.140 (talk) 19:59, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

"Tawdry" etymology
There is an explanation here, here and here, that it's derived from "St. Audrey's lace, a necktie or ribbon sold at the annual fair at Ely on Oct. 17 commemorating St. Audrey (queen of Northumbria, died 679)." There is no mention of St Ives. But I think Audrey would need to be mentioned anyway. "St Audrey's Lane" looks quite similar to "St Audrey's lace," which might account for some confusion here. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:38, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

title: Talk:St Ives, Cambridgeshire


text:
Birmingham Canal Navigations

Birmingham Canal Navigations (BCN) is a network of canals connecting Birmingham, Wolverhampton, and the eastern part of the Black Country. The BCN is connected to the rest of the English canal system at several junctions. It was owned and operated by the Birmingham Canal Navigation Company from 1767 to 1948.

At its working peak, the BCN contained about 160 miles (257 km) of canals; today just over 100 miles (160 km) are navigable, and the majority of traffic is from tourist and residential narrowboats.

History

The earliest mention of the Birmingham Canal Navigation appears in Aris's Birmingham Gazette on 11 April 1768. Here it was reported that on 25 March 1768, the first general assembly of the Company of Proprietors of the Birmingham Canal Navigation was held at the Swann Inn, Birmingham, to raise funds to submit for an act of Parliament. The first canal to be built in the area was the Birmingham Canal, authorized by the Birmingham Canal Navigation Act 1768 and built from 1768 to 1772 under the supervision of James Brindley from the, then, edge of Birmingham, with termini at Newhall Wharf (since built over) and Paradise Wharf (also known as Old Wharf) near to Gas Street Basin to meet the Staffordshire and Worcestershire Canal at Aldersley (north of Wolverhampton). It opened for business on 14 September 1772.

In 1769 an act was obtained to construct the canal through a detached portion of the county of Shropshire, near Oldbury, and it included powers to make reservoirs anywhere within 3 miles between Smethwick and Oldbury.

The Birmingham and Fazeley Canal, from Birmingham to Tamworth, followed in 1784 with the Birmingham Canal Company merging with the Birmingham and Fazeley Canal Company immediately, to form what was originally called the Birmingham and Birmingham and Fazeley Canal Company. This cumbersome name was short-lived, and the combined company became incorporated as the Birmingham Canal Navigations Company from 1794, as the network was expanded. The Birmingham Canal Navigation Act 1794 (34 Geo. 3. c. 87) authorized the extension from Broadwater to Walsall, and the short cut between Bloomfield and Deepfield, where the Coseley Tunnel was constructed, which with a length of 1.75 mi, avoided a detour around Tipton Hill of 4 mi.

Between 1825 and 1829 the canal was improved by the cutting down by 16 ft of the summit at Smethwick, which occupied two and a half years, and cost £560,000, and by cutting off bends and erecting steam engines which reduced the cost of haulage by 4d. per ton.

Between 1825 and 1837 the navigation was improved between Spon Lane, Deepfield and Wolverhampton, saving a distance of six miles, which reduced the toll on coal by 9d per ton. At the same time the Titford Canal was constructed at a cost upwards of £200,000.

The junction with the Warwick and Birmingham Canal was made under powers of an act of 1815 (55 Geo. 3. c. xl). These improvements were all consolidated under the (5 & 6 Will. 4. c. xxxiv).

From 1839 to 1843 the Tame Valley Canal was built, along with the Bentley, Rushall and Walsall Junction Canals opening up the Cannock Chase and Wyrley coal districts to the town of Birmingham at a cost upwards of £570,000.

The Wyrley and Essington Canal was incorporated by the Birmingham Canal Navigation Act 1792 which authorized the line from Wolverhampton to Sneyd Junction and Walsall. The extension to Huddlesford and the Lord Hay and Daw End branches were constructed under the Birmingham Canal Navigation Act 1794 (34 Geo. 3. c. 87). This amalgamated with the Birmingham Canal Navigations in 1840.

In 1855, the Cannock Extension Canal and the Wyrley Bank Branch were added to the network at a cost upwards of £100,000.

From 1855 to 1858 the Netherton Tunnel and other improvements cost the company upwards of £350,000.

In 1776, the Dudley Canal was authorized from Parkhead to the junction with the Stourbridge Canal. The Parkhead to Tipton Green section including Dudley Tunnel was made under the Dudley Canal Act 1785, and the extension from Parkhead to Selly Oak Junction with the Oxford and Birmingham Canal, including the Gorsty Hill and Lappal Tunnels under the Selly Oak Canal Act 1793. This canal became part of the Birmingham Canal Navigations in 1846.

It was re-established as a body corporate on 17 June 1835. It was taken over by the London and Birmingham Railway in 1846, and subsequently owned by the London and North Western Railway, then the London, Midland and Scottish Railway until 1 January 1948 when was it passed to the British Transport Commission.

Levels
The BCN is built on three main levels, each with its own reservoir. These levels are linked by locks at various places on the network.
 * 453 ft OD, the Birmingham Level;
 * 473 ft OD, the Wolverhampton Level;
 * 408 ft OD, the Walsall Level

There are also stretches on their own levels.
 * The Titford Canal and its branches were built at 511 ft OD, linked to the Titford Reservoir (Titford Pool). A feeder supplies water to the Edgbaston Reservoir.
 * A short section of the BCN Old Main Line, at Smethwick Summit, was built at 491 ft OD. Pumps at either end were built to pump water used by the locks back to the summit – one at Spon Lane locks, and one at Smethwick locks: the Smethwick Engine. When the summit became too busy John Smeaton designed a scheme where it was lowered by 18 ft to the Wolverhampton level, eliminating six locks and providing a parallel set of locks at Smethwick which improved traffic throughput. It also linked to the general Wolverhampton Level supply of water.

The canals of the BCN

 * BCN Main Line (originally known as the Birmingham Canal) from Aldersley Junction (north of Wolverhampton) to Gas Street Basin (at the Worcester Bar in central Birmingham), using some of the Old Main Line canal.
 * Old Main Line, originally terminating in Birmingham at two wharfs now built upon: Old Wharf (adjacent to Gas Street Basin) and Newhall Wharf.
 * New Main Line, a revised route for the Birmingham Canal, double towpathed, largely progressing in straight lines using cuttings and tunnels.
 * Bentley Canal (abandoned)
 * Birmingham and Fazeley Canal (from Old Turn Junction (by the National Indoor Arena), eastwards to the Coventry Canal at Fazeley Junction, and thence north-west as far as bridge 78.)
 * Digbeth Branch Canal
 * Bradley Locks Branch
 * Dudley Canal
 * Bumble Hole Branch Canal (part of a bypassed loop)
 * Dudley Canal Line No 1 (see also Dudley Tunnel)
 * Dudley Canal Line No 2 (about half dewatered; see also Lapal Tunnel; Netherton Reservoir)
 * The Two Locks Line (infilled)
 * The Engine Arm
 * Gower Branch Canal - linking the Birmingham and Wolverhampton levels, via three locks, at Tividale.
 * Icknield Port Loop (part of the Old Main Line cut off by Telford's improvements, now serving as a feeder from Edgbaston Reservoir)
 * Netherton Tunnel Branch Canal
 * Rushall Canal
 * Soho Loop (an old circuitous route cut off by Telford's improvements, originally with a branch, the Soho Branch to Soho Wharf, serving the Soho Manufactory)
 * Spon Lane Locks Branch (between Bromford Junction and Spon Lane Junction on the Old Main Line - 3 locks, part of the original Wednesbury Canal, not to be confused with Spon Lane Branch, another name for Tat Bank Branch on the Titford Canal)
 * Titford Canal
 * Tame Valley Canal (a later canal cutting off some northern meanders)
 * Walsall Canal (a more modern canal connecting the main line with Walsall and forming a big northern loop with the Wyrley and Essington Canal)
 * Anson Branch
 * Walsall Branch Canal (Town Branch)
 * Wednesbury Oak Loop (part of the original Old Main Line, now incomplete)
 * Wednesbury Old Canal - part of the original Wednesbury Canal
 * Ridgacre Branch
 * Wyrley and Essington Canal (bought by the Birmingham Canal Navigations in 1840)
 * Anglesey Branch
 * Birchills Branch
 * Cannock Extension Canal
 * Daw End Branch Canal
 * Lord Hay's Branch (Lords Hayes Branch) (abandoned)

Linking canals

 * Coventry Canal (at Fazeley Junction)
 * Grand Union Canal (connects at Salford Junction and also Bordesley Junction (originally Warwick Bar)
 * Staffordshire and Worcestershire Canal (at Aldersley Junction)
 * Stourbridge Canal
 * Worcester and Birmingham Canal (connects the BCN Main Line at the Worcester Bar, (alongside Gas Street Basin), southwards, to the River Severn at Worcester)

Associated features

 * Chasewater (feeds Wyrley and Essington Canal)
 * Edgbaston Reservoir, originally called Rotton Park Reservoir, itself fed from Titford Reservoir (feeds Birmingham Old and New Line)

Engineers

 * James Brindley
 * Thomas Dadford
 * John Smeaton
 * Thomas Telford
 * James Walker

Society
The BCN Society is a registered charity (number 1091760) formed in 1968, which exists to conserve, improve and encourage a wide range of interests in the BCN. It publishes a quarterly journal. Boundary Post. From 1983, it erected signposts at most of the canal junctions on the BCN.

title: Birmingham Canal Navigations