text:
1972 in video games

1972 marked an important landmark in the history of the video game industry with the releases of Pong and the Odyssey home console. The profile of electronic games rose substantially and companies began exploring the distribution of video games on a larger scale. Important mainframe computer games were created in this period which became the basis for early microcomputer games.

Events

 * May 3 – Magnavox initiates their “Magnavox Profit Caravan” series of traveling shows to demonstrate all of their 1972 product line to their dealers and public, including the Odyssey. The first showing occurs in Phoenix, Arizona.
 * May 24 – At a showing in Burlingame, California, three representatives of Nutting Associates including Nolan Bushnell visit the showcase and play the Odyssey demonstration unit. Bushnell takes particular note of the Odyssey game Table Tennis.
 * June 26 – Bally Manufacturing formalizes an agreement with Nolan Bushnell for the creation of one video game and one pinball table for the company. Bushnell later describes the creation of a hockey game. The term “video amusement game” is used – one of the earliest instances of the phrase “video game” in print.
 * August – Atari Inc. tests a prototype of Pong at Andy Capp’s Tavern (later the Rooster T. Feathers Comedy Club) in Sunnyvale, California.
 * August 13–15 – Chess 3.0 wins the U.S. American Computer Chess Championship in Boston, Massachusetts for the third consecutive year.
 * September 14–16 – The Music Operators of America show is held in Chicago, Illinois. Nutting Associates displays Computer Space for the second year and For-Play Manufacturing showcases Star Trek. Nolan Bushnell attends and fails to interest Bill Nutting in manufacturing Pong during this show.
 * October 19 – The Intergalactic Spacewar Olympics competition is held at the Stanford Artificial Intelligence Project facilities in California. It is the first formal video game competition and is a central story in the December 7, 1972 issue of Rolling Stone written by Stewart Brand.
 * November 24 – Nolan Bushnell files for US patent #3,793,483 relating to work developed for video game technology. The patent is issued in February 1974 and does not serve as an effective deterrent to video game copycats.

Publications

 * October – The date of the first issue of the People’s Computer Company newsletter by Dymax Inc. They print type-in listings of games and other demonstrations in the BASIC programming language, helping to spread games originally created on time-sharing networks.

Arcade

 * March – The second unit of the Galaxy Game is placed at the Tresidder Student Union at Stanford University. This version features two fiberglass cabinets with two players each, which can be linked to create a four-player game.
 * October – Coin-operated games company For-Play Manufacturing in California releases Star Trek (1972), a presumed clone of Nutting Associates’ Computer Space.
 * November – Atari Inc. releases their game Pong, shipping it to local distributors in the Northern California area. The game becomes a hit in the local area and launches Atari’s business.

Consoles

 * September – Magnavox releases their Odyssey console in twenty-five major markets. It includes twelve games with the console. A light gun addon with additional games is sold separately. They manufacture 140,000 consoles their first year on the market.

Computer games

 * Empire by Reed College student Peter Langston is created for the HP2000 computer.
 * Louis Bloomfield of University of Illinois Champaign-Urbana creates the game Moonwar for the PLATO IV mainframe system. It becomes the most popular “big board” game on the network.

Business

 * June 27 – Atari Inc. is founded by Nolan Bushnell and Ted Dabney in Sunnyvale, California. They absorb the assets of their prior partnership, Syzygy, though continue using the name Syzygy under a doing business as association.
 * Dymax Inc. establishes a location in Menlo Park, California. They invite interested individuals to visit the location to access time-sharing terminals at the location to create and use programs – many of which are published in the People's Computer Company newsletter.

title: 1972 in video games


text:
Wikipedia talk:Selected anniversaries/March 25

 * 1634 - The first settlers arrive in Maryland (led by Lord Baltimore). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 169.207.85.53 (talk • contribs) 11:39, 7 March 2004 (UTC).

Possiblity for a new inclusion
How about including a line for the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire, which occurred on March 25, 1911? — AnnaKucsma  (Talk to me!) 17:21, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I am going to add this for the 100th anniversary, which occurs this year. -- Ninja Diannaa (Talk) 16:37, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Tomorrow is the 200th anniversary of the Slave Trade Act 1807. Please add this to the Main Page. Thanks. --199.71.174.100 22:22, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 1807 - The Parliament of the United Kingdom passed the Slave Trade Act and abolished the slave trade in the British Empire.

2012 notes
— howcheng  {chat} 06:03, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Omitted: Venice (ineligible—maintenance); Greek War of Independence; Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire; Operation Priboi; Faisal of Saudi Arabia
 * Included: Titan (moon) (8th appearance, last in 2010); Slave Trade Act 1807 (4th appearance, last in 2010); 1948 Tinker Air Force Base tornadoes (first appearance); Treaty of Rome (first appearance; blurb previously featured European Economic Community, which is currently ineligible); Wiki (first appearance)

2013 notes
— howcheng  {chat} 02:41, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Omitted: Titan (moon); Slave Trade Act 1807; Faisal of Saudi Arabia; Wiki
 * Included: Percy Bysshe Shelley (first appearance); Greek War of Independence (2nd appearance, last in 2011); Operation Lam Son 719 (2nd appearance, last in 2011; moved from February 8)
 * Repeats: 1948 Tinker Air Force Base tornadoes (2nd consecutive appearance, 2 total); Treaty of Rome (2nd consecutive appearance, 2 total)

2014 notes
— howcheng  {chat} 06:40, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Rescued from Ineligible (unused): Venice
 * New articles (unused): Capitol Hill massacre
 * Omitted: Percy Bysshe Shelley; Greek War of Independence; 1948 Tinker Air Force Base tornadoes; Treaty of Rome (ineligible—maintenance); Operation Lam Son 719
 * Included: Pope Constantine (first appearance); Yongle Emperor's campaigns against the Mongols (first appearance); Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire (3rd appearance, last in 2011); Scottsboro Boys (4th appearance, last in 2007; rescued from Ineligible); Operation Priboi (2nd appearance, last in 2011)

A national day in Greece
I have always heard that March 25 is Independence Day in Greece. (Admittedly, I am just a second-generation Greek American.) Isn't the independence day of every nation included among the holidays and observances shown on the respective date in the On this day box? Dyspeptic skeptic (talk) 23:55, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
 * The Greece article has a section which has been marked as outdated. This disqualifies it from inclusion. — howcheng  {chat} 16:20, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 25 March 2014
Wasn't pope Constantine "elected" rather than "selected"?

--Terminally uncool (talk) 10:03, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: As it says in the box at the top of this page, to report an error when this list is currently on the Main Page, see Main Page errors. Please remember that this list defers to the supporting articles, so it is best to achieve consensus and make any necessary changes there first. -- Red rose64 (talk) 10:41, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
 * No he was not. See Papal selection before 1059. — howcheng  {chat} 15:49, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

2015 notes
— howcheng  {chat} 07:06, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Omitted: Pope Constantine; Yongle Emperor's campaigns against the Mongols; Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire; Scottsboro Boys; Operation Priboi
 * Included: Greece (rescued from Ineligible); Titan (moon) (9th appearance, last in 2012); Treaty of Amiens (5th appearance, last in 2010; rescued from Ineligible); Georgian Orthodox Church (first appearance); Faisal of Saudi Arabia (4th appearance, last in 2012; 40th anniversary); Wiki (2nd appearance, last in 2012; 20th anniversary)

2016 notes
— howcheng  {chat} 07:46, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Moved to Ineligible: Percy Bysshe Shelley (maintenance); Scottsboro Boys (maintenance)
 * Omitted: Annunciation (ineligible—maintenance); Titan (moon); Treaty of Amiens; Faisal of Saudi Arabia; Wiki
 * Included: Yongle Emperor's campaigns against the Mongols (2nd appearance, last in 2014); Slave Trade Act 1807 (5th appearance, last in 2012); Operation Priboi (3rd appearance, last in 2014); Capitol Hill massacre (first appearance; 10th anniversary)
 * Repeats: Georgian Orthodox Church (2nd consecutive appearance, 2 total)
 * What about Good Friday? Can someone add? Crumpled Fire (talk) 03:17, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Got it. Thanks. — howcheng  {chat} 17:15, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Bengali Genocide Remembrance Day
@User:Howcheng: Please don't forget the important national day in Bangladesh!!! My suggestion for the heading therefore;

March 25: Independence Day in Greece (1821); Genocide Remembrance Day in Bangladesh (1971)

—87.79.189.212 (talk) 23:12, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

2017 notes
— howcheng  {chat} 07:50, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Moved to Ineligible: Province of Maryland (maintenance); Greek War of Independence (maintenance); Wiki (maintenance)
 * Omitted: Yongle Emperor's campaigns against the Mongols; Slave Trade Act 1807; Capitol Hill massacre
 * Included: Pope Constantine (2nd appearance, last in 2014); Titan (moon) (10th appearance, last in 2015); Operation Lam Son 719 (3rd appearance, last in 2013); Kenneth III of Scotland (first appearance); Gloria Steinem (first appearance); Marcel Lefebvre (first appearance)
 * Repeats: Georgian Orthodox Church (3rd consecutive appearance, 3 total; 100th anniversary); Operation Priboi (2nd consecutive appearance, 4 total)

2018 notes
— howcheng  {chat} 07:29, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Moved to Ineligible: Treaty of Amiens (maintenance)
 * Omitted: Greece (ineligible—maintenance); Pope Constantine; Titan (moon); Operation Priboi; Operation Lam Son 719; Kenneth III of Scotland; Gloria Steinem; Marcel Lefebvre
 * Included: Bengali Genocide Remembrance Day (first appearance); Yongle Emperor's campaigns against the Mongols (3rd appearance, last in 2016); Slave Trade Act 1807 (6th appearance, last in 2016); 1948 Tinker Air Force Base tornadoes (3rd appearance, last in 2013; 70th anniversary); Faisal of Saudi Arabia (5th appearance, last in 2015); Sophie Blanchard (first appearance); Marie-Alphonsine Danil Ghattas (first appearance); Melita Norwood (first appearance)
 * Repeats: Georgian Orthodox Church (4th consecutive appearance, 4 total)

2019 notes
— howcheng  {chat} 16:07, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Moved to Ineligible: Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire (maintenance); Capitol Hill massacre (maintenance)
 * New articles (unused): Harriet Backer
 * Omitted: Georgian Orthodox Church (ineligible—maintenance); 1948 Tinker Air Force Base tornadoes; Sophie Blanchard; Marie-Alphonsine Danil Ghattas; Melita Norwood
 * Included: Titan (moon) (11th appearance, last in 2017); Operation Priboi (5th appearance, last in 2017; 70th anniversary); José de Espronceda (first appearance); Selim Sırrı Tarcan (first appearance); Lorna Arnold (first appearance)
 * Repeats: Yongle Emperor's campaigns against the Mongols (2nd consecutive appearance, 4 total); Slave Trade Act 1807 (2nd consecutive appearance, 7 total); Faisal of Saudi Arabia/Faisal bin Musaid (Faisal: 2nd consecutive appearance, 6 total; FBM: first appearance)

2020 notes
All articles but one making their first OTD appearance! — howcheng  {chat} 16:33, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
 * New articles (ineligible): First Philippine Republic (maintenance)
 * Rescued from Ineligible (unused): Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire
 * Omitted: Yongle Emperor's campaigns against the Mongols; Titan (moon); Operation Priboi; Faisal of Saudi Arabia/Faisal bin Musaid; José de Espronceda; Selim Sırrı Tarcan; Lorna Arnold
 * Included: Theodosius III (first appearance); Battle of Margate (first appearance); Scottish National Antarctic Expedition (first appearance); Enrico Fermi (first appearance); Operation Lam Son 719 (4th appearance, last in 2017); Kō no Moronao/Kō no Moroyasu (both: first appearance); Frances Glessner Lee (first appearance); Elton John (first appearance)

2021 notes
— howcheng  {chat} 06:26, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Omitted: Theodosius III; Battle of Margate; Scottish National Antarctic Expedition; Enrico Fermi; Kō no Moronao/Kō no Moroyasu; Frances Glessner Lee; Elton John
 * Included: Pope Constantine (3rd appearance, last in 2017); Planned French invasion of Britain (1708) (first appearance); 1948 Tinker Air Force Base tornadoes (4th appearance, last in 2018); Operation Priboi (6th appearance, last in 2019); José de Espronceda (2nd appearance, last in 2019); Alexandra of Yugoslavia (first appearance; 100th birthday); Marcel Lefebvre (2nd appearance, last in 2017; 30th anniversary)
 * Repeats: Operation Lam Son 719 (2nd consecutive appearance, 5 total; 50th anniversary)

2022 notes
— howcheng  {chat} 15:57, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * New articles (ineligible): Chain Island (maintenance)
 * Omitted: Pope Constantine; Planned French invasion of Britain (1708); 1948 Tinker Air Force Base tornadoes; Operation Priboi; Operation Lam Son 719; José de Espronceda; Alexandra of Yugoslavia; Marcel Lefebvre
 * Included: Yongle Emperor's campaigns against the Mongols (5th appearance, last in 2019); Titan (moon) (12th appearance, last in 2019); Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire (4th appearance, last in 2014); Enrico Fermi (2nd appearance, last in 2020); Faisal of Saudi Arabia/Faisal bin Musaid Al Saud (Faisal: 7th appearance; FBM: 2nd; both last in 2020); Novalis (first appearance); Harriet Backer (first appearance; 90th birthday); Elton John (2nd appearance, last in 2020; 75th birthday)

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


text:
Nicolas Restif de la Bretonne

Nicolas Restif de la Bretonne, born Nicolas-Edme Rétif or Nicolas-Edme Restif (23 October 1734 – 3 February 1806), also known as Rétif, was a French novelist. The term retifism for shoe fetishism was named after him (an early novel, entitled Fanchette's Foot, follows a beautiful heroine and her pretty little foot, which, with her pretty face, gets her and her shoe/s into lots of trouble). He was also reputed to have coined the term "pornographer" in the same-named book, The Pornographer.

Biography
Born the son of a farmer at Sacy (in present-day Yonne), Rétif was educated by the Jansenists at Bicêtre, and on the expulsion of the Jansenists was received by one of his brothers, who was a curé. Owing to a scandal in which he was involved, he was apprenticed to a printer at Auxerre, and, having served his time, went to Paris. Here he worked as a journeyman printer, and in 1760 he married Anne or Agnès Lebègue, a relation of his former master at Auxerre. Soon he embraced Protestantism.

It was not until five or six years after his marriage that Rétif appeared as an author, and from that time to his death he produced a bewildering multitude of books, amounting to something like two hundred volumes, many of them printed with his own hand, on almost every conceivable subject. Rétif suffered at one time or another the extremes of poverty. He drew on the episodes of his own life for his books, which, "in spite of their faded sentiment, contain truthful pictures of French society on the eve of the Revolution". He has been described as both a social realist and a sexual fantasist in his writings.

The original editions of these, and indeed of all his books, have long been bibliographical curiosities owing to their rarity, the beautiful and curious illustrations which many of them contain, and the quaint typographic system in which most are composed on.

The fall of the assignats during the Revolution forced him to make his living by writing, profiting on the new freedom of the press. In 1795 he received a gratuity of 2000 francs from the Thermidor Convention. In spite of his declarations for the new power, his aristocratic acquaintances and his reputation made him fall in disgrace. Just before his death, Napoleon gave him a place in the ministry of police; he died at Paris before taking up the position.

Assessment
According to 1911 Britannica, "Restif de la Bretonne undoubtedly holds a remarkable place in French literature. He was inordinately vain, of extremely relaxed morals, and perhaps not entirely sane. His books were written with haste, and their licence of subject and language renders them quite unfit for general perusal."

He and the Marquis de Sade maintained a mutual hatred, while he was appreciated by Benjamin Constant and Friedrich von Schiller and appeared at the table of Alexandre Balthazar Laurent Grimod de La Reynière, whom he met in 1782. Jean François de La Harpe nicknamed him "the Voltaire of the chambermaids". He was rediscovered by the Surrealists in the early 20th century.

He is also noted for his advocacy of communism, indeed the term first made its modern appearance (1785) in his book review of Joseph-Alexandre-Victor Hupay de Fuveau who described himself as "communist" with his Project for a Philosophical Community.

The author Mario Vargas Llosa has a chapter on Rétif in his novel The Notebooks of Don Rigoberto.

The French novelist Catherine Rihoit made Restif de la Bretonne a major character in her 1982 novel La Nuit de Varenne. It was made into a film in the same year, a French-Italian production called either La Nuit de Varennes (French title, in English, That Night in Varennes) or Il mondo nuovo (Italian title, in English, The New World). Jean-Louis Barrault played Restif. The film also had Marcello Mastroianni as Casanova and Harvey Keitel as Thomas Paine.

In his analysis of the satirical poem "Ode to Buggers," David M. Halperin suggested that Rétif's writing may have drawn from internal conflicts surrounding his sexuality. There is much scholarly debate over the veracity of this conclusion.

Rétif was a "pornographer" in the modern sense of the word, being a writer of graphic depictions of sex. However, he was also a "pornographer" in the Ancient Greek sense of the word, as he wrote about the day-to-day life of prostitutes, and concerned himself with their well-being. It was the latter definition which he accepted as the rightful use of the word.

Works
The most noteworthy of his works are:
 * Le Pied de Fanchette, a novel (1769), the story of a pretty French orphan girl who is hounded by shoe-fetishists.
 * Le Pornographe (1769), a plan for regulating prostitution which is said to have been actually carried out by the Emperor Joseph II, while not a few detached hints have been adopted by continental nations
 * Le Paysan perverti (1775), an erotic novel with a moral purpose, which is a big hit, causing him to follow it with "La Paysanne Pervertie" (1784).
 * La Vie de mon père (1779)
 * La Découverte Australe par un Homme-Volant (1781), a work of proto-science-fiction notorious for its prophetic inventions.
 * Les Contemporaines (42 vols., 1780–1785), a vast collection of short stories
 * Ingenue Saxancour, also a novel (1785)
 * Les Nuits de Paris (beginning 1786: reportage including the September Massacres of 1792)
 * Anti-Justine (1793), an answer to the earlier editions of the Marquis de Sade's Justine.
 * The extraordinary autobiography of Monsieur Nicolas (16 vols., 1794–1797), in which at the age of sixty he has set down his remembrances, his notions on ethical and social points, his hatreds, and above all his numerous loves, both real and fancied. In it, Rétif relates the beginnings of his sexual awakenings between 1738 and 1744, when he remembers experiencing the most pleasurable of sexual stimulations in very early childhood (see text for details). However, the last two volumes are practically a separate and much less interesting work in the opinion of the redactors of the 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica.
 * Les Posthumes (1802) is an example of early space opera and an exercise in exolinguistics.

title: Nicolas Restif de la Bretonne


text:
Pyhäjärvi (Tampere region)

Pyhäjärvi is a lake in southern Finland. Although the name means "holy lake" in modern Finnish, it probably originally meant "border lake". Pyhäjärvi is shaped like the letter C with the cities of Tampere and Nokia on the northern end, and the town of Lempäälä at the southern end.

The lake is fed by the water running through the Tammerkoski rapids in the center of Tampere from the North, and by the waters from lake Vanajavesi in the South. Due to the Tammerkoski rapids, the water in Pyhäjärvi is warmer and richer in ozone than that in the northern lake, Näsijärvi, which results in the life in this lake being richer, even though the water is more polluted.

There are a number of other lakes named Pyhäjärvi in Finland and its former territories, as well.

title: Pyhäjärvi (Tampere region)


text:
1983 in video games

1983 has seen many sequels and prequels in video games, such as Mario Bros. and Pole Position II, along with new titles such as Astron Belt, Champion Baseball, Dragon's Lair, Elevator Action, Spy Hunter and Track & Field. Major events include the video game crash of 1983 in North America, and the third generation of video game consoles beginning with the launch of Nintendo's Family Computer (Famicom) and Sega's SG-1000 in Japan. The year's highest-grossing video game was Namco's arcade game Pole Position, while the year's best-selling home system was Nintendo's Game & Watch for the third time since 1980.

Financial performance

 * In the United States, arcade video game revenues are worth $2.9 billion (equivalent to $ adjusted for inflation).
 * In the United States, home video game sales are worth $2 billion (equivalent to $ adjusted for inflation).
 * In Japan, home video game sales approach ¥400 billion (equivalent to US$billion at the time, or $ adjusted for inflation).

Highest-grossing arcade games
Pole Position, a racing game by Namco, was the most successful arcade game of 1983.

Japan
In Japan, Game Machine magazine began publishing half-monthly charts of top-grossing arcade games from June 1, 1983. The following titles were the top-grossing arcade video games on the Game Machine charts from June to December 1983.

United States
In the United States, the following titles were the highest-grossing arcade games of 1983, according to RePlay magazine, the Amusement & Music Operators Association (AMOA), and Cash Box magazine.

Best-selling home video games
The following titles were the best-selling home video games of 1983.

Events

 * January – Electronic Games labels Donkey Kong, Space Panic, and other games with ladders as "climbing games."
 * The fourth Arcade Awards are held, for games released during 1981–1982, with Tron winning best arcade game, Demon Attack best console game, David's Midnight Magic best computer game, and Galaxian best standalone game.
 * A major shakeout of the North American video game industry ("the crash of 1983") begins. By 1986, total video games sales will decrease from US$3.2 billion to US$0.1 billion.
 * December - Sente Technologies, a division of Pizza Time Theater, launches and demonstrates its first title Snake Pit.

Business

 * MCA Universal files suit against Nintendo, claiming that the latter company's video arcade hit Donkey Kong violated Universal's copyright on King Kong. After a brief trial, the judge determined that the rights to the original Kong had passed into the public domain. The case was dismissed, and MCA Universal paid US$1.8 million in damages to Nintendo.,
 * Atari files suit against Coleco, claiming violation of Atari's patents on the Atari 2600 video game console. The previous year, Coleco released a peripheral device that made it possible for Atari 2600 game cartridges to be run on the ColecoVision console.
 * Amusement Developing Section 8 (later known as Sega-AM2), a research and development department of Sega, is established under the supervision of Yu Suzuki in Tokyo, Japan.
 * Milton Bradley takes over distribution of the Vectrex console after purchasing General Consumer Electronics.
 * New companies: Aackosoft, Alligata, Beyond, Graftgold, Infogrames, Origin Systems, Interplay, Navarre, Mastertronic, Spectrum HoloByte, Tynesoft
 * Defunct companies: Games by Apollo, U.S. Games, Xonox.

Games
Arcade
 * January – Namco releases Xevious.
 * March – Sega releases Astron Belt in the Japanese market, the second laserdisc video game. It uses pre-rendered, computer-animated film footage as backdrops, overlaid with sprite graphics.
 * May – Atari releases Star Wars, a color vector graphics game based on the popular film franchise.
 * Konami releases Gyruss in Japan. Centuri distributes the game in North America.
 * June 14 – Nintendo releases Mario Bros., which features the first appearance of Mario's brother, Luigi.
 * June 19 – Cinematronics releases Advanced Microcomputer Systems's Dragon's Lair, the third laserdisc video game, and the first in the American market.
 * June – Data East releases Bega's Battle, a laserdisc video game. It uses anime FMV cut scenes to develop a story between the game's shooting stages, which would later become the standard approach to video game storytelling.
 * August – Sega releases Astron Belt in Europe, as the first laserdisc game in the region.
 * September – Konami releases Track & Field.
 * November – Sega releases Astron Belt in the United States.
 * December – Namco releases Pole Position II, adding three additional tracks.
 * Atari releases the trackball-controlled Crystal Castles.
 * Bally/Midway releases Spy Hunter. They also release Jr. Pac-Man and quiz game Professor Pac-Man without Namco's authorization, and the latter is an immediate flop.
 * Nintendo releases Punch-Out!! in Japan.
 * Williams releases Blaster, which was originally programmed on an Atari 8-bit computer.
 * Parker Brothers releases James Bond 007.

Personal computer
 * June – Yuji Horii releases The Portopia Serial Murder Case for the NEC PC-6001 in Japan. It is an influential adventure game that lays the foundations for the visual novel genre.
 * July 8 – Infocom releases Planetfall, which becomes one of their top sellers.
 * August 23 – Origin Systems publishes Ultima III: Exodus, one of the first role-playing video games to use tactical, turn-based combat. It is released for the Apple II, Atari 8-bit computers, Commodore 64, and IBM PC.
 * ASCII releases Bokosuka Wars for the Sharp X1 in Japan. It is a precursor to the tactical role-playing game and real-time strategy genres.
 * Koei releases Nobunaga's Ambition for Japanese computers. Its combination of role-playing, turn-based grand strategy and management simulation elements sets a standard for the historical simulation and strategy RPG genres.
 * Electronic Arts publishes its first five titles: Hard Hat Mack, Pinball Construction Set, Archon: The Light and the Dark, M.U.L.E., and Worms?.
 * Bug-Byte releases Matthew Smith's Manic Miner, a platform game, for the ZX Spectrum.
 * Ultimate Play the Game, later known as Rare, releases its first video games, Jetpac and Atic Atac, for the ZX Spectrum.
 * Hudson Soft releases Bomberman for the MSX and FM-7.
 * Psion releases Chequered Flag, the first driving game published for the ZX Spectrum, one of the first computer car simulators, and the first driving game with selectable cars.
 * The 4-player simultaneous Dandy is released for the Atari 8-bit computers. It directly inspires 1985's Gauntlet arcade game.
 * Muse Software releases a port of Castle Wolfenstein for the MS-DOS.

Console
 * December 12 – Nintendo publishes Donkey Kong Jr. Math, for the Famicom.
 * Mattel Electronics publishes World Series Baseball for the Intellivision, one of the first video games to use multiple camera angles.
 * Activision's final big year of Atari 2600 releases includes Enduro, Decathlon, Keystone Kapers, Robot Tank, and Space Shuttle: A Journey into Space.

Hardware
Arcade
 * May – Sega Laserdisc hardware releases, as the first laserdisc video game hardware.
 * July – Sega System 1 releases, with Star Jacker game. Its graphics chips are later used in the Sega System 16 and Sega Space Harrier boards.
 * December – Namco Libble Rabble (System 16 Universal) releases, as Namco's second arcade system board to use a 16-bit microprocessor.

Console
 * July 15 – Sega releases the SG-1000 console in Japan, on the same day as the Famicom.
 * July 15 – Nintendo releases the Family Computer (Famicom) console in Japan. Shortly after its release, complaints begin to surface about rampant system instability, prompting Nintendo to issue a product recall and to rerelease the machine with a new motherboard. It would later be released worldwide as the Nintendo Entertainment System (NES).
 * October – Casio launches the Casio PV-1000 in Japan. It does not remain on the market for long.
 * October – Gakken launches the Compact Vision TV Boy in Japan. It's the last second generation console released. It was expensive and obsolete at launch, being discontinued shortly after.
 * GameLine, a combination modem and dialup game distribution service for the Atari 2600, is announced but never ships.

Personal computer
 * January – Apple Computer releases the Apple IIe, which becomes their most popular 8-bit machine.
 * June 16 – Microsoft Japan releases MSX, an early standardized home computer architecture.
 * March – Atari releases the poorly received 1200XL computer. Late in the year it and the rest of the Atari 8-bit computer series are replaced by the 600XL and 800XL.
 * June – Mattel Electronics releases the Aquarius home computer, originally designed by Radofin Electronics Far East.
 * October – Coleco releases the Adam home computer. It is only on the market for 15 months.
 * October – Mattel discontinues the Aquarius.
 * Acorn Computers release the Acorn Electron, a cut down version of their BBC Micro to compete in the under £200 home computer market. Problems in manufacture see only 1 in 8 presales being delivered for the Christmas market.
 * Sega releases the SC-3000, a personal computer version of the SG-1000 console, in Japan.

title: 1983 in video games


text:
User:Beeglebug

About Me:
I was born on the 25th May 1981, in Wolverhampton, England.

title: User:Beeglebug


text:
Talk:Yad Vashem

Palestinian village?
I have seen claims circulating on social media that Yad Vashem was supposedly built on top of the remains of a depopulated Palestinian village, but searches on Google reveal nothing. Maybe they are referring to Deir Yassin, but that was located to the south of Yad Vashem, not beneath it. Any truth to this claim or is it simply misinfo? Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 13:04, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

+sculptor of "The Eternal Flame"
Please, supplement

> Sculpture by Kosso Eloul, 1960, bronze >

to

Welt-der-Form (talk) 18:50, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ~ Eejit43 ( talk ) 05:06, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Notable visitors?
Seems like unencyclopedic trivia to me. What other articles about places have visitors sections? Clarityfiend (talk) 06:53, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
 * It is unencyclopedic, and should be removed or redone. You could try a really bold edit and remove the entire section, but a lot of people have worked on it, and there are a lot of references, so I'm guessing there would be pushback. For starters, we are an online encyclopedia, not a powerpoint slideshow with bullet-point slides; and this article is not a list article, so all the bullet itsms should be converted to prose. Probably one reason it's a bullet list, is that there is no significant coverage of these visits as a collective topic, and nothing but passing mentions of individual visitors in the news of the day, when this or that head of state is on site. (And MOS:FLAGICON may apply as well). WP:DUEWEIGHT may be another concern, as these names are not the first thing that comes up.
 * I checked titles and snippets of the first 100 results at Google books, and no visitors were mentioned. In Google scholar, of the top ten results, #3 had the word 'visitor' in it: Attitudes Of Israeli Visitors Tovvards the Holocaust Remembrance Site of Yad Vashem, but it is a serious, academic article, and not about trivia. This article would be more appropriate as a resource in a section about "#Visitors reactions" (not the trivia honeypot "#Notable visitors") and would be a more worthwhile, more interesting, and more compliant with editing guidelines than the current section.
 * A very few visits do have historical importance, such as the 1973 multi-day visit by West German Chancellor willy Brandt ((NY Times (1973)), and I find it beyond ironic that of all the trivia included in that section, perhaps the most important visit of all is not covered anywhere in the article, nor even a lonely bullet item lost among the others in that section, though it was clearly of encyclopedic, even historic significance.
 * My preference would be to remove the section, retain a very few names (Sadat, J-P II) and redo the content as prose, and either create a new section mentioning them, and add Brandt and scholarly articles such as the one on Israeli reactions. Mathglot (talk) 21:21, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Just wanted to add, that one compromise approach, which would be to create a new article, List of notable visitors to Yad Vashem, and move everything there. This would deal with both the WP:UNDUE WEIGHT issue here, as well as the TRIVIA problem at the same time. I still think there might be a side issue of what the WP:LISTCRITERIA would be at the new article, but I, for one, wouldn't worry too much about what happens at the list article, and could concentrate more on keeping the main article up to standards. Mathglot (talk) 21:28, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

virtual words

 * The name "Yad Vashem" is taken from a verse in the Book of Isaiah (56:5): "[To] them will I give in my house and within my walls a [memorial] and a [name], better than sons and daughters; I will give them an everlasting [name], that shall not be cut off [from memory]."

Customarily, brackets mark words that are implied but not present in the source. If that is so for all of these, one my question how the name Yad Vashem was taken from this verse! –Tamfang (talk) 01:25, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 10 November 2023
Change "Yom HaShoah, vommemoration day in Israel" to "Yom HaShoah, commemoration day in Israel." Minor typo should be fixed please and thank you. 21Helios12 (talk) 04:20, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
 * ✅ Fixed. Thank you for taking the time to request this typo be corrected. — Sirdog (talk) 04:33, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 29 May 2024
Please make the following change to the article: StativStakitKasket (talk) 09:10, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Done. Clarityfiend (talk) 09:53, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Yad Vashem


text:
Talk:DNA/Archive 5

This Page Should Be Protected 14 february 2004
Can this stop being reverted, or does it need to be locked? Pakaran. 01:11, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)

It needs to be protected and locked. Lirath Q. Pynnor

[P0M]: It needs to be protected and locked because of Lir's interference.

Unfortunately, it's now been protected and locked in 168...'s version by 168..., which is a rather significant breach of sysop good behavior. In theory I could still revert it to the version that was worked out here on talk:, but only by sinking to the same level. An interesting if frustrating situation. Bryan 01:32, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Yes, a valuable lesson in the intrinsic absurdities of the system we have here.168...|...Talk 01:34, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)

The only problem I have with the system we have right here is that it hasn't stripped you of your sysop status more quickly. Not only is it immensely complicating stopping this edit war in an acceptable manner, you're also giving us a horrible reputation in the process. Bryan 01:38, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)

That's the only problem you admit to, at least. BTW, what reputation am I giving you? 168...|...Talk 01:44, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Bryan looks much better to me than people with the back panels of their long johns down. P0M

Sound like a koan. The sound of one panel flapping?168...|...Talk 01:57, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)

See The wrong version? However, it's never a good idea to use, or to be seen to be appearing to use, your own sysop powers in an edit conflict one is involved in. I've found that asking others to act as sysops in this situation helps, even if I know my opinions are the only right and proper ones. -- The Anome 02:15, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)

 * 168 has been temporarily de-sysoped. Considering that I've been uninvolved in the edit war until just a few hours ago, would it be reasonable for me to revert the article's intro back to the consensus version that was hashed out here on talk:? I think it's a good intro, but I didn't have any hand in writing it so hopefully that leaves me "untainted." :) Bryan 02:31, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)

 * I wouldn't have a problem with trhat. I'd been meaning to just hand-add a msg:protected to the top of that old version, when the whole 168 headache started I didn't ever get around to it.  Pakaran. 02:33, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)
 * You have my support too. Stewart Adcock 02:50, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)

 * Since what 168... did was counter to policy I fully support such a change. --mav 02:51, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)

 * Done. I left the page still protected, though; I somehow doubt this matter is completely and totally resolved now. :) Bryan 02:59, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Somewhere in here, possibly under The Role of the Sequence, a mention should probably be made of the existence and importance of Introns and Exons. For instance, some people think substitution of Exons are the likely units for evolution. See: Why Genes In Pieces?, by Walter Gilbert, Nature. 1978 Feb 9;271(5645):501. It is easy to show that the common notion of evolution through random base changes can not be correct, and the persistence of this simple minded notion causes a lot of problems for the acceptance of the theory of evolution.

Just curious...why is that page protected ? 01 of march 2004
Since there hasn't been any discussion of this article in over 2 weeks in spite its having been protected all this time, are we just leaving this protected semi-permanently? I'm not aware of what the issues currently are here. Can someone advise? Jwrosenzweig 17:58, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * [Peak:] Welcome to the New Wikipedia! This page has gone through several protection/unprotection cycles, with no agreement possible amongst the warring parties. Several of us have tried to alert the Wikipedia community to the problems that the current "rules of engagement" entail in the presence of persistent subvandalism. In this case, the outcome is the alternative: either Page Protection (and therefore, according to current rules, no changes allowed!), or a whole lot of wasted time. Besides this Talk page, two entry points to further details are:
 * Requests_for_comment/Lir
 * Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_comment/168
 * Edit_wars_in_progress
 * Peak 18:17, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Other long comments from february to march
I find it shocking that certain people can't behave in a civil manner in the public forum that is Wikipedia. We all realise that some of us have issues with various portions of this article. 168..., you had the opportunity to involve yourself with the final, productive, discussions but you chose not to. I'd like to suggest that you play your silly games elsewhere. Your personal crusade against Lir might very well be warranted, but it is clearly detrimental to progress on this article. You are welcome to suggest changes to that first passage, here, just like everybody else. Lir, you say, "Its pointless for me to discuss the 2nd disputed portion when what goes in the rest of the article depends on what is at the beginning." The first part has been decided, you are welcome to discuss the second passage or not, it is up to you. However, I think it is fair to say that the rest of us will continue to iron out problems with the second passage with or without you.

 * Since you have been so forthright with me, I will confess to you that I too find your process a silly game, and an insidious one too. Your vote took place despite my opposition and has not placated Lir, which was the whole reason for it in the first place. Voting also is far from the established procedure here, where anybody anytime in the future can come and change anything. Voting is particularly problematic in the case of this article, with which lots more people would be involved and around to vote if the proceedings on this page were not try ing to the patience of saints. What I am advocating, and indeed trying to force with my reverts, is reasoned discussion. In contrast to votes, reasoned discussion has ample precedent at Wikipedia, and is I believe both the preferred and predominant procedure. There is nobody here more committed to reasoned discussion than I. Nobody. My passion for reasoned discussion is so great that I can tell when someone is not practicing it or is incapable of it. That's why I won't discuss things with Lir. I would be very surprised if anybody else here did not agree at this point agree that Lir is incapable of reasoned discussion. I am shocked that you, Stewart, should seem to be able to feel so righteously that it is I who should go along with your plan and not the other way around. The strategy of the advocates for voting seems to be: hold a vote so that you can either protect the article against Lir or ban him if he doesn't go along with it. I think that is narrow minded (only about this article), oriented toward the short-term (only about the first paragraph and ignoring the likely resumption of protection) and probably more doomed to fail than my strategy (because Lir has never been banned over his many many similar editing disagreements). Everybody here would be more true to their beliefs and would better serve both this article and Wikipedia generally if we were to get together and take a united stand against Lir, get rid him, and go back to discussing the article like the reasonable people all of the rest of us are. Instead, it seems, people would rather portray me as a crank and help to get me banned instead of Lir. I will continue to do what I have been doing until people either join me or ban me.  168...|...Talk 01:12, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)

If anyone wants to contribute to this article in a constructive way, without getting drawn into this quagmire of flames and personal agendas, please consider writing the section currently entitled, "More on DNA replication". Stewart Adcock 23:53, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Except, the thing is, the first part has not been decided. You have expressed your opinion, and now after we have discovered that we agree on one point, you refuse to discuss the second and third points. You are free to spend as much time looking at the second paragraph as you wish, when you are done -- I will be happy to continue discussing the first paragraph; after which, I will want to move on to the second paragraph. Lirath Q. Pynnor 00:12, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)

 * Okay. If you think you can convince other people to agree with you, please clearly state your issues with the first part along with your suggested changes and we can all consider them.  In the meantime, the rest of us will carefully digest the contents of the next disputed paragraph.  Stewart Adcock 00:18, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)

[P0M:] I'm thinking of archiving some of the really old stuff currently on this talk page. It won't be "disappeared." It is becoming a bit difficult to follow comments because some recent comments have been added near the top. There's nothing wrong with doing that except that I noticed elsewhere that I would sometimes miss entire range wars that went on in the upper 40000. P0M 10:35, 6 Mar 2004 (UTC)

---

unprotected on the 7th of march
After two weeks of protection, I took the initiative and unprotected this page. Please be considerate to one another. Please be cordial. Please review Wikiquette. Work together. Find compromises. Hash it out in the TALK arena.

The reason for my decision is that protected pages are a hindrance to the wikipedia project. Other people should have access to changing this article. I hope it does not spiral into another edit war.

Sincerely, Kingturtle 00:34, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * It already has. --mav 01:00, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * I see that. :) Can you please refrain from reverting? :) Kingturtle 01:01, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * How about we go with the three-revert rule instead? Last I saw the consensus on which version of the intro was preferred was quite clear, and I don't believe that 168... should be able to force a different version out of sheer bloody-mindedness. Bryan 01:07, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * Please, let's refrain from bandying about terms like mindless. We are trying to move forward with a sense of cooperation. Rather than revert, let's have detailed conversations in TALK about edits. Kingturtle 01:10, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * I didn't use the term "mindless", I used the term "bloody-mindedness". I think that this is a quite reasonable term to use to describe a situation where a user keeps on reverting an article to the version he prefers despite anything that's being said about it on talk:. Bryan 01:14, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * Nevertheless, language like that hurts what we are trying to do here...which is to move forward and to collaborate. We must find a way to have the DNA article exist without protection. We all need to find ways to help :) Kingturtle 01:19, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * I reverted once. My last edit was a merge of 168...'s best sentence. I think the merged version is superior to both individual versions. --mav

 * The merging is quite good. Thank you for that prop Mav.

 * Thanks Ant. --mav

Before we merge, could we please, as I have asked many many many many times, discuss the merits of the voted-for phrases vis-a-vis the long-standing, brilliant-prose elected first paragraph of yore. e.g. I don't think "nucleic acid" is important enough to deserve mention in the first paragraph outside of its appearance in the word "Deoxyribonucleic acid." The term appears in the history section. It could appear higher too, but I don't think it belongs in the intro and I am happy to repeat my reasons why, which people did not bother to respond to.168...|...Talk 03:13, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * We already voted that word in. The class of biomolecules that DNA belongs to is an important thing to mention in the lead section - which should be able to stand alone as a concise article in its own right. --mav

The vote, as you pretend to understand it, did not take place. What did take place was not approved by concensus and is non-binding. 168...|...Talk 03:20, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * Very little is "binding" on Wikipedia. There did seem to be a widespread agreement on what the opening paragraph should be like, though, however "official" a vote it may have been. Perhaps you could set up a new poll if you think it would show otherwise? Bryan 03:32, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * People should go to Talk:DNA/archive_4 and decide for themselves (vote if you like as well). Just because 168 refused to participate does not mean that the vote was meaningless or did not take place. The purpose of the vote was to find out what people who have edited this page think the lead section of this article should consist of. --mav

[P0M:] Kingturtle is right, but the problem is that everybody's ego-interests are on the line. As long as people cannot put their egos aside, the quest for vindication will continue. P0M 01:27, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)

The problem, or one of them, is that people have short memories and that lots of people who were not around during the discussions long ago think they understand what is going on and they don't. Zen and pop psychology don't trump ignorance.168...|...Talk 03:13, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * I agree that is a big problem. Why dont you make it easier for everyone to understand what you are trying to do by reverting this page as opposed to editing it? Bensaccount 04:06, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * Before we merge, could we please, as I have asked many many many many times, discuss the merits of the voted-for phrases vis-a-vis the long-standing, brilliant-prose elected first paragraph of yore. e.g. I don't think "nucleic acid" is important enough to deserve mention in the first paragraph outside of its appearance in the word "Deoxyribonucleic acid." The term appears in the history section. It could appear higher too, but I don't think it belongs in the intro and I am happy to repeat my reasons why, which people did not bother to respond to.168...|...Talk 03:13, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * Repeating the same thing over and over again and trying to mask reverts by marking them as minor edits will not work 168. That was your 5th revert of the day, BTW. --mav

 * What am I left to do but repeat when people don't read or believe what I write? Mav your counting is as faulty as your judgment and sense of fair play.168...|...Talk 04:24, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * I count five as well; 17:09, 20:03, 20:17, 21:15 and 21:17. Bryan 04:27, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * You're being liberal then. Apply the same counting principles to Mav and see what you come up with.168...|...Talk 04:36, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * I count only one revert; 14:40. He also made two attempts at merging your changes while restoring previous versions, at 18:06 and 20:07, so if you count those too that's three. However, using the same counting principles as I did with you, I wouldn't count those as reverts myself. Bryan 04:43, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * I count three for you:

 * 1) (cur) (last)  . . 20:16, 6 Mar 2004 . . Bryan Derksen (undo 168's reversion.)
 * 2) (cur) (last) . . 19:22, 6 Mar 2004 . . Bryan Derksen (In that case, I'll step in. Restoring Maveric's compromise version.)
 * 3) (cur) (last) . . 18:40, 13 Feb 2004 . . Bryan Derksen (reverting page back to the version that was worked out on talk:. Note that I'm reverting a protected page, which may be controversial, but which under these circumstances I believe is warranted.)

 * I think you are counting fairly, in the sense that I believe you are looking at my changes and Mav's with the same single set of criteria in mind: It is true that Mav made what have the appearance of substantive edits in his mergings. But their effect was a) to bring back, in various ways, the same old contentious material and b)to perpetuate and promulgate the view that I have no legitimate grounds for contesting their implementation without discussion and c)to continue ignoring my call for discussion. By a not unreasonable set of criteria different than yours, they were reversions, and they were antagonistic. 168...|...Talk 06:48, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * Not to mention now he's protected the page again after reverting. Looks like the same situation we had before is happening all over again. Bryan 04:22, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * Looks like the same mob lynching is about to recur under the same unrepentant leadership.168...|...Talk 04:26, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I haven't had time to read through the entire article but I don't see any reason to revert. There is vast amounts of correct information on DNA so the only reasonable things to do are add information or move information into a correct subcatagory. Bensaccount 01:35, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)

[P0M:] Smarting a bit after 168's remarks that seemed to include me among "people who were not around during the discussions long ago [and] think they understand what is going on and they don't... [and should take it to heart that] Zen and pop psychology don't trump ignorance," I went back and read through the archives. I think it is clear that Lir has achieved a stunning victory against all others by playing "let's you and him fight," and I can understand why 168 does not like to be in the position of dealing with his victory. I don't think anybody else should be happy with that victory either. If anything has emerged from these discussions its seems to be a consensus regarding Lir's edits. That consensus should not, IMHO, argue in favor of any of the other candidate passages. P0M 06:14, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Request for comment Lir (Peak, 9 of march)
Some newcomers may also not realize that time and again, seemingly everyone who has had to deal with Lir on Wikipedia has sooner or later come to the conclusion that it is pointless to engage in dialog with him. Volumes of testimony to this effect have been written, but an introduction may be found at Requests_for_comment/Lir. User:Eloquence also made some insightful remarks at User_talk:Eloquence. Peak 04:16, 9 Mar 2004 (UTC)

You know, this is really rude. Would you please refrain from making deragatory personal attacks. Lirath Q. Pynnor

== Is this page protected from editing ? 07 march 2004 ==

From today, this page is only partially protected.

The DNA page has been protected for many days since the beginning of 2004, due to an edit war on the overview part. The issue is still unsolved, and the last (very temporary) unprotection (5 to 7th of march) resulted in a new edit war. However, many users find unappropriate that the whole article be protected for so many days, with no one being able to improve other parts of the article.

To avoid this page being blocked for days in a row, the page has been unprotected; However, only part of it may be edited.

The overview passage is protected and must not be edited. To discuss this overview passage, see below.

The rest of the article is open for edition.

Any edition of content of the overview part may result in a immediate soft ban of 24 hours.

User:Anthere 13:34, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Note : entry points to further details are:
 * Requests_for_comment/Lir
 * User_talk:Eloquence (about Lir as well)
 * Requests_for_comment/168
 * Requests for comment/Mav
 * Edit_wars_in_progress
 * all the archives listed above.

The majority vote
The introductory passage (the first two paragraphs) passage is highly controversial.

Disagreement over it occured between 168 and Lir.

A vote was held to decide on a version that was acceptable to the majority. A particular passage was selected by everybody except Lir and 168... This passage was crafted to take into consideration in particular Lir opinion.

Today, Lir is not participating to the discussion any more. Each time someone tries to insert the alleged majority approved passage, 168 reverts it.

What is consensus
I do not think an article should ever be written per majority opinion. But rather by consensus. In consensus decision making, there is something called veto. The veto is used when a decision is taken, while at least one person is absolutely opposed to the decision chosen.

I believe that when one of the most proeminent and recognised editor of an article opposes a veto to a solution voted by other editors of the article AND by people who have not participated in the discussion really, there is a problem, and the problem must be adressed.

I do not think repeating ad nauseam that the right solution is the decision voted by the majority is gonna improve anything here. Better assume that the solution chosen by the majority is not acceptable, since there is a veto on it, and try to move on to another solution, that maybe will not suit the majority as well, but which at least will not encounter a veto position.

If not, I suggest that we open a discussion on what consensus really means for you.

Suggestion
Since there is a strong veto over the vote approved text, I suggest that we just drop that text, and try to work on a new one entirely.

I would first like all parties to suggest a text that would suit them personnaly. This text shoud not be the voted text. This text should not try initially to fit one or the other of the disputant opinion, just yours.

Yes, I know, it sounds a bit like "doing it all over again". Well, yes :-)

FirmLittleFluffyThing 14:28, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)

More explanations
here FirmLittleFluffyThing 15:03, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Update on the 8th of march
This I said above stays valid as far as I am concerned for a few days, in case 168 is back after some wikivacations. That means no edition will be acceptable on these two paragraphs for a little longer FirmLittleFluffyThing

Comments
Any contributor to this page who reverts it for more than three times in a row will be banned for 24 hours.—Eloquence 18:31, Mar 7, 2004 (UTC)

 * any contributor who will edit the top of that page, even once, will be banned for 24 hours. Any of the cases will be done either by Erik or by me. FirmLittleFluffyThing

Thank you. I assume there is a prominent warning at the beginning of the article itself. P0M 18:37, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)

There is no such policy. Kindly stop inventing new policies, particulary doing so without seeking community consensus. Jamesday 00:15, 9 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * See Revert.—Eloquence

Still a guideline proposal on the talk page, not a policy yet. It does look as though it's going to be policy quite soon... but that's still not today, so we suffer a little longer. Hopefully there soon will be banning or similar for periods of time to end the silliness. Jamesday

 * It's a policy - it has received consensus, what more do you want? What is still not decided if there can be 24 hour bans to enforce it. This is a special case, though -- see also Anthere's proposal, which is not exactly standard procedure either.—Eloquence 02:17, Mar 9, 2004 (UTC)

 * my proposal is not standard procedure, agreed. FirmLittleFluffyThing 06:31, 9 Mar 2004 (UTC)

The Wrong Version
http://meta.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wrong_Version (thanks Angel) FirmLittleFluffyThing

Reversion by peak 15/03/2004
This section is about the reversion to the oldest version from the newest version by user:Peak. (According to this discussion page the article is no longer protected.) Bensaccount

The opening section is protected. Lirath Q. Pynnor

 * Hey, Lir - we're on the same page!!!! Now, if you'd just add one more ~ to your edits, we might really make some progress :-) Peak 07:07, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Look at the protection as of March 9. (above) It is not. Bensaccount 23:23, 14 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I feel like my words have not been understood. I wrote

 * no encyclopedic article is "done" on Wikipedia, and that no vote made a couple of weeks ago by 5 people, justify that a preambule stays frozen for the months to come. The discussions below suggest me, that some editors do not perceive the current "community" version as necessarily the best ever.

I do not think this can be interpretated as

 * per Anthere's directions not to change preamble without agreement on Talk page.

FirmLittleFluffyThing 05:25, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)

[Peak:] In the article, Anthere wrote:

 * -- WARNING : the first two paragraphs below are NOT OPEN TO BEING EDITED. THEY ARE VIRTUALLY PROTECTED. These paragraphs caused significant debate. Instead, suggest any putative changes on the talk page.

 * --ANY EDITING OF THE FOLLOWING PARAGRAPH MAY RESULT IN IMMEDIATE BANNING, WHOEVER THE EDITOR IS.

And in the Edit Summaries, we were told:
 * 14:11, 7 Mar 2004 . . Anthere (reversion of the article. Please do not edit the first two paragraphs)

 * 13:50, 7 Mar 2004 . . Anthere (I will soft ban any editor who will edit the first two paragraphs. I am serious. The other paragraphs are open for edition )

 * This was written when the preambule was frozen to edition. FirmLittleFluffyThing

If Anthere is now saying that the preamble is a free-for-all, then she may as well say: "Let the edit war begin (again)!" Please clarify, Ant. Peak 07:01, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)

[P0M:] See above, before the heading "Edit boldly where angels..." Anthere's words were: "If you find a better phrasing or content for the preamble, just do it."
 * [Peak:] Those words by Anthere were extremely ambiguous. ("Better" by whose standards? What does "do it" refer to?) In trying to interpret them in a way that was consistent with her other injunctions, and being mindful that she is not a native English speaker, I interpreted them to mean something like: "If you find a formulation which you and others here are agreed is better, then make the change." It could have been interpreted in many other ways, e.g. "If you find a phrasing which you believe to be better, then propose it on the Talk page." Peak 09:00, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Where we are at (mar 15)

 * Actually, until someone disagrees with the current proposed version of the preamble, the idea of which ideas need to be conveyed is now clear. Bensaccount 23:34, 14 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * [P0M:] The above declaration is a non sequiter.

 * Ok it may not be 'perfectly clear', but it is the clearest and least disputed version as of yet. Bensaccount 00:24, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * It does not follow logically from "nobody has disagreed with the current proposed version of the preamble" that "the idea of which ideas need to be conveyed is clear", nor does it follow that "the idea of which ideas need to be conveyed is relatively clear." P0M 00:50, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * [Peak to Bensaccount:] "Current proposed version"??? I see many proposed versions. I also see much disagreement.  And lest there be any doubt, I strongly disagree with the version that Bensaccount installed as of 17:40, 14 Mar 2004 UTC. Peak 07:26, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)

''I took out the namecalling and stuff that belongs in the reversion by Peak section. Bensaccount 16:04, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)''

 * If you follow the heading you will see that all of the proposed intros were posted and people commented on them and based on the comments a new intro was created.

This would normally occur directly on the article but since the passage is so much disputed, all the changes were listed and room for objections was left open.

People should not change something that is controversial without giving a reason that is undisputed.

Peak, if you strongly disagree, why is this the first I hear of it? There was a section for comments right under it and I was the only one who put a comment there before you reverted.Bensaccount 16:04, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * [Peak to Bensaccount:] There has been too much moving of text around for me to follow the precise sequence of events, but one of the reasons I did not cite specific objections was that others had already done so, and so I was just waiting for things to stabilize to the point where some kind of poll or vote would be taken to determine whether there was general agreement, as per Anthere's instructions (at one point in time). By the way, the changes you seem to want are fairly large in relation to the alleged problems with the "near-consensus version." Have you considered proposing specific, incremental changes to the "near-consensus version"? Just a thought... Peak 23:55, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * There was a section for comments right under it and I was the only one who put a comment there before you reverted.
 * Yes every change I made was incremental and the reason was given and undisputed. (unlike your revert)Bensaccount 01:12, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)

(This is in response to your above comment. If this was not why you reverted I will let it go.)Bensaccount 16:18, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * [Peak to Bensaccount: Which comment? Peak 23:55, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)]
 * See above a couple lines. Bensaccount 01:12, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)

title: Talk:DNA/Archive 5


text:
Talk:Bugge Wesseltoft

Untitled
Content deleted as it was copied from http://www.jazzlandrec.com/bugge_bio.html

Karl Naylor 11:53, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Bugge Wesseltoft. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20040402092130/http://www.jazzlandrec.com:80/bugge_bio.html to http://www.jazzlandrec.com/bugge_bio.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 11:29, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

title: Talk:Bugge Wesseltoft


text:
User talk:Marcusvox

Image Tagging for Image:Sympatico.gif
Thanks for uploading Image:Sympatico.gif. 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 User talk:Carnildo/images. 19:50, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

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

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

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following [ this link]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 07:28, 23 May 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Yonatan talk 07:28, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Who's Ya Daddy requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Cyrus     Andiron   11:33, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Image:Paulkeating.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Paulkeating.jpg, has been listed at Images and media for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Sherool (talk) 18:00, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

The Jaywalks
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on The Jaywalks, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because The Jaywalks is pure vandalism; this includes redirects created during cleanup of page move vandalism. To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting The Jaywalks, please affix the template to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. CSDWarnBot (talk) 09:40, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

File:Pc750pix.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Pc750pix.jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Calliopejen1 (talk) 12:02, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

title: User talk:Marcusvox


text: User talk:83.131.124.26

title: User talk:83.131.124.26


text:
Davenport, Greater Manchester

Davenport is a district of Stockport, Greater Manchester, England; until 1974, it was part of Cheshire. At the 2011 census, it had a population of 14,924.

History
Davenport's name arose from the building of Davenport railway station at the behest of the Davenport family, who since the later 14th century had owned Bramall Hall in the neighbouring village of Bramhall. The family name came from an ancestral estate between Holmes Chapel and Congleton, in Mid Cheshire. The estate is recorded in the Domesday Book of 1086, where it is listed as Deneport.

Originally, Davenport's expansion in the 1850s consisted of three key routes, Bramhall Lane, Kennerley Road and Buxton Road, all of which remain in place today.

The 1900s saw an increase in construction of residential houses and commercial developments. The aftermath of World War II saw the demolition of larger, older properties in extensive gardens to make way for smaller private residences and flats.

Transport
The railway station, at Davenport's main road junction, allows travel by rail towards Manchester Piccadilly, Stockport, Hazel Grove and Buxton. Services are generally half-hourly, but hourly on Sundays.

Local bus services are operated by Stagecoach. Routes include the regular 192 service along Buxton Road between Manchester and Hazel Grove.

Places of interest
Cale Green Park is a popular local attraction with its bowling green, tennis court, basketball court and playground.

Stockport Lacrosse Club, the oldest in the world, have played at Cale Green Cricket Club since 1876.

Education
Adswood Primary School and St Ambrose Catholic Primary School are the nearest primary schools.

Stockport Grammar School, founded in 1485, lies next to Davenport Park on Buxton Road, whilst immediately across the road is the local authority comprehensive, Stockport School.

title: Davenport, Greater Manchester


text:
Valier

Valier may refer to:

 * Places
 * Valier, Illinois, a village in the United States
 * Valier, Montana, a town in the United States
 * Villa Duodo, also known as "Villa Valier", in Veneto district, Italy
 * Valier (crater), an impact crater on the Moon

 * People
 * Bertuccio Valier (1596 – 1658), the 102nd Doge of Venice
 * Silvestro Valier (1630 – 1700), the 109th Doge of Venice
 * Max Valier (1895 – 1930), Austrian rocketry pioneer

 * Literature
 * Valier (Middle-earth), female angelic or semi-divine beings in J. R. R. Tolkien's legendarium

title: Valier


text:
Lurline Baths

The Lurline Baths were public salt water baths built in 1894 in San Francisco, California, at the corner of Bush and Larkin streets. The Lurline Baths closed in 1936. The Lurline Pier, also known as the Olympic Pier, at Ocean Beach between Anza and Balboa Streets was built to protect the intake pipe that provided seawater to the baths. The pier existed until about 1966.

The Olympic Salt Water Company owned the baths, which included a swimming pool and water slide. Founded in 1892, the company also supplied water to the Olympic Club as well as smaller commercial baths. Use of sea water for bathing and in swimming pools was common in the 19th century before pollution became an issue. The company built a water distribution system of the intake pipe located 600 feet offshore, almost 4 miles of iron pipe along present-day Geary Boulevard, a water pump, and the reservoir tank located on Laurel Heights. Gravity brought the water to downtown and the customers.

The baths were immortalized by Thomas Edison in August 1897 when he captured 20 seconds (50 feet) of film featuring scenes from the Lurline pool; the main feature is the water slide with some going down in a sitting position and others lying down, head first or feet first.

title: Lurline Baths


text:
Talk:Pinkham's Grant, New Hampshire

Ghost Town?
..so, this is a ghost-town?.. -80.133.108.214 04:16, 7 March 2004
 * I don't think so; I don't think it was ever an inhabited town in the first place. Cooljeanius 13:44, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
 * You'll notice the population used to be above zero, most recently at the 2010 census. Those numbers would be associated with the AMC buildings at the base of the Tuckerman Ravine trails and whether any workers living there at the time were counted as residents by the Census. --Ken Gallager (talk) 12:53, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

Wrong map
The map shows Low and Burbank's Grant, my knowledge of Wikipedia is too limited to know how to fix it :P — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.119.158.130 (talk) 01:38, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Good catch! Luckily someone had already made a map; I just had to guess its name. --Ken Gallager (talk) 12:49, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Pinkham's Grant, New Hampshire


text:
Reading frame

[[File:Reading Frame.png|thumb|400px|An example of three possible forward reading frames for a strand of DNA.

AGG·TGA·CAC·CGC·AAG·CCT·TAT·ATT·AGC A ·GGT·GAC·ACC·GCA·AGC·CTT·ATA·TTA ·GC AG ·GTG·ACA·CCG·CAA·GCC·TTA·TAT·TAG· C ]] In molecular biology, a reading frame is a way of dividing the sequence of nucleotides in a nucleic acid (DNA or RNA) molecule into a set of consecutive, non-overlapping triplets. Where these triplets equate to amino acids or stop signals during translation, they are called codons.

A single strand of a nucleic acid molecule has a phosphoryl end, called the 5′-end, and a hydroxyl or 3′-end. These define the 5′→3′ direction. There are three reading frames that can be read in this 5′→3′ direction, each beginning from a different nucleotide in a triplet. In a double stranded nucleic acid, an additional three reading frames may be read from the other, complementary strand in the 5′→3′ direction along this strand. As the two strands of a double-stranded nucleic acid molecule are antiparallel, the 5′→3′ direction on the second strand corresponds to the 3′→5′ direction along the first strand.

In general, at the most, one reading frame in a given section of a nucleic acid, is biologically relevant (open reading frame). Some viral transcripts can be translated using multiple, overlapping reading frames. There is one known example of overlapping reading frames in mammalian mitochondrial DNA: coding portions of genes for 2 subunits of ATPase overlap.

Genetic code
DNA encodes protein sequence by a series of three-nucleotide codons. Any given sequence of DNA can therefore be read in six different ways: Three reading frames in one direction (starting at different nucleotides) and three in the opposite direction. During transcription, the RNA polymerase read the template DNA strand in the 3′→5′ direction, but the mRNA is formed in the 5′ to 3′ direction. The mRNA is single-stranded and therefore only contains three possible reading frames, of which only one is translated. The codons of the mRNA reading frame are translated in the 5′→3′ direction into amino acids by a ribosome to produce a polypeptide chain.

Open reading frame
An open reading frame (ORF) is a reading frame that has the potential to be transcribed into RNA and translated into protein. It requires a continuous sequence of DNA which may include a start codon, through a subsequent region which has a length that is a multiple of 3 nucleotides, to a stop codon in the same reading frame.

When a putative amino acid sequence resulting from the translation of an ORF remained unknown in mitochondrial and chloroplast genomes, the corresponding open reading frame was called an unidentified reading frame (URF). For example, the MT-ATP8 gene was first described as URF A6L when the complete human mitochondrial genome was sequenced.

Multiple reading frames

The usage of multiple reading frames leads to the possibility of overlapping genes; there may be many of these in viral, prokaryote, and mitochondrial genomes. Some viruses, e.g. hepatitis B virus and BYDV, use several overlapping genes in different reading frames.

In rare cases, a ribosome may shift from one frame to another during translation of an mRNA (translational frameshift). This causes the first part of the mRNA to be translated in one reading frame, and the latter part to be translated in a different reading frame. This is distinct from a frameshift mutation, as the nucleotide sequence (DNA or RNA) is not altered—only the frame in which it is read.

title: Reading frame


text:
User talk:Sharg325

Hello, welcome to Wikipedia. Here's some tips:
 * 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 . If you use four, you can add a datestamp too.
 * Remember to use the show preview button before you save a page.
 * If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page.

Other useful pages are: how to edit, how to write a great article, naming conventions, manual of style and the Wikipedia policies.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Angela. 12:21, Mar 7, 2004 (UTC)

title: User talk:Sharg325


text:
Talk:Media Lens

CE
Made some edits to remove assertions and replace with descriptions. Synonyms for "wrote" and "said" need to be equally neutral.Keith-264 (talk) 14:29, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Oh, while an effort has been made by other editors to show conflicts of interest in ML critics and supporters*, there ought to be a better way of describing MLs worth than by doing more than listing comments for and against.

 * I write on the ML message board so declare an interest.Keith-264 (talk) 14:33, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

 * Don't know if you still watch this page, Keith-264, but the word Pilger currently appears 21 times in this article, while the word Kamm appears only 12 times, respectively 13 and 6 times if one excludes the citations. This number applies to the text and the citations. Just so you know. Philip Cross (talk) 15:11, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Media Lens. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090712121029/http://johnrentoul.independentminds.livejournal.com/87236.html to http://johnrentoul.independentminds.livejournal.com/87236.html
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/53443%2Cnews-comment%2Cnews-politics%2Cbbc-is-not-impartial-independent-nor-even-particularly-truthful%2C2
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060103185929/http://www.chomsky.info/onchomsky/20051031.htm to http://www.chomsky.info/onchomsky/20051031.htm
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/peteroborne/100249502/few-human-beings-can-be-compared-to-jesus-christ-nelson-mandela-was-one

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 19:41, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Media Lens. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110517040852/http://nowthenmagazine.com/issue-38/media-lens/ to http://nowthenmagazine.com/issue-38/media-lens/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131421452000/http://www.tricycle.com/my-view/life-or-death to http://www.tricycle.com/my-view/life-or-death
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100224055453/http://www.medialens.org/about/ to http://www.medialens.org/about/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110224024312/http://www.medialens.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=section&id=1&layout=blog&Itemid=1 to http://www.medialens.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=section&id=1&layout=blog&Itemid=1
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120620145619/http://blogs.independent.co.uk/2011/02/27/banging-the-drum-against-human-rights/ to http://blogs.independent.co.uk/2011/02/27/banging-the-drum-against-human-rights/
 * Added tag to http://www.math.umt.edu/tmme/Monograph1/ONLINEMONOGRAPH_FULL.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091215061702/http://www.medialens.org/alerts/06/060410_iraq_body_count.php to http://www.medialens.org/alerts/06/060410_iraq_body_count.php

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 08:17, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

A few points
Rhacodes, the reason someone added the Journalism panel to the this article would have been the presence there of a link to the Propaganda model page which is listed under "social impact" rather than any aspect of the profession. Cromwell and Edwards do not use the journalist self-description, nor is it present in reliable sources, anything else is original research. They are normally described as media activists, an identifier which they do use and is a fair and non-pejorative description.

I don't see Elliott Murphy's relative obscurity as a problem. He is in the same position as their admirers, bar a handful of exceptions. Most of their most serious detractors have long established Wikipedia articles, one or two, such as Andrew Marr, are quite well known, so your argument is potentially to the disfavour of Media Lens, if followed to its logical conclusion. Given Herman and Chomsky's huge influence on the Media Lens editors, I would assume Cromwell and Edwards are less displeased by Murphy's description of them (having "'taken to heart' the hypothesis of Herman and Chomsky 'probably more than any other writers in Britain'") than anything else in the article. I used his point, partly for emphasis I admit, but also because it is a necessary third-party source to establish the notability of the Herman and Chomsky influence. Philip Cross (talk) 17:34, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

Far left
The introductory sentence was recently amended to state that Media Lens is a “far left” group. A similar amendment was made last year but abandoned after resistance from another editor. Citing a RS which describes someone as “far left” seems fine but can Wikipedia itself take a position on a groups political orientation? If an RS is cited describing an organisation as “far left” would it be more appropriate to do this in the body of the article, e.g. a “response and criticism” section, than in the introduction? Burrobert 14:14, 20 July 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Burrobert (talk • contribs)

 * I've reverted that change; I for one don't consider them "Far Left". They don't advocate for violent revolution, nationalising everything, collectivisation. For what it's worth, I'd guess they're probably anarchists; but I don't think that guesses about their political alignment belong in the lede at all. MrDemeanour (talk) 14:59, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

 * Furthermore, the lede is supposed to summarise sourced material from the article body. There is nothing in the body that says they are "Far Left", let alone anything sourced. "Indisputable" is therefore an absurd edit summary. MrDemeanour (talk) 15:06, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

 * I agree; the term "far-left" certainly does not belong in the lead. They satisfy none of the conditions set out in the far left article to which that editor linked; rather their main purpose is to expose the lying in MSM when the latter try to justify war and military conflict. They are also concerned about the dangers of climate change. For real far-left groups, see Socialist Workers Party, Communist Party of Great Britain, and the like. It may be possible to quote someone calling them "far-left" in the body of the article, with attribution, if balanced with other sources for NPOV. --NSH001 (talk) 23:24, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

Hyperpartisan
The word "hyperpartisan" has recently been added to the description of MediaLens. I reverted it once but it has returned. I can't see that it is supported by any references and does not seem encyclopaedic. There is no explanation of how MediaLens is hyper partisan. What do other editors editors think? Burrobert (talk) 13:28, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

Media Lens missing page sources
You've managed to review Media Lens on your wikipedia page without any reference to articles celebrating their 20th Anniversary. This article for example https://dissidentvoice.org/2021/04/reflecting-on-twenty-years-of-media-lens/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.205.192.46 (talk) 21:35, 16 June 2022 (UTC)

"Media Lens/Archive 7" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Media Lens/Archive 7 and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Regards, SONIC 678 06:26, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

"Media Lens/Archive 6" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Media Lens/Archive 6 and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Regards, SONIC 678 06:26, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

"Media Lens/Archive 5" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Media Lens/Archive 5 and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Regards, SONIC 678 06:26, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

"Media Lens/Archive 4" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Media Lens/Archive 4 and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Regards, SONIC 678 06:26, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

"Media Lens/Archive 3" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Media Lens/Archive 3 and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Regards, SONIC 678 06:26, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

"Media Lens/Archive 2" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Media Lens/Archive 2 and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Regards, SONIC 678 06:26, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Media Lens


text:
User talk:Ding~enwiki

Hello, welcome to Wikipedia. Here's some tips:
 * 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 . If you use four, you can add a datestamp too.
 * Remember to use the show preview button before you save a page.
 * If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page.

Other useful pages are: how to edit, how to write a great article, naming conventions, manual of style and the Wikipedia policies.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Angela. 12:21, Mar 7, 2004 (UTC)

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 Ding. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Ding~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 23:29, 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) 12:10, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Prenatal and perinatal psychology for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Prenatal and perinatal psychology 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/Prenatal and perinatal psychology 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. Salimfadhley (talk) 00:15, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

title: User talk:Ding~enwiki


text:
User talk:Dedioste

My firts user talk comment!

Hello, welcome to Wikipedia. Here's some tips:
 * 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 . If you use four, you can add a datestamp too.
 * Remember to use the show preview button before you save a page.
 * If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page.

Other useful pages are: how to edit, how to write a great article, naming conventions, manual of style and the Wikipedia policies.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Angela. 12:22, Mar 7, 2004 (UTC)

Modified atmosphere
Welcome. I'm amazed Wikipedia had no article on Modified atmosphere packages. Good job dedioste. --Feydey 22:35, 6 May 2005 (UTC)

Right now is nothing more than a stub; I hope to improve it in the next days. --dedioste 10:16, 7 May 2005 (UTC)

title: User talk:Dedioste