text:
History of cryptography

Cryptography, the use of codes and ciphers to protect secrets, began thousands of years ago. Until recent decades, it has been the story of what might be called classical cryptography — that is, of methods of encryption that use pen and paper, or perhaps simple mechanical aids. In the early 20th century, the invention of complex mechanical and electromechanical machines, such as the Enigma rotor machine, provided more sophisticated and efficient means of encryption; and the subsequent introduction of electronics and computing has allowed elaborate schemes of still greater complexity, most of which are entirely unsuited to pen and paper.

The development of cryptography has been paralleled by the development of cryptanalysis — the "breaking" of codes and ciphers. The discovery and application, early on, of frequency analysis to the reading of encrypted communications has, on occasion, altered the course of history. Thus the Zimmermann Telegram triggered the United States' entry into World War I; and Allies reading of Nazi Germany's ciphers shortened World War II, in some evaluations by as much as two years.

Until the 1960s, secure cryptography was largely the preserve of governments. Two events have since brought it squarely into the public domain: the creation of a public encryption standard (DES), and the invention of public-key cryptography.

Antiquity
The earliest known use of cryptography is found in non-standard hieroglyphs carved into the wall of a tomb from the Old Kingdom of Egypt circa 1900 BC. These are not thought to be serious attempts at secret communications, however, but rather to have been attempts at mystery, intrigue, or even amusement for literate onlookers.

Some clay tablets from Mesopotamia somewhat later are clearly meant to protect information—one dated near 1500 BC was found to encrypt a craftsman's recipe for pottery glaze, presumably commercially valuable. Furthermore, Hebrew scholars made use of simple monoalphabetic substitution ciphers (such as the Atbash cipher) beginning perhaps around 600 to 500 BC.

In India around 400 BC to 200 AD, Mlecchita vikalpa or "the art of understanding writing in cypher, and the writing of words in a peculiar way" was documented in the Kama Sutra for the purpose of communication between lovers. This was also likely a simple substitution cipher. Parts of the Egyptian demotic Greek Magical Papyri were written in a cypher script.

The ancient Greeks are said to have known of ciphers. The scytale transposition cipher was used by the Spartan military, but it is not definitively known whether the scytale was for encryption, authentication, or avoiding bad omens in speech. Herodotus tells us of secret messages physically concealed beneath wax on wooden tablets or as a tattoo on a slave's head concealed by regrown hair, although these are not properly examples of cryptography per se as the message, once known, is directly readable; this is known as steganography. Another Greek method was developed by Polybius (now called the "Polybius Square"). The Romans knew something of cryptography (e.g., the Caesar cipher and its variations).

Medieval cryptography

David Kahn notes in The Codebreakers that modern cryptology originated among the Arabs, the first people to systematically document cryptanalytic methods. Al-Khalil (717–786) wrote the Book of Cryptographic Messages, which contains the first use of permutations and combinations to list all possible Arabic words with and without vowels.

The invention of the frequency analysis technique for breaking monoalphabetic substitution ciphers, by Al-Kindi, an Arab mathematician, sometime around AD 800, proved to be the single most significant cryptanalytic advance until World War II. Al-Kindi wrote a book on cryptography entitled Risalah fi Istikhraj al-Mu'amma (Manuscript for the Deciphering Cryptographic Messages), in which he described the first cryptanalytic techniques, including some for polyalphabetic ciphers, cipher classification, Arabic phonetics and syntax, and most importantly, gave the first descriptions on frequency analysis. He also covered methods of encipherments, cryptanalysis of certain encipherments, and statistical analysis of letters and letter combinations in Arabic. An important contribution of Ibn Adlan (1187–1268) was on sample size for use of frequency analysis.

In early medieval England between the years 800–1100, substitution ciphers were frequently used by scribes as a playful and clever way to encipher notes, solutions to riddles, and colophons. The ciphers tend to be fairly straightforward, but sometimes they deviate from an ordinary pattern, adding to their complexity, and possibly also to their sophistication. This period saw vital and significant cryptographic experimentation in the West.

Ahmad al-Qalqashandi (AD 1355–1418) wrote the Subh al-a 'sha, a 14-volume encyclopedia which included a section on cryptology. This information was attributed to Ibn al-Durayhim who lived from AD 1312 to 1361, but whose writings on cryptography have been lost. The list of ciphers in this work included both substitution and transposition, and for the first time, a cipher with multiple substitutions for each plaintext letter (later called homophonic substitution). Also traced to Ibn al-Durayhim is an exposition on and a worked example of cryptanalysis, including the use of tables of letter frequencies and sets of letters which cannot occur together in one word.

The earliest example of the homophonic substitution cipher is the one used by Duke of Mantua in the early 1400s. Homophonic cipher replaces each letter with multiple symbols depending on the letter frequency. The cipher is ahead of the time because it combines monoalphabetic and polyalphabetic features.

Essentially all ciphers remained vulnerable to the cryptanalytic technique of frequency analysis until the development of the polyalphabetic cipher, and many remained so thereafter. The polyalphabetic cipher was most clearly explained by Leon Battista Alberti around AD 1467, for which he was called the "father of Western cryptology". Johannes Trithemius, in his work Poligraphia, invented the tabula recta, a critical component of the Vigenère cipher. Trithemius also wrote the Steganographia. Giovan Battista Bellaso in 1553 first described the cipher that would become known in the 19th century as the Vigenère cipher, misattributed to Blaise de Vigenère. In Europe, cryptography became (secretly) more important as a consequence of political competition and religious revolution. For instance, in Europe during and after the Renaissance, citizens of the various Italian states—the Papal States and the Roman Catholic Church included—were responsible for rapid proliferation of cryptographic techniques, few of which reflect understanding (or even knowledge) of Alberti's polyalphabetic advance. "Advanced ciphers", even after Alberti, were not as advanced as their inventors/developers/users claimed (and probably even they themselves believed). They were frequently broken. This over-optimism may be inherent in cryptography, for it was then – and remains today – difficult in principle to know how vulnerable one's own system is. In the absence of knowledge, guesses and hopes are predictably common.

Cryptography, cryptanalysis, and secret-agent/courier betrayal featured in the Babington plot during the reign of Queen Elizabeth I which led to the execution of Mary, Queen of Scots. Robert Hooke suggested in the chapter Of Dr. Dee's Book of Spirits, that John Dee made use of Trithemian steganography, to conceal his communication with Queen Elizabeth I.

The chief cryptographer of King Louis XIV of France was Antoine Rossignol; he and his family created what is known as the Great Cipher because it remained unsolved from its initial use until 1890, when French military cryptanalyst, Étienne Bazeries solved it. An encrypted message from the time of the Man in the Iron Mask (decrypted just prior to 1900 by Étienne Bazeries) has shed some, regrettably non-definitive, light on the identity of that real, if legendary and unfortunate, prisoner.

Outside of Europe, after the Mongols brought about the end of the Islamic Golden Age, cryptography remained comparatively undeveloped. Cryptography in Japan seems not to have been used until about 1510, and advanced techniques were not known until after the opening of the country to the West beginning in the 1860s.

Cryptography from 1800 to World War I
Although cryptography has a long and complex history, it wasn't until the 19th century that it developed anything more than ad hoc approaches to either encryption or cryptanalysis (the science of finding weaknesses in crypto systems). Examples of the latter include Charles Babbage's Crimean War era work on mathematical cryptanalysis of polyalphabetic ciphers, redeveloped and published somewhat later by the Prussian Friedrich Kasiski. Understanding of cryptography at this time typically consisted of hard-won rules of thumb; see, for example, Auguste Kerckhoffs' cryptographic writings in the latter 19th century. Edgar Allan Poe used systematic methods to solve ciphers in the 1840s. In particular he placed a notice of his abilities in the Philadelphia paper Alexander's Weekly (Express) Messenger, inviting submissions of ciphers, most of which he proceeded to solve. His success created a public stir for some months. He later wrote an essay on methods of cryptography which proved useful as an introduction for novice British cryptanalysts attempting to break German codes and ciphers during World War I, and a famous story, The Gold-Bug, in which cryptanalysis was a prominent element.

Cryptography, and its misuse, were involved in the execution of Mata Hari and in Dreyfus' conviction and imprisonment, both in the early 20th century. Cryptographers were also involved in exposing the machinations which had led to the Dreyfus affair; Mata Hari, in contrast, was shot.

In World War I the Admiralty's Room 40 broke German naval codes and played an important role in several naval engagements during the war, notably in detecting major German sorties into the North Sea that led to the battles of Dogger Bank and Jutland as the British fleet was sent out to intercept them. However, its most important contribution was probably in decrypting the Zimmermann Telegram, a cable from the German Foreign Office sent via Washington to its ambassador Heinrich von Eckardt in Mexico which played a major part in bringing the United States into the war.

In 1917, Gilbert Vernam proposed a teleprinter cipher in which a previously prepared key, kept on paper tape, is combined character by character with the plaintext message to produce the cyphertext. This led to the development of electromechanical devices as cipher machines, and to the only unbreakable cipher, the one time pad.

During the 1920s, Polish naval-officers assisted the Japanese military with code and cipher development.

Mathematical methods proliferated in the period prior to World War II (notably in William F. Friedman's application of statistical techniques to cryptanalysis and cipher development and in Marian Rejewski's initial break into the German Army's version of the Enigma system in 1932).

World War II cryptography
By World War II, mechanical and electromechanical cipher machines were in wide use, although—where such machines were impractical—code books and manual systems continued in use. Great advances were made in both cipher design and cryptanalysis, all in secrecy. Information about this period has begun to be declassified as the official British 50-year secrecy period has come to an end, as US archives have slowly opened, and as assorted memoirs and articles have appeared.

Germany
The Germans made heavy use, in several variants, of an electromechanical rotor machine known as Enigma. Mathematician Marian Rejewski, at Poland's Cipher Bureau, in December 1932 deduced the detailed structure of the German Army Enigma, using mathematics and limited documentation supplied by Captain Gustave Bertrand of French military intelligence acquired from a German clerk. This was the greatest breakthrough in cryptanalysis in a thousand years and more, according to historian David Kahn. Rejewski and his mathematical Cipher Bureau colleagues, Jerzy Różycki and Henryk Zygalski, continued reading Enigma and keeping pace with the evolution of the German Army machine's components and encipherment procedures for some time. As the Poles' resources became strained by the changes being introduced by the Germans, and as war loomed, the Cipher Bureau, on the Polish General Staff's instructions, on 25 July 1939, at Warsaw, initiated French and British intelligence representatives into the secrets of Enigma decryption.

Soon after the invasion of Poland by Germany on 1 September 1939, key Cipher Bureau personnel were evacuated southeastward; on 17 September, as the Soviet Union attacked Poland from the East, they crossed into Romania. From there they reached Paris, France; at PC Bruno, near Paris, they continued working toward breaking Enigma, collaborating with British cryptologists at Bletchley Park as the British got up to speed on their work breaking Enigma. In due course, the British cryptographers – whose ranks included many chess masters and mathematics dons such as Gordon Welchman, Max Newman, and Alan Turing (the conceptual founder of modern computing) – made substantial breakthroughs in the scale and technology of Enigma decryption.

German code breaking in World War II also had some success, most importantly by breaking the Naval Cipher No. 3. This enabled them to track and sink Atlantic convoys. It was only Ultra intelligence that finally persuaded the admiralty to change their codes in June 1943. This is surprising given the success of the British Room 40 code breakers in the previous world war.

At the end of the War, on 19 April 1945, Britain's highest level civilian and military officials were told that they could never reveal that the German Enigma cipher had been broken because it would give the defeated enemy the chance to say they "were not well and fairly beaten".

The German military also deployed several teleprinter stream ciphers. Bletchley Park called them the Fish ciphers; Max Newman and colleagues designed and deployed the Heath Robinson, and then the world's first programmable digital electronic computer, the Colossus, to help with their cryptanalysis. The German Foreign Office began to use the one-time pad in 1919; some of this traffic was read in World War II partly as the result of recovery of some key material in South America that was discarded without sufficient care by a German courier.

The Schlüsselgerät 41 was developed late in the war as a more secure replacement for Enigma, but only saw limited use.

Japan
A US Army group, the SIS, managed to break the highest security Japanese diplomatic cipher system (an electromechanical stepping switch machine called Purple by the Americans) in 1940, before the attack on Pearl Harbour. The locally developed Purple machine replaced the earlier "Red" machine used by the Japanese Foreign Ministry, and a related machine, the M-1, used by Naval attachés which was broken by the U.S. Navy's Agnes Driscoll. All the Japanese machine ciphers were broken, to one degree or another, by the Allies.

The Japanese Navy and Army largely used code book systems, later with a separate numerical additive. US Navy cryptographers (with cooperation from British and Dutch cryptographers after 1940) broke into several Japanese Navy crypto systems. The break into one of them, JN-25, famously led to the US victory in the Battle of Midway; and to the publication of that fact in the Chicago Tribune shortly after the battle, though the Japanese seem not to have noticed for they kept using the JN-25 system.

Allies
The Americans referred to the intelligence resulting from cryptanalysis, perhaps especially that from the Purple machine, as 'Magic'. The British eventually settled on 'Ultra' for intelligence resulting from cryptanalysis, particularly that from message traffic protected by the various Enigmas. An earlier British term for Ultra had been 'Boniface' in an attempt to suggest, if betrayed, that it might have an individual agent as a source.

Allied cipher machines used in World War II included the British TypeX and the American SIGABA; both were electromechanical rotor designs similar in spirit to the Enigma, albeit with major improvements. Neither is known to have been broken by anyone during the War. The Poles used the Lacida machine, but its security was found to be less than intended (by Polish Army cryptographers in the UK), and its use was discontinued. US troops in the field used the M-209 and the still less secure M-94 family machines. British SOE agents initially used 'poem ciphers' (memorized poems were the encryption/decryption keys), but later in the War, they began to switch to one-time pads.

The VIC cipher (used at least until 1957 in connection with Rudolf Abel's NY spy ring) was a very complex hand cipher, and is claimed to be the most complicated known to have been used by the Soviets, according to David Kahn in Kahn on Codes. For the decrypting of Soviet ciphers (particularly when one-time pads were reused), see Venona project.

Role of women
The UK and US employed large numbers of women in their code-breaking operation, with close to 7,000 reporting to Bletchley Park and 11,000 to the separate US Army and Navy operations, around Washington, DC. By tradition in Japan and Nazi doctrine in Germany, women were excluded from war work, at least until late in the war. Even after encryption systems were broken, large amounts of work were needed to respond to changes made, recover daily key settings for multiple networks, and intercept, process, translate, prioritize and analyze the huge volume of enemy messages generated in a global conflict. A few women, including Elizabeth Friedman and Agnes Meyer Driscoll, had been major contributors to US code-breaking in the 1930s and the Navy and Army began actively recruiting top graduates of women's colleges shortly before the attack on Pearl Harbor. Liza Mundy argues that this disparity in utilizing the talents of women between the Allies and Axis made a strategic difference in the war.

Modern cryptography
Encryption in modern times is achieved by using algorithms that have a key to encrypt and decrypt information. These keys convert the messages and data into "digital gibberish" through encryption and then return them to the original form through decryption. In general, the longer the key is, the more difficult it is to crack the code. This holds true because deciphering an encrypted message by brute force would require the attacker to try every possible key. To put this in context, each binary unit of information, or bit, has a value of 0 or 1. An 8-bit key would then have 256 or 2^8 possible keys. A 56-bit key would have 2^56, or 72 quadrillion, possible keys to try and decipher the message. With modern technology, cyphers using keys with these lengths are becoming easier to decipher. DES, an early US Government approved cypher, has an effective key length of 56 bits, and test messages using that cypher have been broken by brute force key search. However, as technology advances, so does the quality of encryption. Since World War II, one of the most notable advances in the study of cryptography is the introduction of the asymmetric key cyphers (sometimes termed public-key cyphers). These are algorithms which use two mathematically related keys for encryption of the same message. Some of these algorithms permit publication of one of the keys, due to it being extremely difficult to determine one key simply from knowledge of the other.

Beginning around 1990, the use of the Internet for commercial purposes and the introduction of commercial transactions over the Internet called for a widespread standard for encryption. Before the introduction of the Advanced Encryption Standard (AES), information sent over the Internet, such as financial data, was encrypted if at all, most commonly using the Data Encryption Standard (DES). This had been approved by NBS (a US Government agency) for its security, after public call for, and a competition among, candidates for such a cypher algorithm. DES was approved for a short period, but saw extended use due to complex wrangles over the use by the public of high quality encryption. DES was finally replaced by the AES after another public competition organized by the NBS successor agency, NIST. Around the late 1990s to early 2000s, the use of public-key algorithms became a more common approach for encryption, and soon a hybrid of the two schemes became the most accepted way for e-commerce operations to proceed. Additionally, the creation of a new protocol known as the Secure Socket Layer, or SSL, led the way for online transactions to take place. Transactions ranging from purchasing goods to online bill pay and banking used SSL. Furthermore, as wireless Internet connections became more common among households, the need for encryption grew, as a level of security was needed in these everyday situations.

Claude Shannon
Claude E. Shannon is considered by many to be the father of mathematical cryptography. Shannon worked for several years at Bell Labs, and during his time there, he produced an article entitled "A mathematical theory of cryptography". This article was written in 1945 and eventually was published in the Bell System Technical Journal in 1949. It is commonly accepted that this paper was the starting point for development of modern cryptography. Shannon was inspired during the war to address "[t]he problems of cryptography [because] secrecy systems furnish an interesting application of communication theory". Shannon identified the two main goals of cryptography: secrecy and authenticity. His focus was on exploring secrecy and thirty-five years later, G.J. Simmons would address the issue of authenticity. Shannon wrote a further article entitled "A mathematical theory of communication" which highlights one of the most significant aspects of his work: cryptography's transition from art to science.

In his works, Shannon described the two basic types of systems for secrecy. The first are those designed with the intent to protect against hackers and attackers who have infinite resources with which to decode a message (theoretical secrecy, now unconditional security), and the second are those designed to protect against hackers and attacks with finite resources with which to decode a message (practical secrecy, now computational security). Most of Shannon's work focused around theoretical secrecy; here, Shannon introduced a definition for the "unbreakability" of a cipher. If a cipher was determined "unbreakable", it was considered to have "perfect secrecy". In proving "perfect secrecy", Shannon determined that this could only be obtained with a secret key whose length given in binary digits was greater than or equal to the number of bits contained in the information being encrypted. Furthermore, Shannon developed the "unicity distance", defined as the "amount of plaintext that… determines the secret key."

Shannon's work influenced further cryptography research in the 1970s, as the public-key cryptography developers, M. E. Hellman and W. Diffie cited Shannon's research as a major influence. His work also impacted modern designs of secret-key ciphers. At the end of Shannon's work with cryptography, progress slowed until Hellman and Diffie introduced their paper involving "public-key cryptography".

An encryption standard
The mid-1970s saw two major public (i.e., non-secret) advances. First was the publication of the draft Data Encryption Standard in the U.S. Federal Register on 17 March 1975. The proposed DES cipher was submitted by a research group at IBM, at the invitation of the National Bureau of Standards (now NIST), in an effort to develop secure electronic communication facilities for businesses such as banks and other large financial organizations. After advice and modification by the NSA, acting behind the scenes, it was adopted and published as a Federal Information Processing Standard Publication in 1977 (currently at FIPS 46-3). DES was the first publicly accessible cipher to be 'blessed' by a national agency such as the NSA. The release of its specification by NBS stimulated an explosion of public and academic interest in cryptography.

The aging DES was officially replaced by the Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) in 2001 when NIST announced FIPS 197. After an open competition, NIST selected Rijndael, submitted by two Belgian cryptographers, to be the AES. DES, and more secure variants of it (such as Triple DES), are still used today, having been incorporated into many national and organizational standards. However, its 56-bit key-size has been shown to be insufficient to guard against brute force attacks (one such attack, undertaken by the cyber civil-rights group Electronic Frontier Foundation in 1997, succeeded in 56 hours. ) As a result, use of straight DES encryption is now without doubt insecure for use in new cryptosystem designs, and messages protected by older cryptosystems using DES, and indeed all messages sent since 1976 using DES, are also at risk. Regardless of DES' inherent quality, the DES key size (56-bits) was thought to be too small by some even in 1976, perhaps most publicly by Whitfield Diffie. There was suspicion that government organizations even then had sufficient computing power to break DES messages; clearly others have achieved this capability.

Public key
The second development, in 1976, was perhaps even more important, for it fundamentally changed the way cryptosystems might work. This was the publication of the paper New Directions in Cryptography by Whitfield Diffie and Martin Hellman. It introduced a radically new method of distributing cryptographic keys, which went far toward solving one of the fundamental problems of cryptography, key distribution, and has become known as Diffie–Hellman key exchange. The article also stimulated the almost immediate public development of a new class of enciphering algorithms, the asymmetric key algorithms.

Prior to that time, all useful modern encryption algorithms had been symmetric key algorithms, in which the same cryptographic key is used with the underlying algorithm by both the sender and the recipient, who must both keep it secret. All of the electromechanical machines used in World War II were of this logical class, as were the Caesar and Atbash ciphers and essentially all cipher systems throughout history. The 'key' for a code is, of course, the codebook, which must likewise be distributed and kept secret, and so shares most of the same problems in practice.

Of necessity, the key in every such system had to be exchanged between the communicating parties in some secure way prior to any use of the system (the term usually used is 'via a secure channel') such as a trustworthy courier with a briefcase handcuffed to a wrist, or face-to-face contact, or a loyal carrier pigeon. This requirement is never trivial and very rapidly becomes unmanageable as the number of participants increases, or when secure channels aren't available for key exchange, or when, as is sensible cryptographic practice, keys are frequently changed. In particular, if messages are meant to be secure from other users, a separate key is required for each possible pair of users. A system of this kind is known as a secret key, or symmetric key cryptosystem. D-H key exchange (and succeeding improvements and variants) made operation of these systems much easier, and more secure, than had ever been possible before in all of history.

In contrast, asymmetric key encryption uses a pair of mathematically related keys, each of which decrypts the encryption performed using the other. Some, but not all, of these algorithms have the additional property that one of the paired keys cannot be deduced from the other by any known method other than trial and error. An algorithm of this kind is known as a public key or asymmetric key system. Using such an algorithm, only one key pair is needed per user. By designating one key of the pair as private (always secret), and the other as public (often widely available), no secure channel is needed for key exchange. So long as the private key stays secret, the public key can be widely known for a very long time without compromising security, making it safe to reuse the same key pair indefinitely.

For two users of an asymmetric key algorithm to communicate securely over an insecure channel, each user will need to know their own public and private keys as well as the other user's public key. Take this basic scenario: Alice and Bob each have a pair of keys they've been using for years with many other users. At the start of their message, they exchange public keys, unencrypted over an insecure line. Alice then encrypts a message using her private key, and then re-encrypts that result using Bob's public key. The double-encrypted message is then sent as digital data over a wire from Alice to Bob. Bob receives the bit stream and decrypts it using his own private key, and then decrypts that bit stream using Alice's public key. If the final result is recognizable as a message, Bob can be confident that the message actually came from someone who knows Alice's private key (presumably actually her if she's been careful with her private key), and that anyone eavesdropping on the channel will need Bob's private key in order to understand the message.

Asymmetric algorithms rely for their effectiveness on a class of problems in mathematics called one-way functions, which require relatively little computational power to execute, but vast amounts of power to reverse, if reversal is possible at all. A classic example of a one-way function is multiplication of very large prime numbers. It's fairly quick to multiply two large primes, but very difficult to find the factors of the product of two large primes. Because of the mathematics of one-way functions, most possible keys are bad choices as cryptographic keys; only a small fraction of the possible keys of a given length are suitable, and so asymmetric algorithms require very long keys to reach the same level of security provided by relatively shorter symmetric keys. The need to both generate the key pairs, and perform the encryption/decryption operations make asymmetric algorithms computationally expensive, compared to most symmetric algorithms. Since symmetric algorithms can often use any sequence of (random, or at least unpredictable) bits as a key, a disposable session key can be quickly generated for short-term use. Consequently, it is common practice to use a long asymmetric key to exchange a disposable, much shorter (but just as strong) symmetric key. The slower asymmetric algorithm securely sends a symmetric session key, and the faster symmetric algorithm takes over for the remainder of the message.

Asymmetric key cryptography, Diffie–Hellman key exchange, and the best known of the public key / private key algorithms (i.e., what is usually called the RSA algorithm), all seem to have been independently developed at a UK intelligence agency before the public announcement by Diffie and Hellman in 1976. GCHQ has released documents claiming they had developed public key cryptography before the publication of Diffie and Hellman's paper. Various classified papers were written at GCHQ during the 1960s and 1970s which eventually led to schemes essentially identical to RSA encryption and to Diffie–Hellman key exchange in 1973 and 1974. Some of these have now been published, and the inventors (James H. Ellis, Clifford Cocks, and Malcolm Williamson) have made public (some of) their work.

Hashing
Hashing is a common technique used in cryptography to encode information quickly using typical algorithms. Generally, an algorithm is applied to a string of text, and the resulting string becomes the "hash value". This creates a "digital fingerprint" of the message, as the specific hash value is used to identify a specific message. The output from the algorithm is also referred to as a "message digest" or a "check sum". Hashing is good for determining if information has been changed in transmission. If the hash value is different upon reception than upon sending, there is evidence the message has been altered. Once the algorithm has been applied to the data to be hashed, the hash function produces a fixed-length output. Essentially, anything passed through the hash function should resolve to the same length output as anything else passed through the same hash function. It is important to note that hashing is not the same as encrypting. Hashing is a one-way operation that is used to transform data into the compressed message digest. Additionally, the integrity of the message can be measured with hashing. Conversely, encryption is a two-way operation that is used to transform plaintext into cipher-text and then vice versa. In encryption, the confidentiality of a message is guaranteed.

Hash functions can be used to verify digital signatures, so that when signing documents via the Internet, the signature is applied to one particular individual. Much like a hand-written signature, these signatures are verified by assigning their exact hash code to a person. Furthermore, hashing is applied to passwords for computer systems. Hashing for passwords began with the UNIX operating system. A user on the system would first create a password. That password would be hashed, using an algorithm or key, and then stored in a password file. This is still prominent today, as web applications that require passwords will often hash user's passwords and store them in a database.

Cryptography politics
The public developments of the 1970s broke the near monopoly on high quality cryptography held by government organizations (see S Levy's Crypto for a journalistic account of some of the policy controversy of the time in the US). For the first time ever, those outside government organizations had access to cryptography not readily breakable by anyone (including governments). Considerable controversy, and conflict, both public and private, began more or less immediately, sometimes called the crypto wars. They have not yet subsided. In many countries, for example, export of cryptography is subject to restrictions. Until 1996 export from the U.S. of cryptography using keys longer than 40 bits (too small to be very secure against a knowledgeable attacker) was sharply limited. As recently as 2004, former FBI Director Louis Freeh, testifying before the 9/11 Commission, called for new laws against public use of encryption.

One of the most significant people favoring strong encryption for public use was Phil Zimmermann. He wrote and then in 1991 released PGP (Pretty Good Privacy), a very high quality crypto system. He distributed a freeware version of PGP when he felt threatened by legislation then under consideration by the US Government that would require backdoors to be included in all cryptographic products developed within the US. His system was released worldwide shortly after he released it in the US, and that began a long criminal investigation of him by the US Government Justice Department for the alleged violation of export restrictions. The Justice Department eventually dropped its case against Zimmermann, and the freeware distribution of PGP has continued around the world. PGP even eventually became an open Internet standard (RFC 2440 or OpenPGP).

Modern cryptanalysis
While modern ciphers like AES and the higher quality asymmetric ciphers are widely considered unbreakable, poor designs and implementations are still sometimes adopted and there have been important cryptanalytic breaks of deployed crypto systems in recent years. Notable examples of broken crypto designs include the first Wi-Fi encryption scheme WEP, the Content Scrambling System used for encrypting and controlling DVD use, the A5/1 and A5/2 ciphers used in GSM cell phones, and the CRYPTO1 cipher used in the widely deployed MIFARE Classic smart cards from NXP Semiconductors, a spun off division of Philips Electronics. All of these are symmetric ciphers. Thus far, not one of the mathematical ideas underlying public key cryptography has been proven to be 'unbreakable', and so some future mathematical analysis advance might render systems relying on them insecure. While few informed observers foresee such a breakthrough, the key size recommended for security as best practice keeps increasing as increased computing power required for breaking codes becomes cheaper and more available. Quantum computers, if ever constructed with enough capacity, could break existing public key algorithms and efforts are underway to develop and standardize post-quantum cryptography.

Even without breaking encryption in the traditional sense, side-channel attacks can be mounted that exploit information gained from the way a computer system is implemented, such as cache memory usage, timing information, power consumption, electromagnetic leaks or even sounds emitted. Newer cryptographic algorithms are being developed that make such attacks more difficult.

title: History of cryptography


text:
User talk:Abassign~enwiki

Welcome
Hello, welcome to Wikipedia.

You might find these links helpful in creating new pages or helping with the above tasks: How to edit a page, How to write a great article, Naming conventions, Manual of Style. You should read our policies at some point too.

If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump, or ask me on my talk page. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!
 * You can introduce yourself on the new users page.
 * If you made any edits before you got an account, you might be interested in assigning those to your username.
 * You can sign your name using three tildes, like this: . If you use four, you can add a datestamp too.
 * If you ever think a page or image should be deleted, please list it at the votes for deletion page. There is also a votes for undeletion page if you want to retrieve something that you think should not have been deleted.

Again, welcome! Chris Roy 18:07, 11 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Unverified image
Hi! Thanks for uploading the following image:

 * Image:DukeOfAlbuquerquePaintByGiovanniBattistaMoroni.jpg

I notice it currently doesn't have an image copyright tag. Could you add one to let us know its copyright status?

You can use  : if you release it under the GNU Free Documentation License,

 if you claim fair use, and so on. Click here for a list of the various tags.

If you don't know what any of this means, just let me know at my talk page where you got the image from, and I'll tag it for you. Thanks so much. Denni ☯ 04:23, 2004 Dec 13 (UTC)

P.S. You can help tag other images at Untagged_Images. Thanks again.

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

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

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

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

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 21:32, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 10:09, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

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

title: User talk:Abassign~enwiki


text:
User talk:Alydar

Welcome
Hello, welcome to Wikipedia.

You might find these links helpful in creating new pages or helping with the above tasks: How to edit a page, How to write a great article, Naming conventions, Manual of Style. You should read our policies at some point too.

If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump, or ask me on my talk page. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!
 * You can introduce yourself on the new users page.
 * If you made any edits before you got an account, you might be interested in assigning those to your username.
 * You can sign your name using three tildes, like this: . If you use four, you can add a datestamp too.
 * If you ever think a page or image should be deleted, please list it at the votes for deletion page. There is also a votes for undeletion page if you want to retrieve something that you think should not have been deleted.

Again, welcome! Chris Roy 18:07, 11 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Throughbred racing project
A number of Wikipedians have come together and formed the WikiProject Throughbred racing  to help to expand and better organise information in articles and categories related to the sport of thoroughbred racing. As a past contributor to horse racing articles, we invite you to consider becoming a participant in the project, and/or adding the page to your watchlist so that you become aware, and can join any future horse racing discussions, which may be of interest to you. Regards - Cuddy Wifter 06:32, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

title: User talk:Alydar


text:
User talk:Geeklizzard

Welcome
Hello, welcome to Wikipedia.

You might find these links helpful in creating new pages or helping with the above tasks: How to edit a page, How to write a great article, Naming conventions, Manual of Style. You should read our policies at some point too.

If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump, or ask me on my talk page. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!
 * You can introduce yourself on the new users page.
 * If you made any edits before you got an account, you might be interested in assigning those to your username.
 * You can sign your name using three tildes, like this: . If you use four, you can add a datestamp too.
 * If you ever think a page or image should be deleted, please list it at the votes for deletion page. There is also a votes for undeletion page if you want to retrieve something that you think should not have been deleted.

Again, welcome! Chris Roy 18:08, 11 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 Welcome, !

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! I'm Clamster5, one of the thousands of editors here at Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

 * [[Image:Crystal Clear app ksmiletris.png|23px]]  The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * [[Image:Crystal package utilities.png|23px]]  How to edit a page
 * [[Image:Crystal khelpcenter.png|23px]]  Help pages
 * Crystal Clear app ktip.svg  Tutorial
 * [[Image:Crystal Clear app ksokoban.png|23px|]]  How to write a great article
 * [[Image:Crystal_Clear_app_kedit.png|23px]]  Manual of Style
 * [[Image:Nuvola apps konquest.png|23px]]  Fun stuff...

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or type  here on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!

<3  Clamster5

question regarding your weblog
Hi, Liz. I wanted to drop you a line in regards to something on your weblog, but found that there wasn't an email address there, nor here. Do you suppose you could email me? ... aa:talk 01:07, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:BlogHer2006.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:BlogHer2006.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 05:06, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

SF meetup 3
If you're interested in the next meetup, we have a new page for it: Meetup/San Francisco 3 Georgewilliamherbert 20:36, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Hello
I like your userpage. Hope to see more of your edits around! --Grrrlriot (talk) 00:12, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Your censorship of Abelard talk page material
Look, how can I put this without ending up with a mass of howling feminazis on my doorsteps, hissing hexes and baying for my blood? I see that you are a champion of wimmin poetry, and wimmin writing, and wimmin this and wimmin that. That’s good. One day all of us pesky men will go to the moon, and let you gals run everything down here, and I’m sure all of us will agree that the world will be like unto a Garden of Eden, and all war and animosity will, like, just disappear once the dames are running the joint. But until then, might I remind you that Men still hold up half the sky. Dear Lizzard, while you might be the biggest fan of all things female, let me remind you that you do not, repeat NOT, actually OWN the subject of women. Any old poster, whether they be bequeathed a Charlie or a Chapel, can just write stuff on any subject they so choose to do, and should not be subjected to some nouveau Stalin who gets out the pinking shears whenever they read something that does not measure up to their strangulated world view.

You probably never expected to read this, did you? One of those nasty testosterone-driven men coming back at you and giving you a bit of lip? Well, here it is. NEWS FLASH: I have as much right to post on female subjects as do you. So please don’t censor my stuff. I see you are women of cultivated sensibilities and keen intellect. NEW FLASH: So am I. Please leave my posts alone. Notthere (talk) 06:37, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

 * Hello. I deleted material that was inappropriate for a talk page, ie, a creative writing exercise in pornographic fantasy about "birching" about historical figures.
 * I will report your anti-feminist ranting and harassment on my talk page and to Wikiquette alerts. --Lizzard (talk) 07:46, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Notthere back. Some admin who rejoices in the sobriquet Orbis 3 has stepped in and made an executive decision in this long-running dispute re: my comments concerning Heloise’s bottom, whiter shade of pale, or not quite so. I’m satisfied with it, so I hope you can put DEFCON on amber again. (See section 13 on talk page for Abelard article on WP) I for one have “moved on”, and to show you that I can walk on the wild side mylself I will shortly direct you to a new piece I am composing concerning a truly amazing lady. When you see and read it, you will only be able to gasp: “God, why couldn’t one of the sisterhood have written this? Why did it have to be a man, and if a man, why that mongrel Notthere?. Why!? Why!!??” Notthere (talk) 03:36, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Feminism Task Force
Hello! I've seen you around Wikipedia and I've noticed that you joined my category "Wikipedians interested in feminism". I just wanted to let you know that you might be interested in this. Hope to see you around more and happy editing! :) --Grrrlriot (talk) 20:46, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Western commerce, industry and technologies
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Silhak -- Rising Sun Wiki  22:55, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Greg-winking.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Greg-winking.jpg I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to [mailto:permissions-en@wikimedia.org permissions-en@wikimedia.org], stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to [mailto:permissions-en@wikimedia.org permissions-en@wikimedia.org].

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 18:07, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Not sure what to do here. I emailed J. Milburn directly and the person who took the photo did too, at the time. Guess now that I've noticed it still isn't there, I'll put it up again. Lizzard  (talk) 05:40, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Re: Wheelchair discussion
Hi there. I replied to you and Vicki on my talk page. I also read your post here. I frown upon off-wiki campaigning for reasons of transparency, but as far as those go, this was pretty innocent (it kind of makes you look like the PC police though).--Atlan (talk) 09:54, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Hi, it wasn't like I was exhorting people to pile on one article or page for some kind of petty revert war. It was an open public call for people to come and edit about a subject we care about. I don't think objecting to an offensive term that affects me in my actual everyday oppression can be "pc police", either. For example, if an article on Hillary Clinton described her with a misogynist term, wouldn't you think that should be edited out for reasons of not being at all relevant or accurate? Would you think it fine to refer to a person of color with a derogatory and out of date term? It is the same in my eyes. It is not "encyclopediac" or good journalistic practice to be offensive. For example, here is a style guide from The Guardian: http://www.guardian.co.uk/sustainability/guardian-style-guide and a quote from it:

...what we publish should reflect the traditions of tolerance and fairness that we hold dear. You will not find the Guardian or Observer writing about "bogus asylum seekers" or "black-on-black violence". Disabled people (not "the disabled") are not "wheelchair-bound" and people with learning disabilities are not "handicapped". Nor will you find stories about ""career girls" or "battling grannies". We avoid racist, sexist and other inappropriate language not to be "politically correct" but to put our beliefs into practice in the most important work we do - reporting. Thanks for listening and I hope you can see the politics of language as something non-trivial. Why trivialize the meaning of language and word choice by calling it "pc police"? We're building something made of words -- and the words we choose are important. --Lizzard (talk) 03:39, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

 * Yes, as I said, I will endeavor to change the language of wheelchair related text to something we can all agree on. I will do this on the articles I edited previously and to any I encounter while editing the encyclopedia. As for the "pc police" comment: It was purely based on the one blog comment. "A bunch of us are swarming Wikipedia [to remove all instances of wheelchair bound]" just gives the wrong impression. A better course of action would be to discuss it on Wikipedia beforehand (much like we are doing now). Anyway, that's water under the bridge and no harm was done. See you around.--Atlan (talk) 07:36, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Re:Photo of Greg Hall
Taking a look at the permission email you sent, I'm afraid that is not enough. I have replied to your email with further details. J Milburn (talk) 08:19, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

AIV reports
Thank you for your AIV report. Please use the proper format for reporting as explained in the edit window. In your example, for IP Vandals use: ; also, please do not post to AIV unless the editor has been properly warned. (See warning templates). -- Alexf(talk) 00:00, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Wiki etiquette alert
I have opened a wiki etiquette alert re your editing on the Anders talk page here: https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikiquette_alerts#Repeated_failures_to_assume_good_faith_and_abusive_blanking_of_sections_of_talk_page Bigdaddy1981 (talk) 19:22, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Research survey invitation
Greetings Geeklizzard-

My name is Randall Livingstone, and I am a doctoral student at the University of Oregon, studying digital media and online community. I am posting to invite you to participate in my research study exploring the work of Wikipedia editors who are members of WikiProject: Countering Systemic Bias. The online survey should take 20 to 25 minutes to complete and can be found here:

https://oregon.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_cSHzuwaQovaZ6ss

Your responses will help online communication researchers like me to better understand the collaborations, challenges, and purposeful work of Wikipedia editors like you. In addition, at the end of the survey you will have the opportunity to express your interest in a follow-up online interview with the researcher.

This research project has been reviewed and approved by the Wikimedia Research Committee as well as the Office for Protection of Human Subjects at the University of Oregon. For a detailed description of the project, please visit its Meta page. This survey is voluntary, and your confidentiality will be protected. You will have the choice of using your Wikipedia User Name during the research or creating a unique pseudonym. You may skip any question you choose, and you may withdraw at any time. By completing the survey, you are providing consent to participate in the research.

If you have any questions about the study, please contact me via my Talk Page (UOJComm) or via email. My faculty advisor is Dr. Ryan Light. If you have any questions regarding your rights as a research participant, please contact the Office for Protection of Human Subjects at the University of Oregon.

Thank you very much.

Sincerely,

Randall Livingstone School of Journalism & Communication University of Oregon UOJComm (talk) 03:59, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

 * Prathia Hall (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Princeton, Selma, Terrell County and Sasser

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:44, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 19
Hi. When you recently edited Pamela Palmater, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mi'kmaq (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 03:53, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Love history & culture? Get involved in WikiProject World Digital Library!

 * Hey Geeklizzard! I'm so happy you've signed up for the WDL project. Welcome! I noticed you're interested in Latin American content, including Venezuela. I built out a to-do list for Latin American here. Be sure to book mark it, as it'll be added to as more content is released to the WDL website (monthly). If I can help with anything, just ask. I do look forward to following your outcomes and please share them on the outcomes page. Thanks for all you do for Wikipedia! SarahStierch (talk) 16:53, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

World Digital Library-Wikimedia Partnership Newsletter
Hi ! Thanks for participating in the World Digital Library-Wikimedia Partnership. Your contributions are important to improving Wikipedia! I wanted to share a few updates with you:
 * We have an easy way to now cite WDL resources. You can learn more about it on our news page, here.
 * Our to-do list is being expanded and features newly digitized and created resources from libraries and archives around the world, including content from Sweden, Qatar, the Library of Congress, and more! You can discover new content for dissemination here.
 * WDL project has new userbox for you to post on your userpage and celebrate your involvement. Soffredo created it, so please be sure to thank them on their talk page. You can find the userbox and add it to your page here.
 * Our first batch of WDL barnstars have been awarded! Congratulations to our first recipients: ProtoplasmaKid, ChrisGualtieri, TenthEagle, Rhyswynne, Luwii, Sosthenes12, Djembayz, Parkwells, Carl Francis, Yunshui, MrX, Pharaoh of the Wizards, and the prolific Yster76!! Thank you for your contributions and keep up the great work. Be sure to share your article expansions and successes here.

Keep up the great work, and please contact me if you need anything! Thank you for all you do for free knowledge! EdwardsBot (talk) 16:46, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

A kitten for you!
thanks for having a look at Neo Boys!

Selena Deckelmann (talk) 02:49, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your improvements to Tookoolito!
Thanks very much for your improvements to Tookoolito. I did change the section headers back just a bit, in hopes that these would clarify the extent of each of Hall's Arctic forays. You've inspired me to take a fresh look at this article and see if there are still other ways it cane be improved. Clevelander96 (talk) 17:29, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

January 2014
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=590124179 your edit] to Fannie Hurst may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 20:39, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
 * the Works Progress Administration in 1940. She was a member of the feminist intellectual group [Heterodoxy (group)|Heterodoxy] in Greenwich Village, and a delegate to the [[World Health

Disambiguation link notification for January 11
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Alpha Suffrage Club, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mary Jackson (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:59, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

WWUCB Berkeley Meetup
Hey Liz,

Hope that some of the negative drama stuff going down at the NB Space hasn't affected your other productive activities. In regards to your 22:45 13 March 2014 (UTC) post on the WikiWomen's Edit-a-thon at University of California, Berkeley for your own online participation in this event, What are your thoughts about inviting to this other accomplished women associated with both Noisebridge and the East Bay's SudoRoom? E.g., Romy Ilano @romyilano and/or Naomi Most @nthmost ??

Unfortunately, although I myself am more local to the Cal campus and Sudo Room than I am to Noisebridge, afraid that I myself couldn't contribute to this WikiWomen Edit-a-thon either beforehand or on its scheduled date of Saturday, April 5.

Sfgiantsace36 (talk) 00:29, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 3
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Shaun Ellis (wolf researcher), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Nez Perce (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:54, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 30
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

 * Agnes Morley Cleaveland
 * added a link pointing to Bloomers

 * F. A. Nettelbeck
 * added a link pointing to Greg Hall

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:57, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 10
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Meliza Bañales, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Santa Cruz. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:03, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 13
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Honey Lee Cottrell, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Astoria. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:56, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:14, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 29
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Henry Beveridge, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Persian. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:37, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 11
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Independent living, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ed Roberts. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:21, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

April Fools? Nope! Welcome to the Women Scientists worldwide online edit-a-thon during Year of Science
(To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 01:59, 1 April 2016 (UTC) via MassMessage

About Women
Hi Geeklizzard. I'm an editor (not very active till now) of the Italian Wikipedia, where the gender gap is a real issue. I'm trying to participate to an IEG with the project "Women are everywhere". You will find the draft at this link https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IEG/Women_are_everywhere It would be great if you could have a look at it. I need any kind of suggestion or advice to improve it. Support or endorsement would be fantastic. Many thanks, --Kenzia (talk) 13:45, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

You are invited to the Bay Area WikiSalon kickoff
Liz, Sorry if this is a duplicate. Please spread the word.

Please join us for our first Bay Area WikiSalon!

We have two brief presentations lined up for our kickoff event at the Wikimedia Foundation offices in downtown San Francisco:

 * The Nueva Upper School recently hosted the [//wikistrategies.net/editathon-at-nueva/ first ever high school Wikipedia edit-a-thon]. We will hear from their research librarian, students, and faculty about what interests them about Wikipedia, what they have learned so far, and what they hope to achieve.
 * Photojournalist Kris Schreier Lyseggen, author of [//www.krislyseggen.com/#!The-Women-of-San-Quentin-Sept-12015/c22fz/8238034E-B1B7-4216-A2BC-56039A93FF61 The Women of San Quentin: The Soul Murder of Transgender Women in Male Prisons], will tell us about her work and how she researched the topic.

We allow time for informal conversation and working on articles. Wi-Fi is available. Newcomers are encouraged to attend. Bring a friend! The doors open promptly at 6:00 pm. We will have beverages and light snacks, provided by [//wikistrategies.net Wiki Strategies], Ben Creasy, and Wayne Calhoon.

Please note: You must register here, and bring a photo ID that matches your registration name. The building policy is strict on this point.

For further details, see here.

Cheers! 21:24, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

Contests
User:Dr. Blofeld has created WikiProject Africa/Contests. The idea is to run a series of contests/editathons focusing on each region of Africa. He has spoken to Wikimedia about it and $1000-1500 is possible for prize money. As someone who has previously expressed interest in African topics, would you be interested in contributing to one or assisting draw up core article/missing article lists? He says he's thinking of North Africa for an inaugural one in October. If interested please sign up in the participants section of the Contest page, thanks.♦ -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 01:21, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Attention: WikiProject African diaspora participants
Hello fellow project participants. Not sure how many users are still active as normal Wikipedia editors but felt the need to attempt to get a gauge on who can be called on for help with articles falling under the umbrella of the African diaspora project. According to the project's article table there are over six thousand articles related to the African diaspora; there's not a hundred at FA/GA grade and there's over twelve hundred that are unassessed. With Wikipedia being one of the major information reference points in the world today we should consider this unacceptable. Much work needs to be done on the rating of the importance of articles as well. With more communication amongst participants and a dedication to addressing the articles on the to-do list I believe we can make this WikiProject one of the most well organized and thorough on the site. If you are interested in collaborative work with some of your fellow project members, have certain expertise on any particular subjects, ideals on/about the WikiProject, etc. simply drop your name under the "Project revision" section I've created on the project's talk page and state your intentions and main points of interest in our WikiProject and we can attempt to move forward from there. Hoping to hear from everyone soon! WikiGuy86 (talk) 03:29, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Beth Winegarner for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Beth Winegarner is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Beth Winegarner until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Jack Frost (talk) 06:01, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Your upload of Double Union logo may be free
File:Double Union logo.png may not require a fair use rationale. Please check if you've applied the copyright information correctly. 84.250.17.211 (talk) 11:33, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started
Hello, Geeklizzard

Thank you for creating SF International HipHop DanceFest.

User:Rosguill, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with. Please remember to sign your reply with ~.

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

signed,Rosguill talk 00:28, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

Survey about History on Wikipedia (If you reside in the United States)
I am Petros Apostolopoulos, a Ph.D. candidate in Public History at North Carolina State University. My Ph.D. project examines how historical knowledge is produced on Wikipedia. You must be 18 years of age or older, reside in the United States to participate in this study. If you are interested in participating in my research study by offering your own experience of writing about history on Wikipedia, you can click on this link https://ncsu.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_9z4wmR1cIp0qBH8. There are minimal risks involved in this research.

If you have any questions, please let me know. Petros Apostolopoulos, paposto@ncsu.edu Apolo1991 (talk) 16:47, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:20, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

title: User talk:Geeklizzard


text:
User talk:Taak

Hello

I like the additions to the fallacies list, although I think some organization is necessary -- such as suggested by David H. Fischer's book, Historian's Fallacies. Currently, it is hard to locate a fallacy (or particular fallacies used in certain areas.) I also started an article political argument.. I put some stuff on social choice theory to give it some structure, but that is somewhat questionable. This is related to some of your more recent additions.

CSTAR 18:55, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Hey, thanks. I don't have a copy of Fischer's book, but I see that there's a copy at my local library, so maybe it would be a good excuse to pick it up next time I go down there (it's been on my Amazon list).

I agree that there could be better ways to organize the list. Maybe there should be both an alphabetical list and a categorized list. I've always liked fallacy files' taxonomy and the table of fallacies is interesting (though the latter would be too opaque to anyone who wasn't already very comfortable with formal logic).

I like the idea of suggesting fallacies that may be relevant to different subjects. For political argument, maybe we could list misleading vividness, slippery slope, perfect solution fallacy, ad hominem, lump of labour fallacy, appeal to emotion, off the top of my head. We could say For fallacies related to a specific subject, see: and list political argument, formal argument, etc.

I also was thinking it would be cool if we could have some sort of standard classification table for each of the fallacy pages like they have on all of the animal species (like, say deer or roundworm), which might list type (informal or formal), parent fallacies, subfallacies, etc.

Taak 22:17, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)

-- Standard classification table for each fallacy. This would be very useful. Fischer does attempt something like this. CSTAR 20:52, 21 Jun 2004 (UTC)

OK, well I'll get that book out soon. We should probably propose/discuss this on Talk:logical fallacy so that anyone else who might be interested can comment. --Taak 17:48, 23 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip on linking to sub-sections! Alanyst 04:52, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Here's to undocumented features! --Taak 17:45, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Fallacies
Hello, it's been a while since I've talked about these pages. One of the things that would be worthwhile pointing out are distinctions between:

 * Purely logical fallacies (e.g. All males are mortal, Mary is mortal, therefore Mary is a male.)

 * Fallacies in some technical specialty (your lump of labor fallacy is a good example from economics) or fallacies in mathematical reasoning

 * $$ \frac{a+b}{c+d} = \frac{a}{c} + \frac{b}{d} $$

 * or fallacies in probabilistic or statistical reasoning.

proposes rules of argumentatitive dialog. These can be regarded in some sense as fairness rules.
 * Fallacies arising from violations of principles or argumentation. There's a whole fairly recent of argumentation theory which

Talking of Slippery slope, from Kevin Drum:

Texas Senator John Cornyn:

It does not affect your daily life very much if your neighbor marries a box turtle. But that does not mean it is right....Now you must raise your children up in a world where that union of man and box turtle is on the same legal footing as man and wife.

CSTAR 02:03, 16 Jul 2004 (UTC)

The most basic and frequently-used way that I've seen fallacies split up is between those of formal logic and informal logic.

It makes sense to split them up between different circumstances of use in real life, however, in the interest of making it easier to use. There's also no reason why we could provide several different organizations of them.

Maybe I'll work on some sort of draft for a classification table to put on all of the individual pages, soon (which may require asking on the irc channel for tips on how to do this).

--Taak 22:09, 17 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Did you take a WikiVacation?
I haven't seen your contributions here in quite a while or in DK. I also notice the last date of contribution was dated Nov 3 ;) CSTAR 22:28, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Article Licensing
Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 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)

Dave Barry libertarian?
OK, this is really old, but... Is Dave Barry really a libertarian? I've read everything he's ever written, and I don't particularly get that impression. Do you have a source, or an example, or something? (I don't particularly care, just curious.) --MarkusRTK 18:08, Dec 12, 2004 (UTC)

 * http://www.google.com/search?q=dave+barry+libertarian

Image copyright?
I don't know if you're watching Image talk:Iraq-prewar-antiamerican-cartoon.jpg, but some copyright issues have been raised there... - Mustafaa 14:46, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)

tickerbot
Please read and reply to my comments made at Wikipedia talk:Bots. Thank you! -- AllyUnion (talk) 06:38, 27 May 2005 (UTC)

Illusion of control
I have a question about some of the text you contributed to the Illusion of control article. I suspect that there is a typo in the sentence: "...it has been shown that people tend to throw harder for high numbers and lower for low numbers." Should that read softer for low numbers? see also Talk:illusion of control. Thanks! --Amoore 22:37, Jun 25, 2005 (UTC)
 * Someone else made the change, so unless it's wrong, I don't think your intervention is required. Thanks! --Amoore June 29, 2005 15:30 (UTC)

Lump of labor fallacy
I would like to know if you could clarify me a doubt. In this article, it says "It remains the law in France, although rollback proposals have been floated by Raffarin. Some economists contend that such proposals are likely to be ineffective, alleging that there are usually substantial administration costs associated with employing more workers, such as recruitment, training, and management, that would increase average cost per unit of output that would reduce production, and ultimately lower employment." "Such proposals" seems to refer to Raffarin´s proposals; however, what follows seems to give reasons of why reducing the amount of working hours doen´t mean just redestributing the total amount of hours among more workers. So, what is the article trying to say?--Please answer here--Wikiwert 01:05, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

Request for article
Dear Taak, Could you please create an entry for the "psychologist's fallacy" that you mention on the historian's fallacy entry? I am curious and do not have the expertise to do it. Apparently it is by William James.

Possibly unfree Image:Iraq-prewar-antiamerican-cartoon.jpg
An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Iraq-prewar-antiamerican-cartoon.jpg, has been listed at Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. Please go to its page for more information if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Liftarn 18:08, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Possibly unfree Image:Terualsiege.jpg
An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Terualsiege.jpg, has been listed at Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. Please go to its page for more information if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Fritz S. (Talk) 12:03, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Delist
Dear Taak,

 you have originally uploaded to English Wikipedia is now proposed for delisting from Featured Pictures.

Your comments/suggestions/etc are welcome

--Mothmolevna ( ©   ® ) 21:40, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem
Thanks for your uploads. You've indicated that the following images are being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why they meet Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page an image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check

 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
 * That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

 * Image:Spe-deloused.jpg
 * Image:Spe-pushups.jpg

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --05:51, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Spe-encounter.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Spe-encounter.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ╟─TreasuryTag►Not-content─╢ 08:57, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

NowCommons: File:Soldiers-english-coast.jpg
File:Soldiers-english-coast.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:Soldiers-english-coast.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case:. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 10:19, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Nomination of Inner Party for deletion
The article Inner Party is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Inner Party until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Sadads (talk) 13:56, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 4
Hi. When you recently edited Insensitivity to sample size, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sampling theory (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:16, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 11
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

 * Clustering illusion (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Priming

 * Conjunction fallacy (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Wimbleton

 * Conservatism (Bayesian) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Bayesian

 * Illusion of external agency (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Daniel Gilbert

 * Lady Macbeth effect (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Bloodstain

 * Naïve realism (psychology) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Andrew Ward

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:31, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Extension Neglect
Hi Taak, do you have any ideas about fixing Extension neglect? The wording there is not helpful, and there doesn't seem to be much information online. I suspect that this is a phrase used in fairly limited academic contexts at the moment, most of which refer directly to Kaaheman's article. We should probably fix it or delete it. Kevin Saff (talk) 18:40, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Minor term

The article Minor term has been proposed for deletion  because of the following concern:
 * WP:NOTDIC; unclear if it would be useful redirect to Syllogism, where this is already contained.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. AdventurousSquirrel (talk) 12:05, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Major term

The article Major term has been proposed for deletion  because of the following concern:
 * WP:NOTDIC; unclear if it would be useful redirect to Syllogism, where this is already contained.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. AdventurousSquirrel (talk) 12:06, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:15, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Availability, salience and vividness for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Availability, salience and vividness is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Availability, salience and vividness until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:38, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Illusion of external agency

The article Illusion of external agency has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern: '''Does not seem to meet the notability guideline, as the article only refers to the original paper. Upon a Google search, I couldn't find any reference to the concept of "Illusion of external agency" other than Wikipedia and the original paper itself. The article itself is also a bit confusing'''

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. 7804j (talk) 15:33, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Outer Party

The article Outer Party has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern: "The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing General notability guideline requirement nor the more detailed Notability (fiction) supplementary essay. WP:BEFORE did not reveal any significant coverage on Gnews, Gbooks or Gscholar. (Note: cited academic paper here is unreliable). If you disagree and deprod this, please explain how it meets them on the talk page here in the form of 'This article meets criteria A and B because...' and ping me back through WP:ECHO or by leaving a note at User talk:Piotrus. Thank you."

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:13, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of Inner Party for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Inner Party is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Inner Party& until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:25, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of Outer Party for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Outer Party is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Outer Party until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:18, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

title: User talk:Taak