text:
Sirolimus

Sirolimus, also known as rapamycin and sold under the brand name Rapamune among others, is a macrolide compound that is used to coat coronary stents, prevent organ transplant rejection, treat a rare lung disease called lymphangioleiomyomatosis, and treat perivascular epithelioid cell tumor (PEComa). It has immunosuppressant functions in humans and is especially useful in preventing the rejection of kidney transplants. It is a mechanistic target of rapamycin (mTOR) kinase inhibitor that reduces the sensitivity of T cells and B cells to interleukin-2 (IL-2), inhibiting their activity.

This compound also has a use in cardiovascular drug-eluting stent technologies to inhibit restenosis.

It is produced by the bacterium Streptomyces hygroscopicus and was isolated for the first time in 1972, from samples of Streptomyces hygroscopicus found on Easter Island. The compound was originally named rapamycin after the native name of the island, Rapa Nui. Sirolimus was initially developed as an antifungal agent. However, this use was abandoned when it was discovered to have potent immunosuppressive and antiproliferative properties due to its ability to inhibit mTOR. It was approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in September 1999. Hyftor was approved for treatment of facial angiofibroma in the European Union in May 2023.

Medical uses
Sirolimus is indicated for the prevention of organ transplant rejection and for the treatment of lymphangioleiomyomatosis (LAM).

Sirolimus (Fyarro), as protein-bound particles, is indicated for the treatment of adults with locally advanced unresectable or metastatic malignant perivascular epithelioid cell tumor (PEComa).

In the EU, sirolimus, as Rapamune, is indicated for the prophylaxis of organ rejection in adults at low to moderate immunological risk receiving a renal transplant and, as Hyftor, is indicated for the treatment of facial angiofibroma associated with tuberous sclerosis complex.

Prevention of transplant rejection
The chief advantage sirolimus has over calcineurin inhibitors is its low toxicity toward kidneys. Transplant patients maintained on calcineurin inhibitors long-term tend to develop impaired kidney function or even kidney failure; this can be avoided by using sirolimus instead. It is particularly advantageous in patients with kidney transplants for hemolytic-uremic syndrome, as this disease is likely to recur in the transplanted kidney if a calcineurin-inhibitor is used. However, on 7 October 2008, the FDA approved safety labeling revisions for sirolimus to warn of the risk for decreased renal function associated with its use. In 2009, the FDA notified healthcare professionals that a clinical trial conducted by Wyeth showed an increased mortality in stable liver transplant patients after switching from a calcineurin inhibitor-based immunosuppressive regimen to sirolimus. A 2019 cohort study of nearly 10,000 lung transplant recipients in the US demonstrated significantly improved long-term survival using sirolimus + tacrolimus instead of mycophenolate mofetil + tacrolimus for immunosuppressive therapy starting at one year after transplant.

Sirolimus can also be used alone, or in conjunction with a calcineurin inhibitor (such as tacrolimus), and/or mycophenolate mofetil, to provide steroid-free immunosuppression regimens. Impaired wound healing and thrombocytopenia are possible side effects of sirolimus; therefore, some transplant centers prefer not to use it immediately after the transplant operation, but instead administer it only after a period of weeks or months. Its optimal role in immunosuppression has not yet been determined, and it remains the subject of a number of ongoing clinical trials.

Lymphangioleiomyomatosis
In May 2015, the FDA approved sirolimus to treat lymphangioleiomyomatosis (LAM), a rare, progressive lung disease that primarily affects women of childbearing age. This made sirolimus the first drug approved to treat this disease. LAM involves lung tissue infiltration with smooth muscle-like cells with mutations of the tuberous sclerosis complex gene (TSC2). Loss of TSC2 gene function activates the mTOR signaling pathway, resulting in the release of lymphangiogenic growth factors. Sirolimus blocks this pathway.

The safety and efficacy of sirolimus treatment of LAM were investigated in clinical trials that compared sirolimus treatment with a placebo group in 89 patients for 12 months. The patients were observed for 12 months after the treatment had ended. The most commonly reported side effects of sirolimus treatment of LAM were mouth and lip ulcers, diarrhea, abdominal pain, nausea, sore throat, acne, chest pain, leg swelling, upper respiratory tract infection, headache, dizziness, muscle pain and elevated cholesterol. Serious side effects including hypersensitivity and swelling (edema) have been observed in renal transplant patients.

While sirolimus was considered for treatment of LAM, it received orphan drug designation status because LAM is a rare condition.

The safety of LAM treatment by sirolimus in people younger than 18 years old has not been tested.

Coronary stent coating
The antiproliferative effect of sirolimus has also been used in conjunction with coronary stents to prevent restenosis in coronary arteries following balloon angioplasty. The sirolimus is formulated in a polymer coating that affords controlled release through the healing period following coronary intervention. Several large clinical studies have demonstrated lower restenosis rates in patients treated with sirolimus-eluting stents when compared to bare-metal stents, resulting in fewer repeat procedures. A sirolimus-eluting coronary stent was marketed by Cordis, a division of Johnson & Johnson, under the tradename Cypher. However, this kind of stent may also increase the risk of vascular thrombosis.

Vascular malformations
Sirolimus is used to treat vascular malformations. Treatment with sirolimus can decrease pain and the fullness of vascular malformations, improve coagulation levels, and slow the growth of abnormal lymphatic vessels. Sirolimus is a relatively new medical therapy for the treatment of vascular malformations in recent years, sirolimus has emerged as a new medical treatment option for both vascular tumors and vascular malformations, as a mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR), capable of integrating signals from the PI3K/AKT pathway to coordinate proper cell growth and proliferation. Hence, sirolimus is ideal for "proliferative" vascular tumors through the control of tissue overgrowth disorders caused by inappropriate activation of the PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway as an antiproliferative agent.

Angiofibromas
Sirolimus has been used as a topical treatment of angiofibromas with tuberous sclerosis complex (TSC). Facial angiofibromas occur in 80% of patients with TSC, and the condition is very disfiguring. A retrospective review of English-language medical publications reporting on topical sirolimus treatment of facial angiofibromas found sixteen separate studies with positive patient outcomes after using the drug. The reports involved a total of 84 patients, and improvement was observed in 94% of subjects, especially if treatment began during the early stages of the disease. Sirolimus treatment was applied in several different formulations (ointment, gel, solution, and cream), ranging from 0.003 to 1% concentrations. Reported adverse effects included one case of perioral dermatitis, one case of cephalea, and four cases of irritation.

In April 2022, sirolimus was approved by the FDA for treating angiofibromas.

Adverse effects
The most common adverse reactions (≥30% occurrence, leading to a 5% treatment discontinuation rate) observed with sirolimus in clinical studies of organ rejection prophylaxis in individuals with kidney transplants include: peripheral edema, hypercholesterolemia, abdominal pain, headache, nausea, diarrhea, pain, constipation, hypertriglyceridemia, hypertension, increased creatinine, fever, urinary tract infection, anemia, arthralgia, and thrombocytopenia.

The most common adverse reactions (≥20% occurrence, leading to an 11% treatment discontinuation rate) observed with sirolimus in clinical studies for the treatment of lymphangioleiomyomatosis are: peripheral edema, hypercholesterolemia, abdominal pain, headache, nausea, diarrhea, chest pain, stomatitis, nasopharyngitis, acne, upper respiratory tract infection, dizziness, and myalgia.

The following adverse effects occurred in 3–20% of individuals taking sirolimus for organ rejection prophylaxis following a kidney transplant:

Diabetes-like symptoms
While sirolimus inhibition of mTORC1 appears to mediate the drug's benefits, it also inhibits mTORC2, which results in diabetes-like symptoms. This includes decreased glucose tolerance and insensitivity to insulin. Sirolimus treatment may additionally increase the risk of type 2 diabetes. In mouse studies, these symptoms can be avoided through the use of alternate dosing regimens or analogs such as everolimus or temsirolimus.

Lung toxicity
Lung toxicity is a serious complication associated with sirolimus therapy,      especially in the case of lung transplants. The mechanism of the interstitial pneumonitis caused by sirolimus and other macrolide MTOR inhibitors is unclear, and may have nothing to do with the mTOR pathway. The interstitial pneumonitis is not dose-dependent, but is more common in patients with underlying lung disease.

Lowered effectiveness of immune system
There have been warnings about the use of sirolimus in transplants, where it may increase mortality due to an increased risk of infections.

Cancer risk
Sirolimus may increase an individual's risk for contracting skin cancers from exposure to sunlight or UV radiation, and risk of developing lymphoma. In studies, the skin cancer risk under sirolimus was lower than under other immunosuppressants such as azathioprine and calcineurin inhibitors, and lower than under placebo.

Impaired wound healing
Individuals taking sirolimus are at increased risk of experiencing impaired or delayed wound healing, particularly if they have a body mass index in excess of 30 kg/m2 (classified as obese).

Interactions
Sirolimus is metabolized by the CYP3A4 enzyme and is a substrate of the P-glycoprotein (P-gp) efflux pump; hence, inhibitors of either protein may increase sirolimus concentrations in blood plasma, whereas inducers of CYP3A4 and P-gp may decrease sirolimus concentrations in blood plasma.

Pharmacodynamics
Unlike the similarly named tacrolimus, sirolimus is not a calcineurin inhibitor, but it has a similar suppressive effect on the immune system. Sirolimus inhibits IL-2 and other cytokine receptor-dependent signal transduction mechanisms, via action on mTOR, and thereby blocks activation of T and B cells. Ciclosporin and tacrolimus inhibit the secretion of IL-2, by inhibiting calcineurin.

The mode of action of sirolimus is to bind the cytosolic protein FK-binding protein 12 (FKBP12) in a manner similar to tacrolimus. Unlike the tacrolimus-FKBP12 complex, which inhibits calcineurin (PP2B), the sirolimus-FKBP12 complex inhibits the mTOR (mammalian Target Of Rapamycin, rapamycin being another name for sirolimus) pathway by directly binding to mTOR Complex 1 (mTORC1).

mTOR has also been called FRAP (FKBP-rapamycin-associated protein), RAFT (rapamycin and FKBP target), RAPT1, or SEP. The earlier names FRAP and RAFT were coined to reflect the fact that sirolimus must bind FKBP12 first, and only the FKBP12-sirolimus complex can bind mTOR. However, mTOR is now the widely accepted name, since Tor was first discovered via genetic and molecular studies of sirolimus-resistant mutants of Saccharomyces cerevisiae that identified FKBP12, Tor1, and Tor2 as the targets of sirolimus and provided robust support that the FKBP12-sirolimus complex binds to and inhibits Tor1 and Tor2.

Pharmacokinetics
Sirolimus is metabolized by the CYP3A4 enzyme and is a substrate of the P-glycoprotein (P-gp) efflux pump. It has linear pharmacokinetics. In studies on N=6 and N=36 subjects, peak concentration was obtained in 1.3 hours +/r- 0.5 hours and the terminal elimination was slow, with a half life around 60 hours +/- 10 hours. Sirolimus was not found to effect the concentration of ciclosporin, which is also metabolized primarily by the CYP3A4 enzyme.

The bioavailabiliy of sirolimus is low, and the absorption of sirolimus into the blood stream from the intestine varies widely between patients, with some patients having up to eight times more exposure than others for the same dose. Drug levels are, therefore, taken to make sure patients get the right dose for their condition. This is determined by taking a blood sample before the next dose, which gives the trough level. However, good correlation is noted between trough concentration levels and drug exposure, known as area under the concentration-time curve, for both sirolimus (SRL) and tacrolimus (TAC) (SRL: r2 = 0.83; TAC: r2 = 0.82), so only one level need be taken to know its pharmacokinetic (PK) profile. PK profiles of SRL and of TAC are unaltered by simultaneous administration. Dose-corrected drug exposure of TAC correlates with SRL (r2 = 0.8), so patients have similar bioavailability of both.

Chemistry
Sirolimus is a natural product and macrocyclic lactone.

Biosynthesis
The biosynthesis of the rapamycin core is accomplished by a type I polyketide synthase (PKS) in conjunction with a nonribosomal peptide synthetase (NRPS). The domains responsible for the biosynthesis of the linear polyketide of rapamycin are organized into three multienzymes, RapA, RapB, and RapC, which contain a total of 14 modules (figure 1). The three multienzymes are organized such that the first four modules of polyketide chain elongation are in RapA, the following six modules for continued elongation are in RapB, and the final four modules to complete the biosynthesis of the linear polyketide are in RapC. Then, the linear polyketide is modified by the NRPS, RapP, which attaches L-pipecolate to the terminal end of the polyketide, and then cyclizes the molecule, yielding the unbound product, prerapamycin.

The core macrocycle, prerapamycin (figure 2), is then modified (figure 3) by an additional five enzymes, which lead to the final product, rapamycin. First, the core macrocycle is modified by RapI, SAM-dependent O-methyltransferase (MTase), which O-methylates at C39. Next, a carbonyl is installed at C9 by RapJ, a cytochrome P-450 monooxygenases (P-450). Then, RapM, another MTase, O-methylates at C16. Finally, RapN, another P-450, installs a hydroxyl at C27 immediately followed by O-methylation by Rap Q, a distinct MTase, at C27 to yield rapamycin.

The biosynthetic genes responsible for rapamycin synthesis have been identified. As expected, three extremely large open reading frames (ORF's) designated as rapA, rapB, and rapC encode for three extremely large and complex multienzymes, RapA, RapB, and RapC, respectively. The gene rapL has been established to code for a NAD+-dependent lysine cycloamidase, which converts L-lysine to L-pipecolic acid (figure 4) for incorporation at the end of the polyketide. The gene rapP, which is embedded between the PKS genes and translationally coupled to rapC, encodes for an additional enzyme, an NPRS responsible for incorporating L-pipecolic acid, chain termination and cyclization of prerapamycin. In addition, genes rapI, rapJ, rapM, rapN, rapO, and rapQ have been identified as coding for tailoring enzymes that modify the macrocyclic core to give rapamycin (figure 3). Finally, rapG and rapH have been identified to code for enzymes that have a positive regulatory role in the preparation of rapamycin through the control of rapamycin PKS gene expression. Biosynthesis of this 31-membered macrocycle begins as the loading domain is primed with the starter unit, 4,5-dihydroxocyclohex-1-ene-carboxylic acid, which is derived from the shikimate pathway. Note that the cyclohexane ring of the starting unit is reduced during the transfer to module 1. The starting unit is then modified by a series of Claisen condensations with malonyl or methylmalonyl substrates, which are attached to an acyl carrier protein (ACP) and extend the polyketide by two carbons each. After each successive condensation, the growing polyketide is further modified according to enzymatic domains that are present to reduce and dehydrate it, thereby introducing the diversity of functionalities observed in rapamycin (figure 1). Once the linear polyketide is complete, L-pipecolic acid, which is synthesized by a lysine cycloamidase from an L-lysine, is added to the terminal end of the polyketide by an NRPS. Then, the NSPS cyclizes the polyketide, giving prerapamycin, the first enzyme-free product. The macrocyclic core is then customized by a series of post-PKS enzymes through methylations by MTases and oxidations by P-450s to yield rapamycin.

Cancer
The antiproliferative effects of sirolimus may have a role in treating cancer. When dosed appropriately, sirolimus can enhance the immune response to tumor targeting or otherwise promote tumor regression in clinical trials. Sirolimus seems to lower the cancer risk in some transplant patients.

Sirolimus was shown to inhibit the progression of dermal Kaposi's sarcoma in patients with renal transplants. Other mTOR inhibitors, such as temsirolimus (CCI-779) or everolimus (RAD001), are being tested for use in cancers such as glioblastoma multiforme and mantle cell lymphoma. However, these drugs have a higher rate of fatal adverse events in cancer patients than control drugs.

A combination therapy of doxorubicin and sirolimus has been shown to drive Akt-positive lymphomas into remission in mice. Akt signalling promotes cell survival in Akt-positive lymphomas and acts to prevent the cytotoxic effects of chemotherapy drugs, such as doxorubicin or cyclophosphamide. Sirolimus blocks Akt signalling and the cells lose their resistance to the chemotherapy. Bcl-2-positive lymphomas were completely resistant to the therapy; eIF4E-expressing lymphomas are not sensitive to sirolimus.

Tuberous sclerosis complex
Sirolimus also shows promise in treating tuberous sclerosis complex (TSC), a congenital disorder that predisposes those afflicted to benign tumor growth in the brain, heart, kidneys, skin, and other organs. After several studies conclusively linked mTOR inhibitors to remission in TSC tumors, specifically subependymal giant-cell astrocytomas in children and angiomyolipomas in adults, many US doctors began prescribing sirolimus (Wyeth's Rapamune) and everolimus (Novartis's RAD001) to TSC patients off-label. Numerous clinical trials using both rapamycin analogs, involving both children and adults with TSC, are underway in the United States.

Effects on longevity
mTOR, specifically mTORC1, was first shown to be important in aging in 2003, in a study on worms; sirolimus was shown to inhibit and slow aging in worms, yeast, and flies, and then to improve the condition of mouse models of various diseases of aging. Sirolimus was first shown to extend lifespan in wild-type mice in a study published by NIH investigators in 2009; the studies have been replicated in mice of many different genetic backgrounds. A study published in 2020 found late-life sirolimus dosing schedules enhanced mouse lifespan in a sex-specific manner where limited rapamycin exposure enhanced male lifespan but not female, providing evidence for sex differences in sirolimus response. The results are further supported by the finding that genetically modified mice with impaired mTORC1 signalling live longer.

Sirolimus has potential for widespread use as a longevity-promoting drug, with evidence pointing to its ability to prevent age-associated decline of cognitive and physical health. In 2014, researchers at Novartis showed a related compound, everolimus, increased elderly patients' immune response on an intermittent dose. This led to many in the anti-aging community self-experimenting with the compound. However, because of the different biochemical properties of Sirolimus the dosing is potentially very different than everolimus. Ultimately, due to known side effects of sirolimus, as well as inadequate evidence for optimal dosing, more research is required before sirolimus could be widely prescribed for this purpose.

Sirolimus has complex effects on the immune system—while IL-12 goes up and IL-10 decreases, which suggests an immunostimulatory response, TNF and IL-6 are decreased, which suggests an immunosuppressive response. The duration of the inhibition and the exact extent to which mTORC1 and mTORC2 are inhibited play a role, but are not yet well understood.

Topical administration
When applied as a topical preparation, researchers showed that rapamycin can regenerate collagen and reverse clinical signs of aging in elderly patients. The concentrations are far lower than those used to treat angiofibromas.

SARS-CoV-2
Rapamycin has been proposed as a treatment for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 insofar as its immunosuppressive effects could prevent or reduce the cytokine storm seen in very serious cases of COVID-19. Moreover, inhibition of cell proliferation by rapamycin could reduce viral replication.

Atherosclerosis
Rapamycin can accelerate degradation of oxidized LDL cholesterol in endothelial cells, thereby lowering the risk of atherosclerosis. Oxidized LDL cholesterol is a major contributor to atherosclerosis.

Lupus
As of 2016, studies in cells, animals, and humans have suggested that mTOR activation as process underlying systemic lupus erythematosus and that inhibiting mTOR with rapamycin may be a disease-modifying treatment. As of 2016 rapamycin had been tested in small clinical trials in people with lupus.

Lymphatic malformation
Lymphatic malformation, or cystic hygroma, is an abnormal growth of lymphatic vessels that usually affects children around the head and neck. Treatment often consists of to removal of the tissue, but the rate of recurrence is high. Sirolimus has shown evidence of being helpful in alleviating symptoms and reducing the size of the malformation.

Graft-versus-host disease
Due to its immunosuppressant activity, Rapamycin has been assessed as prophylaxis or treatment agent of Graft-versus-host disease (GVHD), a complication of hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. While contrasted results were obtained in clinical trials, pre-clinical studies have shown that Rapamycin can mitigate GVHD by increasing the proliferation of regulatory T cells, inhibiting cytotoxic T cells and lowering the differentiation of effector T cells.

Applications in biology research
Rapamycin is used in biology research as an agent for chemically induced dimerization. In this application, rapamycin is added to cells expressing two fusion constructs, one of which contains the rapamycin-binding FRB domain from mTOR and the other of which contains an FKBP domain. Each fusion protein also contains additional domains that are brought into proximity when rapamycin induces binding of FRB and FKBP. In this way, rapamycin can be used to control and study protein localization and interactions.

Veterinary uses
A number of veterinary medicine teaching hospitals are participating in a long-term clinical study examining the effect of rapamycin on the longevity of dogs.

title: Sirolimus


text:
User talk:Moink/archive100504

Mar 16 2004: Old talk archived at User_talk:Moink/archive160304

Do you know anyone named Jonathan Benezre in MIT? That is my cousin. Master Homer

Thanks
Thanks for the words of kindness, moink (or should I call you Teresa? I believe that's the name you use on the mailing list, but I'm always in a quandary regarding username versus first name.  2/3 of the people here address me as Jwros and a few others as James....I guess none of us know) -- I appreciate it very much, and am glad to know I can do something worthwhile here on occasion. Having just now seen your userpage, I think I should mention that I was a student at Simon Fraser University for 2 years, so I know Burnaby moderately well should you ever get homesick for it and want to reminisce. :-) What part of town did you reside in?  Anyway, I came here to thank you for being encouraging, and I do want to emphasize that you have risen very much on my "radar of trust" in the last 6 weeks or so -- I'm very glad to see your contributions here, and hope you are sticking around for the long haul!  Happy editing, Jwrosenzweig 17:19, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * By the way, I've nominated you for adminship, which I hope the community supports (I can't imagine they wouldn't) and you will accept (I don't envision you will, but it's a possibility). Sometime in the next few days, please leave a note at RfA announcing your acceptance or rejection of my nomination.  Thanks so much for your good work here! Jwrosenzweig 17:29, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * Well, moink, I guess I'd say that for talking directly to me, James is a good choice for typing ease. For referring to me in large fora (the pump, mailing lists, etc.), I think my user name or some approximation of it might be better, as we have (at the very least) James F. and JamesDay here.  Always tough to know.  And BCIT, hmmm, seems to me that was on a bus route of mine, perhaps between SFU and Metrotowne?  I'll have to think on it.  Wish I'd known BCIT better -- I'd write the article. :) Jwrosenzweig 17:37, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)

- Thanks for seeing my error with Jimbo, Moink!--Plato 00:20, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I suspect the differences of opinion expressed on Talk:Aermacchi MB-326 have to do with your engineering background vs. other contributors' aviation-fan backgrounds, possibly? The terms used by User:Tannin in that article are ones I'm quite familiar with from the enthusiast press, but I would imagine not used in serious aeronautical engineering circles! —Morven 18:42, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Thanks Moink, for the friendly responce. My momma never wanted me to grow up to be a janitor, sooo, i'll post-phone my goal of becoming administer.Hoever, I am trying hard to introduce some of my old comrades, and my professors to wikipedia.--Plato 04:20, 19 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Speaking of mommas: if you're looking for a part-time job, my mother is an MIT alum and could use some help with her computers and possibly with some book-editing. Let me know if you're interested. --Uncle Ed 15:04, 19 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I removed the reference to demographic information, because that's completely unrelated to information on famous people who live in a location. Hope you don't mind, or are willing to use a different example. Anthony DiPierro 20:46, 21 Mar 2004 (UTC)

By the way, I keep getting you confused with someone else. Sorry about that. Anthony DiPierro 20:48, 21 Mar 2004 (UTC)

moink, no worries about the edit to the protected page. It was obviously not an abuse of your powers, and your instant confession was the exact right thing to do. We've all done that multiple times -- usually we just revert the change once we notice what happened, but in this case I think you're right to leave it in place, as it has no bearing on the dispute. Incidentally, I _love_ the State your point don't prove it project, and will make multiple references to it in the future, I am sure. I like the title....it has a practical grace on par with Staying cool when the editing gets hot or What Wikipedia is not. Oh, and before I forget, welcome to the wacky world that is being an admin. Expect to be denounced monthly and to have your user page defaced on a similar schedule. ;-) I hope you enjoy the added responsibility, and am very glad the community supported you so completely!  Have a great day, Jwrosenzweig 19:51, 22 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * You're welcome for the nomination. I do my best to keep adding administrators to help defuse the accusations that we are elitist, closed-minded, etc.  You were, I believe, my most successful nomination yet -- a satisfying result for us both. :-)  May I post on the Village pump a link to the state your point policy page?  I'd like to get it agreed on as wise policy sooner rather than later, but if you're still refining, I'll of course respect your wishes.  Let me know. :-) Jwrosenzweig 20:08, 22 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * Goodness, I just glanced at my comment about nominating you and realized I made a dreadful error in typing so that it looked as though I thought you wouldn't accept adminship. I am horrified (as I always am when I discover such errors) and am glad you ignored what must have been a very confusing comment.  My apologies! Jwrosenzweig

Be careful! I'm sure Wikipedia has added at least two years to my (still unfinished) PhD. --AstroNomer 22:05, Mar 22, 2004 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for doing the msg:test on that anon's page for me. It took me a couple of minutes to remember that I was supposed to do that. :) fabiform | talk 00:11, 23 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * Heh, that's funny. I've only been an admin for a couple of days, so this was the first time I'd deleted something someone else had created, quite fun.  ;)  I've always enjoyed reading the deletion-log as it goes past in recent changes, there's some quite funny things in there (in a toilet-grafitti kind of way).  fabiform | talk 00:20, 23 Mar 2004 (UTC)

--- Hi. Thanks for the tip but that's not why I've been submitting frequently while writing the article. I've had problems with computer freeze today and lost a few articles as a result so I started submitting while writing so I wouldn't lose everything if the computer froze. Formeruser-83 02:27, 23 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Thanks re: Kimba
Thanks for the answer on the Reference Desk about Kimba -- a long nagging mystery solved! I like your user page, and I have added "custodian" to the descriptors on my page as well. I think it's marvelous! Cheers, Catherine

What test? I have no idea what you're talking about. Please explain. Rübezahl 02:23, 24 Mar 2004 (UTC) --- I have placed a question mark on a page THAT SOMEBODY ELSE MADE REFERENCE TO. This was the only way for me to put that page on my watchlist, because the issue interests me. In what way did it disturb anybody? Why did it have to be removed? You realize, that now the page disappeared from my watchlist, thanks. In the future, also, I would appreciate if you spare me your sarcasm and inappropriate tone. I am not a little kid and don't need to be patronized. If you are overweight, or have other inadequacies, that you cannot deal with, please consult a psycoanalyst, but refrain from letting own problems affect other people. Thank you, sincerely Rübezahl 02:51, 24 Mar 2004 (UTC) --- OK. Rübezahl 03:06, 24 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Thank you...
For some words of encouragement that are needed in a week where I've been feeling a little rocky (Talk:Fascism and its fallout just about sent me on a long Wikibreak). I had seen that incredibly rude post above, and your remarkably restrained and polite response, and was very pleased -- in fact, I'm surprised I hadn't left you a note saying so. Certainly it was the model of good stewardship (which is another word that, like custodian, is preferable to "admin"). I am flattered and slightly embarassed to be a model of behavior for other Wikipedians (at least a few have said I have been a model for them), and while I feel very much that I am unworthy of such high praise, I will "study deserving", as Edmund said in Lear (though I will hope to succeed where he failed). And if I may return the compliment, your attitude and approach here are exemplary, and I can only believe that, in a few weeks or months, you will be receiving accolades like the one you gave me from numerous editors. Keep it up. :-) Jwrosenzweig 21:43, 24 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for sorting out my error with Ghosts (Ibsen) - just beat me to it! Hugh2414 00:52, 27 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Love your sarcasm
Good to see someone else who does not buy into the 'sporters are gods' meme. (re: Talk:Kobe_Bryant's_accuser). — Jor (Talk) 20:48, 29 Mar 2004 (UTC)

James D. Watson
Looks like all the articles have been disambiguated. I'm reluctant to edit talk and user pages (seems some people can get a bit touchy about editing such things). I've restored the disambig page at James Watson and will draft an article about the politicians shortly. And there are an amazing number of semi-notable persons named James Watson. I'm not going to include them preemptively though. Thanks for your help with this. Bkonrad | Talk 18:07, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I think you'll appreciate this -- BCorr | Брайен

Same Gnome
'Odd' yup, thats me! At our place of work we have two categories of games, ones you can do on the phone (we do a lot of IT support over the phone), and ones you can't. Basically the latter don't get much play, but the former you can work & play at the same time.

In the light of day, the line looked odd to me, too!

Thanks for the edit.

TIM.

Thanks for the unprotections. —No-One Jones 19:28, 12 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Speedy del
Thanks for the pointers, Moink. I'll pay a bit more attention with the to-be-deleteds. --Brockert 22:32, Apr 14, 2004 (UTC)

Wry comment alert
Just thought I'd notify you of a wry comment I made on Newcomers' help desk, dated 03:54 on April 16. Please review it at your leisure. Feel free to remove it if you find it unaccepatble. -- Tim Starling 04:01, Apr 16, 2004 (UTC)

universe responds
Cheer up, it could be worse....GrazingshipIV 07:50, Apr 19, 2004 (UTC)

awww *HUGZ* - Mark 07:53, 19 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * No worries :-) - Mark

Thanks for the kind words you left on my talk page last month. You're very sweet. --"D ICK " C HENEY 20:05, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I thought you'd want to know, I've nominated Hcheney at WP:RFA. I anticipate we will share an opinion on this issue, as per usual. :-) Have a pleasant day and keep up the excellent work, Jwrosenzweig 22:59, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * Wow, you're quicker than I was in getting here. :-) Thanks! Jwrosenzweig 23:01, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * LOL. :-) Pretty soon we'll be accused of being the same person. ;-)  Thanks for the note. Jwrosenzweig 23:15, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Some universe, where people can be smeared with no evidence, being alone in it sounds great.....GrazingshipIV 03:36, Apr 23, 2004 (UTC)

response. I, of course, deny the charges, not that it means much to anyone anyway. GrazingshipIV 15:50, Apr 26, 2004 (UTC)

user:68.211.204.46 could use a swift banning ;) GrazingshipIV 23:59, May 9, 2004 (UTC)

 * He was banned before you said anything, and not even by me, though I was just about to the next time he did something stupid. By the way, why is your talk page protected?  That's an odd thing, and it makes it harder to communicate with you.  moink 00:40, 10 May 2004 (UTC)

Sorry, Spade was vandalizing it earlier so I asked danny to protect it. It's fine now. GrazingshipIV 00:52, May 10, 2004 (UTC)

YOU ACT ARBITRARILY WITH PROPER DISCUSSION OR STATING CAUSE== YES I MOST CERTAINLY THINK YOU ABUSED YOUR CUSTODIAL POWERS IN UNPROTECTING DEISM AS IT NOW DOESN"T REFLECT DEISM OR DEISTS YOUR INSIGHT IS POOR AND YOU RUINED MY FRIGGIN DAY WITH YOUR ARBITRARY AND CAPRICIOUS BULLSHIT I WONDER WHO PUT YOU UP TO IT. Andrew Zito

Moink thanks for your reply I don't know you unprotected that page and it reverted to a state I found unacceptable. In fact several of those people who are listed as Deists there I would not call Deists and would prefer to perhaps delete(so I am being liberal). Having many things to do (I having several seb sites and user groups) plus need exercise so perhaps I can blow up/flustered but ok? Any way in regard to Deism WORLDWIDE I find many untruisms in many languages I just added some on the french page on Deism (my french is not the best and perhaps it can be edited down some as I tend to fill in the spaces with some variables and then delete and edit). Any way I don't know where to put anything correctly except on pages so thats what I do as I don't have all these other interests people seem to require. I haven't even been able to connect the french page with this page and I don't like asking anyone for anything as you suggest.

Sits/lies
Maybe I should have ticked the "this is a very minor edit" box! :-D It's just that I realised it only needed a subtle misreading to be an accusation rather than a comment. And I find something fascinating but somehow disturbing about the fact that on a wiki, you really can take back your words... IMSoP 20:37, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)

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

title: User talk:Moink/archive100504


text:
Ascension

Ascension or ascending may refer to:

Religion

 * "Ascension", "Assumption", or "Translation", the belief in some religions that some individuals have ascended into Heaven without dying first
 * Ascension of Jesus
 * Feast of the Ascension (Ascension day), an annual day of feast commemorating Jesus' ascension; a public holiday in several countries
 * The Ascension, another title for the Old English poem Christ II
 * Ascension Cathedral (disambiguation)
 * The Ascension, Lavender Hill, an Anglo-Catholic church on Lavender Hill, Battersea, South West London

Places

 * Ascensión Municipality, Chihuahua, Mexico
 * Ascensión, Chihuahua, a city and capital of the municipality
 * Ascensión de Guarayos, Santa Cruz Department, Bolivia
 * Ascension Island, in the southern Atlantic Ocean
 * Ascension Islands, a group of uninhabited islands in Canada
 * Ascension, Prince Edward Island, Canada
 * L'Ascension, Quebec, Canada
 * Ascension Parish, Louisiana, United States

Fiction

 * Ascension (comics), a comic book series (1997–2000) created by David Finch
 * Ascension (Star Wars novel), 2011

Film and TV

 * The Climb (2017 film) (L'ascension), a French adventure film
 * Dracula II: Ascension, a 2003 direct-to-video American-Romanian horror film
 * Ascension, an award-winning short film produced by Vickie Gest
 * Ascension (miniseries), a television miniseries that aired in December 2014
 * "Ascension" (The X-Files), a 1994 episode of The X-Files
 * "Ascension", a 1999 episode of Batman Beyond
 * Ascension (Stargate), in the Stargate universe, a process to become a noncorporeal entity on a higher plane of existence (first mentioned in season 3, 2000)
 * "Ascension" (Stargate SG-1), a 2001 Stargate SG-1 episode
 * "Ascension", a 2013 episode of NCIS: Los Angeles
 * Ascension (Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.), a 2016 Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. episode
 * David Blaine Ascension, a stunt by David Blaine in Page, Arizona, September 2, 2020
 * Ascension (film), a 2021 American documentary film

Games

 * Mage: The Ascension, a role-playing game
 * Ultima IX: Ascension, the final part of the computer role-playing game series Ultima
 * God of War: Ascension, a 2013 game for the PlayStation 3
 * Ascension: Chronicle of the Godslayer, a 2011 deck-building card game
 * A game map in Zombie Mode in Call of Duty: Black Ops, from the "First Strike" map pack
 * Kanye Quest 3030, which featured a secret map alleged to be linked to a cult religion referred to as "Ascensionism" through use of the password "ASCEND"

Music

 * L'Ascension, a suite for orchestra or organ by Olivier Messiaen
 * Ascension, an alias used by the British trance music act The Space Brothers

Albums

 * Ascension (A Flock of Seagulls album), 2018
 * Ascension (Djam Karet album), 2001
 * Ascension (Jesu album), 2011
 * Ascension (John Coltrane album), 1966
 * Ascension (Misia album), 2007
 * Ascension (Pep Love album), 2001
 * The Ascension (2face Idibia album), 2014
 * The Ascension (Glenn Branca album), 1981
 * The Ascension (Otep album), 2007
 * The Ascension (Phil Wickham album), 2013
 * The Ascension (Sufjan Stevens album), 2020
 * Ascension, by Michael Pinnella, 2014
 * Ascension, by Toya Delazy, 2014
 * The Afterman: Ascension, by progressive rock band Coheed and Cambria, 2012

Songs

 * "Ascension" (Gorillaz song), by Gorillaz from Humanz, 2017
 * "Ascension (Don't Ever Wonder)", by Maxwell from Maxwell's Urban Hang Suite, 1996
 * "Ascension," the only song featured in the 1966 John Coltrane album Ascension
 * "Ascension," by Born of Osiris from The Discovery, 2011
 * "Ascension," by Enslaved from Isa, 2004
 * "Ascension," by Fear Factory from Archetype, 2004
 * "Ascension", by John Frusciante from Curtains, 2005
 * "Ascension", by Killswitch Engage from Incarnate, 2016
 * "Ascension", by Mac Miller from GO:OD AM, 2015
 * "Ascension", by Vanessa Carlton from Liberman, 2015
 * "The Ascension", by Manowar from Gods of War, 2007
 * "Ascension (A)", by Sunn O))) from their album Pyroclasts, 2019

Ships

 * HMS Ascension (K502), a Royal Navy frigate in service from 1944 to 1946
 * MV Ascension, a 1993 cargo and container ship

Other

 * Ascension (Calvo), an outdoor 1996 sculpture by Robert Calvo, in Portland, Oregon
 * Ascension (Wercollier), 1978 and 1986 sculptures by Lucien Wercollier
 * Ascension (healthcare system), a Catholic non-profit health system in the United States
 * Ascension (publisher), A Catholic media publisher
 * Ascension Road, Prince Edward Island Route 160, a highway in Canada
 * The Ascension (professional wrestling), a WWE wrestling tag team

title: Ascension


text:
CNA

CNA may refer to:

Certifications

 * Certification and Accreditation
 * Certified National Accountant
 * Certified Novell Administrator
 * Certified Nursing Assistant

Education

 * College of the North Atlantic, public college in Newfoundland
 * Republic of China Naval Academy, in Taiwan

Organizations

 * California Nurses Association
 * Canadian Nuclear Association
 * Canadian Nurses Association
 * Chin National Army
 * CNA (nonprofit), the Center for Naval Analyses
 * Center for Transportation and Logistics Neuer Adler
 * Centre for Nonviolent Action, Bosnia and Serbia
 * Royal Canadian Numismatic Association
 * National Audiovisual Council, Romania
 * Centre national de l'audiovisuel, Luxembourg
 * CVE (Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures) Numbering Authority

Companies

 * Canadian Numbering Administrator
 * China Northern Airlines
 * CNA Financial Corporation
 * Compagnia Nazionale Aeronautica, an Italian aircraft manufacturer of the 1930s
 * CNA (bookstore), a South African chain founded in 1896

News agencies

 * Caribbean News Agency
 * Catholic News Agency
 * Central News Agency (disambiguation), any of several news agencies
 * CNA (TV network), a television network based in Singapore, formerly known as Channel NewsAsia
 * Cyprus News Agency

People

 * Go C-Na (born 1974), Japanese composer
 * Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie (born 1977), Nigerian writer
 * C. N. Annadurai (1909–1969), Indian politician

Technology

 * Computer network attack, one type of computer network operations (CNO) in U.S. military doctrine
 * Converged network adapter, a computer interface for both general-purpose and storage networks
 * CVE Numbering Authority, an entity responsible for assigning Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures identifiers

Other uses

 * Central Neo-Aramaic, a language
 * Child Nutrition Act
 * Copy number abnormality, in genomics
 * Cartoon Network Arabic, a TV channel

title: CNA


text:
Talk:September 11 attacks/Archive 3

Article Title
There isn't going to be any convincing of Wik, so we need to have a discussion instead of a move-war about this, please. In the form of a vote. Personally I find the whole debate a shining example of doublespeak, George Orwell would be proud, and it is sickening to me, but let's have the debate and *vote* somewhere, please. Tempshill 08:46, 17 Jan 2004 (UTC)

A good idea, and one that will (hopefully) bring this whole pedantric matter to a close. My prediction is that "keep the terrorist word in" side will win handsomely. Arno 09:21, 17 Jan 2004 (UTC)

 * OK. Let's do it. Tannin

The Word "Terrorist"

 * Err .... but I better point out that it is not pedantic. "Terrorist" is a value-laden, emotive word. It doesn't describe a type of action, it describes a type of judgemet about that action, and as such is inapropriate for use as an article title here. Tannin

 * Disagree with the latter sentence, and even Wik conceded that the attack was, objectively, a terrorist attack. Certainly it is emotionally loaded, but still is accurate.  It is a disservice to truth to sanitize your vocabulary for fear of offending someone.  Hence my vote for including "terrorist" in the title.  Tempshill 18:13, 17 Jan 2004 (UTC)

 * No, I only said it was terrorist by any technical definition that ignores the judgemental content of the word. Otherwise, will you agree to call the Dresden bombings terrorist, or Israeli bombings of civilian areas in Palestine? This would be just as "accurate". --Wik 18:26, Jan 17, 2004 (UTC)

 * I will agree to have this same debate on each bombing you cite, yes, but not to make a sweeping declaration that nothing (or everything) must be called "terrorist" or "massacre" or "murder" because these words are judgmental. Tempshill 19:58, 17 Jan 2004 (UTC)

 * We should be consistent. Either we avoid the term generally or we use it in every case where the technical definition applies. --Wik 20:12, Jan 17, 2004 (UTC)

 * Encylopedias are not about technical definitions, they are about common usage. Anthony DiPierro 20:51, 17 Jan 2004 (UTC)

 * What does common usage mean, the common usage of the commissars of the corporate media, or the usage of the common man. The view of the one billion of the world's Muslims is more common than those of the 1/4 billion Americans.  I am American and I don't consider an attack on a military target like the Pentagon "terrorist".  And as far as civilian casualties - Dresden, Hiroshima, Nagaski, the firebombing of Japan, the bombing of Hanoi...are these all terrorist actions as well? -- HectorRodriguez 02:20, 10 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Interlude

 * Err... yes it is pedantric, but let's vote rather than argue. Arno 09:29, 17 Jan 2004 (UTC)

 * Sheesh - that last suggestion was certainly Canutelike. Arno 07:25, 20 Jan 2004 (UTC)

After Interlude
The arguments for terrorist have all been made to the point where I feel anything I write would be redundant. These were obviously terrorist attacks; as mentioned on Talk:Osama bin Laden, even bin Laden calls them terrorist. The comparison to Dresden, Israel, etc., only serve to underscore this fact, which is to say, seeking to call such things terrorist in no way alters the terrorist nature of other acts, but in fact reinforces it. The argument goes something like: If blowing up a passenger bus in Tel Aviv is an act of terrorism, then isn't the Israeli military's raid on Jenin also because of so-and-so similarities? By analogy, consider (say) an issue in the California recall election. While called by some auto registration fees, others called those fees a car tax. The same argument could be made: How is that not too a tax, just like, say, the income tax? This does not function as an argument for not calling the income tax a tax because tax is "controversial" or "emotive"; rather, it makes it clear that the income tax is a tax, and puts forth a (potentially controversial) argument for extending the term tax to other fees. But it would put forth a POV, the view which accepts this parallel, to have titles such as "Jenin terrorist raid" and "Dresden terrorist bombing", but in no way is POV to call the 9/11 Terrorist Attacks exactly what they were. -- VV 01:06, 18 Jan 2004 (UTC)

 * You're mistaken on several points. 1) Actually, Bin Laden said this: "They rip us of our wealth and of our resources and of our oil. Our religion is under attack. They kill and murder our brothers. They compromise our honor and our dignity and dare we utter a single word of protest against the injustice, we are called terrorists. This is compounded injustice." Does this sound as if he accepts this term? When accused of terrorism, he may play along and say something like "If avenging the killing of our people is terrorism then history should be a witness that we are terrorists." But other than in response to such questions he does not see himself as a terrorist. 2) Wrong analogies. No one denies the income tax is a tax. The controversy here only starts when the word is to be applied to things which can be easily argued to be substantially different (such as user fees). But you have not made a case for how Dresden is substantially different from 9/11. Calling it terrorism is POV in both cases. If 9/11 is supposed to be "objectively" terrorism, then Dresden and Jenin must be too. You'd have to make up some arbitrary definition to make it apply to one and not the other. --Wik 01:42, Jan 18, 2004 (UTC)

 * I'm not familiar with the cases of Dresden and Jenin, but were civilians intentionally targetted in those cases, like that of 9/11? If so, then I'd be fine with calling it terrorism.  Because, there's nothing at all arbitrary about that definition.  Again, I challenge you to come up with a definition of terrorism that does not apply to September 11th.  I'm talking about a real definition, one that you're going to stand behind, not "well a couple nutcases think it's fine to kill innocent people," because those nutcases aren't going to be reading Wikipedia and even if they did I really don't give a s**t about them.  Anthony DiPierro 04:54, 18 Jan 2004 (UTC)

 * Terrorist should be in the title. As Anthony says 'I challenge you to come up with a definition of terrorism that does not apply to September 11th.' : ChrisG

 * I challenge you to come up with a definition of "incident in which a number of passenger airliners were hijacked and used as weapons to destroy and seriously damage buildings" that does not apply to September 11th, but I still don't think that needs to be in the title of the article if there's a reason to leave it out. Onebyone 11:41, 19 Jan 2004 (UTC)

 * Not passenger airliners, but planes used as projectiles against military and non-military targets, discounting the idiot who crashed his micro-light into the Whitehouse and think about a small nation who is sending unarmed troups to Irak, Japan. Seriously damage buildings, cruisers, minesweepers, etc. Webhat 05:13, Jan 20, 2004 (UTC)

 * Uhm, the Wik quote above from U/OBL is in english. He doesn't seem to speak english in any of the Al Jazeera tapes I've seen. Should we not also be cautious about translation issues? For example, are mujahadeen being translated as "soldiers", "warriors", or terrorists? I'm not saying it's one or the other, but that translation issues can play a major role, and we have to work harder than normal to find equivalent terms when tranlating languages, which may have different POV terms than english. Ronabop 08:56, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Google Hits

 * "september 11" - 3,940,000 (I think we can safely throw this one out as incidental - 151.204.210.18)
 * Very much so, the September 11 in this range of articles could mean anything from the terrorist attacks to the birthday of someone's pet budgie, as well as sentences such as "Last September, 11 cars were sold." Arno 06:58, 22 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Potential titles
 * "september 11, 2001" - 2,220,000
 * "september 11, 2002" - 384,000 (for comparison)
 * "september 4, 2002" - 199,000 (more comparison)
 * "september 11th" - 1,390,000 (this one too --Wik)
 * "september 4th" - 121,000 (more comparison)
 * "events of september 11" - 472,000
 * "Attack on America" - 316,000
 * "Attack on America" September 11 - 76,600
 * "september 11 attacks" - 289,000
 * "events of september 11, 2001" - 139,000
 * "september 11 terrorist attacks" - 125,000
 * "september 11th, attacks" - 67,800
 * "september 11, 2001 terrorist attacks" - 40,800
 * "september 11, 2001 attacks" - 30,200
 * "september 11th, terrorist attacks" - 28,700
 * "September 11: Attack on America" - 1,760
 * "september 11th, 2001 terrorist attacks" - 1,100
 * "september 11th, 2001 attacks" - 1,060

but...Pfortuny 20:04, 17 Jan 2004 (UTC)

(BTW, what about titles that have 11 September in them.... or shouldn't I ask?) Arno 06:58, 22 Jan 2004 (UTC)

 * "11 september" - 1,680,000 (including German results)
 * "11 september 2001" - 402,000
 * "11 september 2002" - 83,500
 * "11 september 2000" - 36,900
 * "11 september 2001 attacks" - 3,740
 * "11 september attacks" - 24,300
 * "11-9 attacks" - 119 (oh... that was neat ^^)

Now the yyyy-mm-dd format (used in East Asia and other countries... I think)
 * "2001-09-11" - 352,000
 * "2002-09-11" - 522,000 (what's so special about that date? Maybe just more people on line)
 * "2000-09-11" - 216,000
 * "2004-01-24" - 223,000
 * "2001-09-11 attacks" - 20

Sabbut 14:37, 26 Jan 2004 (UTC)

 * No, I guess I should not have asked. Arno 11:07, 10 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Poll on page title
Feel free to change your position at any time based on new arguments.

 * September 11, 2001 attacks
 * 1) Tannin 09:22, 17 Jan 2004 (UTC)
 * 2) Delirium 18:34, Jan 17, 2004 (UTC)
 * 3) Fred Bauder 19:01, 17 Jan 2004 (UTC)
 * 4) SimonP 19:02, Jan 17, 2004 (UTC) (I would also drop the 2001)
 * 5) Lou I 19:12, 17 Jan 2004 (UTC)
 * 6) Arwel 20:18, 17 Jan 2004 (UTC)
 * 7) Onebyone 20:30, 17 Jan 2004 (UTC)
 * 8) WormRunner 21:19, 17 Jan 2004 (UTC)
 * 9) Kokiri
 * 10) Jia ng  00:24,18 Jan 2004 (UTC) (other encyclopedias use it, but count this vote and disregard the other provided that terrorist not be removed from the text)
 * 11) Meelar As long as the word "terrorist" is in the article, we don't need it in the title
 * 12)  ☮ Eclecticology 01:05, 2004 Jan 18 (UTC)
 * 13) mav This whole thread is operating on a hugely misinformed assumption; that NPOV applies to titles. It cannot, nor should it ever. If it did, then titles would have to be very long and near impossible to remember. We have to choose just one term for every title and that is inherently a POV process. The convention we have decided to use in these cases is common usage among English speakers with caveats for ambiguity and unreasonable offensiveness. So if a term happens to have "terrorist" or "massacre" in its most common name, then we use that term as the page title. With that said, it does appear, that, in this case, the word "terrorist" is neither more common, nor needed for disambiguation for this title. On that basis, and on that basis alone, should it be removed. As a matter of fact, this may work for most other cases where "terrorist" is in the title (but not so for "massacre").
 * This sounds like grounds for voting for September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks! Arno 07:25, 20 Jan 2004 (UTC)
 * Sorry - no it isn't. It is an argument for following common usage and not having titles longer than they need to be. --mav
 * 1) Dpbsmith No need for the word "terrorist" to appear in the title. Doesn't make the article any easier to find.
 * 2) Jade Hamblyn 02:21, 18 Jan 2004 (UTC)
 * 3) .·. Optim 02:41, 18 Jan 2004 (UTC) .·.
 * 4) Flockmeal 04:47, Jan 18, 2004 (UTC)
 * 5) The term terrorism is POV. Kingturtle 06:16, 18 Jan 2004 (UTC)
 * That is irrelevant. See my message above. --mav
 * 1) Should be at the most likely to be searched for term. It's nothing to do with POV. Secretlondon 07:32, Jan 18, 2004 (UTC)
 * Look at google hits. The other term is searched for more often.
 * 1) Bill 12:33, 18 Jan 2004 (UTC)
 * 2) The Fellowship of the Troll 13:53, 18 Jan 2004 (UTC)Searches isn't a problem, we can have as many redirects as we can eat. The term is POV, and the precident of 'this was so terrible that POV doesn't matter here' will cause problems elsewhere if we apply it fairly.
 * Those of you claiming the term is POV really should explain that somewhere on the talk page. I can think of no definition of terrorist for which the 9/11 incident does not apply.  Starters would be coming up with one. Anthony DiPierro 16:48, 18 Jan 2004 (UTC)
 * 1) Toby Bartels 00:25, 19 Jan 2004 (UTC) -- This is among the options listed, with the term "terrorist" being the main point of contention. In all, I know of 5 points of contention in the title, and I agree with this version only on 3 or 4 of them.
 * 2) Lord Emsworth
 * 3) Jeroenvrp 03:46, 20 Jan 2004 (UTC)
 * 4) ChrisO 17:13, 20 Jan 2004 (UTC) The description "terrorist" seems a bit redundant, to be honest - everyone knows what category the attacks fall into, surely?
 * 5) UtherSRG I'd like to vote below, but mav's argument is most compelling. Thanks mav!
 * 6) "terrorist" is controversial and unnecessary in the title. The article (or a linked article) should explain the controversy. --Ellmist 03:41, 21 Jan 2004 (UTC)
 * 7) Tompagenet 17:34, 21 Jan 2004 (UTC)
 * 8) MikeCapone 04:29, 23 Jan 2004 (UTC)
 * 9) Sabbut 14:19, 26 Jan 2004 (UTC)
 * 10) Nico 18:46, 30 Jan 2004 (UTC)
 * 11) Infrogmation 07:41, 4 Feb 2004 (UTC)
 * 12) HectorRodriguez 02:15, 10 Feb 2004 (UTC)
 * 13) Martin 20:15, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC) (ohne terrorist)
 * 14) pir 03:13, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)
 * 15) Richardchilton 07:31, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * 16) RickK 03:13, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC) I'm sure many of you are surprised at my vote, but believe it or not, I have no problem with NPOV.  I would object to the removal of the word "terrorist" from the article itself.  Another question -- has Tim Starling not proven that HectorRodriguez and Richardchilton are the same person?  If so, sock puppet votes should be discarded.
 * 17) Kpalion 13:40, 13 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks
 * 1) Arno 09:29, 17 Jan 2004 (UTC) This sets a silly precedent for political correctness, in my view.
 * 2) PMA 15:13, Jan 17, 2004 (UTC)
 * 3) Rmhermen 15:24, Jan 17, 2004 (UTC)
 * 4) Tempshill 18:13, 17 Jan 2004 (UTC)
 * 5) —Eloquence 19:10, Jan 17, 2004 (UTC) (if used consistently for CIA-sponsored terrorism as well)
 * 6) WhisperToMe 19:53, 17 Jan 2004 (UTC)
 * 7) Pfortuny 19:56, 17 Jan 2004 (UTC)
 * 8) Maximus Rex 00:20, 18 Jan 2004 (UTC)
 * 9) Jia ng  00:24, 18 Jan 2004 (UTC) (see conditions above)
 * 10) Dori
 * 11) VV 00:45, 18 Jan 2004 (UTC) (I'd be open to dropping the 2001 however)
 * 12) Ruhrjung 13:34, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC) - me too ;)
 * 13) Binky 07:29, 18 Jan 2004 (UTC). Attacks is already point of view, may as way go all the way.
 * 14) Crusadeonilliteracy 12:48, 18 Jan 2004 (UTC)
 * 15) Marteau
 * 16) jengod 06:36, Jan 21, 2004 (UTC) It's what Osama would want.
 * Hmmm, voting the right way for the wrong reasons....Arno 07:53, 21 Jan 2004 (UTC)
 * 1) ChrisG Political correctness gone mad.
 * Hear hear!! Arno 23:52, 25 Jan 2004 (UTC)
 * 1) Ilyanep Really.
 * 2) Lirath Q. Pynnor Who doesn't think those were terrorist attacks? Whether American, Israeli, Afghani, Palestinian, Iraqi, or Saudi Arabian in origin -- surely they were still terrorists.
 * 3) Ryan_Cable 14:03, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * September 11, 2001
 * 1) Anthony DiPierro 19:47, 17 Jan 2004 (UTC)
 * 2) Webhat 05:03, Jan 20, 2004 (UTC)
 * 3) Jack 01:38, 26 Jan 2004 (UTC) and I'd like to give a big ol' "Me Too!" out to ADP (I call it "9/11")
 * 4) Lirath Q. Pynnor

 * "Don't Care"
 * 1) —Noldoaran (Talk) 04:10, Feb 14, 2004 (UTC) - I don't think it matters as long as the one that isn't chosen becomes a redirect page to the other.
 * 2) Moriori 20:27, Feb 14, 2004 (UTC). I tend to agree, but also support Anthony DiPierro re the word terrorist remaining in the text itself. The key for me is the answer to the following question. "Were the people who carried out the attacks terrorists"?
 * 3) Martin 20:15, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Note that this vote is solely for the title. I don't think the word terrorist should be taken out of the text itself. If there are credible arguments that the attacks were not terrorism, they can be included. In any case, that is a separate vote. Anthony DiPierro 19:50, 17 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Comments on the poll
I think it is a nice thing to have exceptions in any policy, and this one seems good enough for me. This explains my vote above. Pfortuny 19:56, 17 Jan 2004 (UTC)

I think that calls for the term terrorist be applied consistently are politics in a thin disguise. It is fortunate that in this case, specifying "attacks" rather than "terrorist attacks" is sufficient to identify what the article is about, so I think that in the interests of avoiding a spree of people adding "terrorist" to various articles in order to make political points about government-sponsered terrorism we should just do the simple thing. Furthermore, talking about "the" definition of terrorism is disingenuous, since various groups have produced different definitions according to their biases and their aims, to reflect the different things that they mean when they talk about terrorism. Onebyone 20:30, 17 Jan 2004 (UTC)
 * I think calling them merely "attacks" dilutes the reality of the situation. Specifying "September 11, 2001" is likewise sufficient to identify what the article is about.  As for "the" definition of terrorism, Wikipedia is based on common usage, isn't it?  What this event is referred to as should be the only question.  Even if it definitively wasn't terrorism, if it's overwhelmingly referred to as such that's the title we should use.  We still call it Manifest Destiny, don't we?  Anthony DiPierro 20:45, 17 Jan 2004 (UTC)

 * It is not "overwhelmingly" called terrorism. --Wik 20:51, Jan 17, 2004 (UTC)

 * It is overwhelmingly regarded as a terrorist act. --mav 02:24, 18 Jan 2004 (UTC)

 * Nor is it "overwhelmingly" called "September 11, 2001 attacks." If you noticed, I didn't vote for either. Anthony DiPierro 20:54, 17 Jan 2004 (UTC)

 * No one made that claim. There is no "overwhelmingly" used name, so we should just describe it in a concise and NPOV manner. --Wik 20:58, Jan 17, 2004 (UTC)

 * I think it's quite clear that neither title is NPOV. And my point about "overwhelmingly" was to defend the statement that definitions are meaningless. Anthony DiPierro 21:05, 17 Jan 2004 (UTC)

 * I agree they would be meaningless if there were an overwhelmingly used name. But there isn't, so they aren't. And I don't see what's not NPOV about "September 11, 2001 attacks". --Wik 21:23, Jan 17, 2004 (UTC)

 * Well, I still say they're meaningless. But I guess I can't use the Manifest Destiny argument any more.  In any case, I find it hard to see a definition of terrorism that doesn't include this event.  Do you know of one?  And what is not NPOV about "September 11, 2001 attacks" is that it implies that the attacks were not terrorist, especially when you type in "September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks" and get redirected.  Finally, I don't see the problem with using "September 11, 2001." Anthony DiPierro 21:30, 17 Jan 2004 (UTC)

 * The most common definition of "terrorism" implies condemnation, just like "murder" means an unjustified killing and those 9who support killings in certain circumstances won't ever call those killings "murder"; likewise those who support those attacks don't call them "terrorism". So the common definition doesn't include this event for those who support it. As to the other point, while not every "attack" has to be a "terrorist attack", every "terrorist attack" is also an "attack", so the title "September 11, 2001 attacks" does not imply that they were not terrorist. By the same logic, your proposed version "September 11, 2001" would imply that there wasn't even an attack! --Wik 01:12, Jan 18, 2004 (UTC)
 * Are you suggesting that the WTC attack was justified? Does anyone on here support this?  Should we stop calling murderers murderers because hey somewhere someone thought what they did was OK?  As to not implying that it is not terrorist, changing the title from "terrorist attack" to "attack" because some nutball out there thinks that it's fine to intentionally kill innocent victims most certainly implies that it's not terrorist.  Implying that it is not an attack does not at all follow from the same logic.  You just don't understand my logic. Anthony DiPierro 04:41, 18 Jan 2004 (UTC)
 * This is an encyclopaedia, not a United States "news" channel. Let's try to just be a little objective about this. If we label this page with the word "terrorist" included then all other instances of "terrorist" attacks covered in the WP should also have their names changed, including "terrorist" acts perpetrated by the United States(plenty of those). So why not just keep it simple. By the way someone whose opinion differs from yours is not automatically a "nutball". Its not like the U.S. hasn't done anything to upset the people that attack it. Jade Hamblyn 05:18, 18 Jan 2004 (UTC)
 * All instances of "terrorist" attacks which are indisputably terrorism (intentionally target civilians to create terror for political purposes) should be labeled as such. If you have such an instance, then go ahead, label it terrorism.  No, someone whose opinion differs from mine is not automatically a "nutball."  But someone who defends the murders which took place on 9/11 is.  I don't care how much you upset someone.  Killing thousands of innocent civilians is not the answer. Anthony DiPierro 05:28, 18 Jan 2004 (UTC)
 * The US government, over and over again, has targeted civilians. Putting aside events like My Lai, which they attribute to people not following orders (although it seems a natural consequence of the operation it was part of Wheeler Walawa), the US government has targeted civilians over and over again - Dresden and other German cities, Hiroshima, Nagaski, the firebombing of Tokyo (and other Japanese cities), the bombing of Hanoi, the attacks on dams to cause floods and famine in Korea and Vietnam and so on and so forth.  The idea that the US has never targeted civilians is ludicrous.  By the way, the CIA was who brought over the sheikh who plotted the first bombing of the WTC and the CIA with MAK is who trained and armed Al Qaeda to fight in Afghanistan against the communist government with.  Please spare us your horror about killing innocent civilians, as there is no government in the world currently which has more blood on it's hands then the USA. -- HectorRodriguez 05:44, 10 Feb 2004 (UTC)

9/11/01 Was indeed a terrorist attack. It should be identified as such. Political correctness should not be our goal. Our goal is to be subjective and this is a 'terrorist' attack! Ilyanep 16:55, 25 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Dates
The designation as "9/11" is so universal that I wonder whether the title shouldn't use this term rather than "September 11." Also, the title should distinguish the article from articles about any other events that might have happened on the same day. I don't think "terrorist" helps to do this, but I wonder whether "World Trade Center" shouldn't be in the title. Dpbsmith 02:16, 18 Jan 2004 (UTC)
 * The bastards attacked the Pentagon too, so if you mention the WTC, you gotta mention the Pentagon. Anthony DiPierro 04:41, 18 Jan 2004 (UTC)
 * Right - the Pentagon is the Jan Brady of September 11 PMA 05:29, Jan 18, 2004 (UTC)
 * As for universality... in Spain, where I live, people call the fatidical date "11-S", and few people know what "9/11" means. IMO, "9/11" should be a redirect... or the title of an article about the fraction "nine elevenths". I'll stick with "September 11"... no need to abbreviate it and confuse readers whose main language isn't English. Sabbut 13:18, 2004 Jan 18 (UTC)
 * But this is the English version of the encyclopedia. Why can't we confuse readers whose main language isn't English? Anthony DiPierro 17:28, 18 Jan 2004 (UTC)

 * Bear in mind that 9/11 is the US date format. Elsewhere, (eg down under) the format is 11/9. September 11 is rather less ambiguous and more universal. BTW, if you mention the Pentagon and the WTC, let's not forget Flight 93. Arno 07:59, 21 Jan 2004 (UTC)

 * Flight 93 was part of the attack on the Pentagon. Anthony DiPierro 02:07, 22 Jan 2004 (UTC)

 * No it wasn't. Flight 93 was supposed to strike the Capitol. See the Flight 93 article and September 11 (terrorist) attacks artivle ("Recent statements and revelations"). The terrorists called it the "faculty of law" in their communications. The Pentagon had a different code name. Arno 06:41, 22 Jan 2004 (UTC)

 * Fine, attack on the Pentagon, WTC, and the Capitol. Just more reason not to use such a title.  September 11, 2001 is the only reasonable title right now. Anthony DiPierro 13:26, 22 Jan 2004 (UTC)

More general discussion
I think we should be thinking about this in a global sense and avoid possibly nationalistic notions of the "universality" of a term to describe this event, as people from different countries refer to it using a multitude of terms. The name of an article referring to this event should just be concise.--Jade Hamblyn 03:52, 18 Jan 2004 (UTC)~

Anthony wrote: All instances of "terrorist" attacks which are indisputably terrorism (intentionally target civilians to create terror for political purposes) should be labeled as such. OK. Let's go with that, shall we? Hmmm ... that will give us:
 * Tokyo B-29 terrorist raids
 * Hiroshima terrorist atom bomb
 * British terrorist bombing of Germany, 1941-45
 * V1 buzz bomb terrorist weapon
 * The terrorist Blitz, London, 1940
 * Rolling Thunder terrorist raids on Hanoi
 * Indonesian terrorist invasion of East Timor
 * The Hungarian terrorist Uprising

Shall I go on? Tannin

Apparently you don't understand what the word indisputably means. Let's take Hiroshima. The US govt claims that this was targetted as a military base. So using the term terrorist is disputed.

Furthermore, labelling as such doesn't necessarily mean in the title. In the case of 9/11, it was already in the title, and is just as popular in the title as not, so I don't have a problem with it.

I obviously don't feel that "terrorist" has to be in the title. Actually my suggestion, September 11, 2001, which no one has even commented on, doesn't contain the word terrorist in it. Isn't the word "attack" POV? Maybe we should just September 11, 2001 self-defense... Anthony DiPierro 22:37, 18 Jan 2004 (UTC)

 * Do not forget please

 * Soviet terror camps
 * Terrorist politics of Stalin
 * Communist terrorist politics

Shall I go on? Pfortuny 14:55, 18 Jan 2004 (UTC)
 * However, probably the only way you could disagree the sep 2001 incident was a terrorist attack would be if you wished you were personally carrying out the next emulation of it. This raises interesting questions regarding the whole NPOV theory. Crusadeonilliteracy

 * Thankfully, not every word that we agree could legitimately descibe the event needs to be in the title, noone is arguing that it should be Awful, horrific, tragic, terrorist attacks (Sept 11). The Fellowship of the Troll 15:01, 18 Jan 2004 (UTC)

 * This goes for lots of things, Warsaw Pact is the opposite of Warsaw Treaty. I've never heard of anybody signing a peace pact... but if you ever want to get into a treaty with the Devil... Terror is POV, however terrorists are described in one of the many Geneva pacts. AFAIK freedom fighter/terrorist can stand in a busy street and blow himself up and be considered a soldier in an armed conflict, by international law, if he announces that he is a member of blah army before he starts shooting/exploding at the military target. And ofcourse his leaders have to have informed the enemy that they are at war. Perhaps it should be September 11, 2001 Horiffic acts of War. Webhat 04:59, Jan 20, 2004 (UTC)

 * But it is commonly accepted that 9/11 was terrorism. Nobody's saying to rename WWII to Hitler's terrorism tries to 'perfect' the world. In any case, this is getting way too far. Ilyanep 19:11, 25 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Justification for one pollee's vote
Since I'm in the poll, I should summarise my reasons.

Short version:
 * 1) The shorter title is at least as common as the longer title.
 * 2) Shorter titles, when disambiguous, are a Good Thing.
 * 3) Titles should be restrained in their implicit claims.

Long version:
 * 1) The attacks were definitely terrorist.
 * 2) However, calling them terrorist without attribution is POV.
 * 3) However, mav is right that article standards of POV can't apply to titles.
 * 4) This is why we fix arbitrary naming conventions, although they are of little help here.
 * 5) The default naming convention is common usage.
 * 6) However, common usage in this case can't make the decision.
 * 7) Someday we may have a fixed, standardised name (like St. Valentine's Day Massacre), but we don't have that now.
 * 8) While Google indicated a preference, the difference was below any threshold of trusthing Google to report general usage.
 * 9) We have no specialised naming convention for this situation.
 * 10) But there are some good naming principles that we can apply.
 * 11) Shorter names will almost always be used more often than longer names.
 * 12) NPOV can apply in a lesser sense, in calling for titles to be moderate.
 * 13) These principles, while not universal, can help us decide to remove "terrorist".

My position is explained more fully on the wikiEN-L thread.

-- Toby Bartels 01:02, 19 Jan 2004 (UTC)

I voted for September 11, 2001 for most of the same reasons (except I disagree with 2, and 4.2 doesn't apply). We do have a clearly most commonly used and unambiguous title. Anthony DiPierro 06:53, 20 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Terrorist Attacks
The attacks were for sure terrorist attacks. There is no doubt for that! And I hope it will never happen again. But the title "September 11, 2001 attacks" is shorter and better. There is really no need to add the word Terrorist, since everyone knows it is terrorism. Optim 01:20, 19 Jan 2004 (UTC)

 * But mention of it being terrorism should not be removed from the text. --Jiang

 * If it is NPOV, yes ("it is generally accepted in USA and most parts of the world that these attacks were terrorist in nature"). Citing quotes of politicians saying that these attacks were terrorist would be great. (note: I haven't really read the article). Optim 05:38, 21 Jan 2004 (UTC)

 * Calling it terrorist is NPOV. As you said yourself, the attacks were for sure terrorist attacks.  There's no serious dispute over whether or not the attacks were terrorist.  They were.  There's no need to qualify the statement.  In and of itself it is a fact. Anthony DiPierro 05:47, 21 Jan 2004 (UTC)

 * Well, if the standard is to exclude 'what everybody knows' the page would just be called "September 11". Marteau

 * No. in Chile they use this date for another political event. Also, we already have a September 11 article. Optim 05:38, 21 Jan 2004 (UTC)

 * To extend on this, "September 11" is too vague and could apply for any event indicated in the September 11 article. Arno

 * We don't have an article for September 11, 2001, though. Actually, we do, it just points to this page already. Anthony DiPierro 05:47, 21 Jan 2004 (UTC)

 * I don't really agree with the main title of the article being just a date. We know perfectly what September 11, 2001 stands for, but we may have to think for a while for other important dates in history like August 6, 1945, and even many of us don't really know what happened back then. IMO, we should specify that there was an attack on Sept. 11, but it may be unnecessary to call it "a terrorist attack". So, I go for "September 11, 2001 attacks" (the current name of the article). Sabbut 18:25, 21 Jan 2004 (UTC)

 * Unlike Hiroshima, September 11th is commonly referred to by the date. In fact, there is no other widely accepted name for the incident.  Even the term "events of september 11, 2001" receives far more google hits than "september 11, 2001 attacks."  I highly doubt that 60 years from now many people who have heard about the attacks would hear the date and not know what was being referred to.  Going back to the example, Hiroshima is a city.  By your argument, we move the discussion of the bombings to a page called August 6, 1945 attacks.  I'm open to other suggestions, but of the three choices, I think September 11, 2001 is the best.  Maybe September 11: Attack on America would be better?  Anthony DiPierro 02:27, 22 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Linking on the page
I don't care who you attribute the word "terrorist" to but it must be linked on this page.--Jiang 20:46, 10 Feb 2004 (UTC)

title: Talk:September 11 attacks/Archive 3


text:
Talk:49 (number)

Roman numeral form
Several Internet sites say that "The proper way to write 49 is XLIX, not IL", but this page mentions it nowhere. Do any pages at Wikipedia mention this?? (unsigned)

See Roman numerals. There's no "one correct" way to write 49. The Romans certainly wouldn't have cared. XLIX is the more usual these days. - Nunh-huh 23:35, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I suppose that IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII is out of the question? --Dante Alighieri | Talk 08:33, Feb 7, 2005 (UTC)

How many I's is that above?? Georgia guy 01:26, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Let's check this Unary one by factorization:
 * IIIIIII
 * IIIIIII
 * IIIIIII
 * IIIIIII
 * IIIIIII
 * IIIIIII
 * IIIIIII
 * That definitely looks 72 to me. Gebruiker:Dedalus 14:08, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)

In religion
In this section of the article, the reader is told that '[i]n Psalm 49, the 49th word from the beginning is Shake, and the 49th word from the end is Spear.' This utter nonsense. The Psalm in question is number 46 in the King James Bible, and it is 46 words from the beginning and 47 from the end. It is this type of unresearched rubbish that makes so many people question the validity of wikipedia as a reliable source of information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.86.172.141 (talk) 13:48, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Decimal expansion of 1/49
0. 02    04       08         16           32             64              128                256                  512                   1024                     2048 +                     ....... --- 0. 020408163265306122448979591836734693877551...
 * 1/49 = 0.0204081632 6530612244 8979591836 7346938775 51...

(from 49). LGMᚂ 05:59, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

recipricol
See the above section. Anything usable should already be here. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 15:31, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Agree --Ling Kah Jai (talk) 12:19, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Dead link
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

 * http://www.ngcic.org/
 * In IC 1337 on 2011-04-23 17:08:25, Socket Error: 'getaddrinfo failed'
 * In IC 1337 on 2011-04-24 04:34:10, Socket Error: 'getaddrinfo failed'
 * In 10 (number) on 2011-05-23 02:06:58, Socket Error: 'getaddrinfo failed'
 * In 10 (number) on 2011-05-31 22:27:07, Socket Error: 'getaddrinfo failed'
 * In 11 (number) on 2011-06-01 02:53:15, Socket Error: 'getaddrinfo failed'
 * In 138 (number) on 2011-06-01 14:55:19, Socket Error: 'getaddrinfo failed'
 * In 48 (number) on 2011-06-19 14:01:14, Socket Error: 'getaddrinfo failed'

--JeffGBot (talk) 14:05, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Dead link 2
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

 * http://sunearth.gsfc.nasa.gov/eclipse/LEsaros/LEsaros1-175.html
 * In 10 (number) on 2011-05-23 02:07:31, 404 Not Found
 * In 1520s BC on 2011-05-23 03:34:42, 404 Not Found
 * In 1630s BC on 2011-05-25 01:51:51, 404 Not Found
 * In 10 (number) on 2011-05-31 22:27:15, 404 Not Found
 * In 11 (number) on 2011-06-01 02:53:24, 404 Not Found
 * In 1409–1400 BC on 2011-06-01 15:26:12, 404 Not Found
 * In 159 (number) on 2011-06-01 18:16:53, 404 Not Found
 * In 48 (number) on 2011-06-19 14:03:06, 404 Not Found

--JeffGBot (talk) 14:08, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Dead link 3
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

 * http://sunearth.gsfc.nasa.gov/eclipse/SEsaros/SEsaros1-175.html
 * In 138 (number) on 2011-05-23 02:57:59, 404 Not Found
 * In 138 (number) on 2011-06-01 14:55:24, 404 Not Found
 * In 159 (number) on 2011-06-01 18:16:47, 404 Not Found
 * In 48 (number) on 2011-06-19 14:03:15, 404 Not Found

--JeffGBot (talk) 14:08, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Bingo names -
Please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Numbers for a centralized discusion as to whether Bingo names should be included in thiese articles. Arthur Rubin (alternate) (talk) 23:34, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

title: Talk:49 (number)


text:
Chronic fatigue

Chronic fatigue may refer to:
 * Chronic fatigue, a long-term state of physical or mental exhaustion, a symptom of many chronic illnesses and of Idiopathic chronic fatigue
 * Myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome, a discrete chronic medical condition characterized by post-exertional malaise, symptoms of profound intensity including fatigue, pain, and cognitive impairment and usually caused or precipitated by a systemic infection.

title: Chronic fatigue


text:
St. Marys River (Florida–Georgia)

The St. Marys River (named Saint Marys River by the United States Geological Survey, ) is a 126 mi river in the southeastern United States. The river was known to the Indians of the area as Thlathlothlaguphka, or Phlaphlagaphgaw, meaning "rotten fish". French explorer Jean Ribault named the river the Seine when he encountered it in 1562. From near its source in the Okefenokee Swamp, to its mouth at the Atlantic Ocean, it forms a portion of the border between the U.S. states of Georgia and Florida. The river also serves as the southernmost point in the state of Georgia. The St. Marys River rises as a tiny stream, River Styx, flowing from the western edge of Trail Ridge, the geological relic of a barrier island/dune system, and into the southeastern Okefenokee Swamp. Arching to the northwest, it loses its channel within the swamp, then turns back to the southwest and reforms a stream, at which point it becomes the St. Marys River. Joined by another stream, Moccasin Creek, the river emerges from the Okefenokee Swamp at Baxter, Florida/Moniac, Georgia. It then flows south, then east, then north, then east-southeast intersecting I-95 near Yulee, and finally emptying its waters into the Atlantic, near St. Marys, Georgia and Fernandina Beach, Florida.

Name
The U.S. Board on Geographic Names discourages the use of apostrophes in place names, including St. Marys River.

1805 incident
On 6 July 1805, Lieutenant Robert Pigot of HMS Cambrian (1797) arrived off the harbour in the French privateer schooner Matilda, which the British had captured three days earlier. On 7 July Pigot took Matilda 12 mi up the St Marys River to attack three vessels reported to be there. Along the way militia and riflemen fired on Matilda. Eventually the British reached the three vessels, which were lashed in a line across the river. They consisted of a Spanish privateer schooner and her two British prizes, the ship Golden Grove and the brig Ceres, which the Spanish privateer had captured some two months earlier. The Spaniards had armed Golden Grove with eight 6-pounder guns and six swivels, and given her a crew of 50 men. The brig too was armed with swivels and small arms. The Spanish schooner carried six guns and a crew of 70 men.

Pigot engaged the vessels for an hour, and then after Matilda had grounded, took his crew in her boats and captured Golden Grove. The British then captured the other two vessels. Lastly, Pigot fired on a group of 100 militia, with a field gun, dispersing them. The British had two men killed, and 14 wounded, including Pigot, who had received two bullet wounds to head and one to a leg. A crowd of Americans on the Georgia side of the river watched the entire battle.

War of 1812
See Battle of Fort Peter

Literature
Martin, Charles. Where the River Ends. New York, Broadway Books, 2008. ISBN 9780767926980. An artist and his dying wife fulfill her wish of one last canoe ride from the headwaters of the St. Marys to the sea.

title: St. Marys River (Florida–Georgia)


text:
Taking Tiger Mountain (By Strategy)

Taking Tiger Mountain (By Strategy) is the second solo studio album by Brian Eno (mononymously credited as "Eno"), released in November 1974 by Island Records. Unlike his debut album Here Come the Warm Jets, which featured 16 musicians, this album utilized a core band of five instrumentalists: Eno (keyboards, guitar), Phil Manzanera (guitar), Brian Turrington (bass guitar), Freddie Smith (drums), and Robert Wyatt (percussion). Manzanera also participated in the writing and production. To help guide the musicians, Eno and Peter Schmidt developed instruction cards called Oblique Strategies to facilitate creativity during the recording process.

Taking Tiger Mountain (By Strategy) is a loose concept album that references themes of geopolitical intrigue ranging from espionage to the Chinese Communist Revolution. It did not chart in the United Kingdom or the United States, but received positive reviews from critics. Since its release, the album has received even more critical attention.

Production
The album was inspired by a series of postcards depicting a Chinese revolutionary opera titled Taking Tiger Mountain by Strategy. Eno described his understanding of the title as referring to "the dichotomy between the archaic and the progressive. Half Taking Tiger Mountain – that Middle Ages physical feel of storming a military position – and half (By Strategy) – that very, very 20th-century mental concept of a tactical interaction of systems."

To further explore the possibilities of the studio setting, Eno and his friend Peter Schmidt developed instruction cards, called Oblique Strategies. During the recording sessions, he would allow the cards to dictate the next unconsidered action in the recording process. Describing the words on the album as an expression of "idiot glee", Eno and Schmidt eventually expanded the Oblique Strategies set to over 100 "worthwhile dilemmas", which would be used in nearly all his future recordings and productions. Schmidt also designed the album cover, which consists of four prints from an edition of fifteen hundred of his unique lithographs, as well as Polaroids of Eno, credited on the album sleeve to Lorenz Zatecky.

Manzanera spoke positively about the recording experience. He described it as:

"...just doing anything we felt like doing at the time. The engineer we used, Rhett Davies, also did Diamond Head and 801 Live and Quiet Sun, so it was like family. There was a lot of experimenting and a lot of hours spent with Brian Eno, me, and Rhett in the control room doing all the things that eventually evolved into those cards, the Oblique Strategies, and it was just a lot of fun."

Eno's group on Taking Tiger Mountain included Brian Turrington and Freddie Smith of The Winkies, along with Robert Wyatt and Manzanera. Other musicians appearing on the album include Andy Mackay of Roxy Music, along with the Portsmouth Sinfonia, an orchestra in which Eno had once played clarinet. (The Portsmouth Sinfonia allowed anybody to join as long as they had no experience with the instrument they would play in the orchestra.) Phil Collins plays drums on "Mother Whale Eyeless". After Eno had helped with production on the Genesis album The Lamb Lies Down on Broadway, Genesis front man Peter Gabriel asked how the band could reciprocate, so Eno requested Collins play drums for him.

Music and lyrics
The sound of Taking Tiger Mountain (By Strategy) has been described as more subdued than Eno's previous solo album, while the lyrics have darker themes and subject matter. The album's lyrics have been described as "remarkably literate and often humorous" with "quick-fire rhymes, oddball couplets, abrupt demands, and ruthless statements". To create the lyrics, Eno sang nonsense syllables to the record's backing tracks and then turned them into words. This lyric-writing method was used for all his more vocal-based recordings of the 1970s.

References to China appear in the album's songs, including "Burning Airlines Give You So Much More," "China My China," and "Taking Tiger Mountain". Steve Huey of AllMusic described the album's themes as "often inscrutable, but still playful – about espionage, the Chinese Communist revolution, and dream associations". On the political theme within the lyrics and album title, Eno explained that he is "not Maoist or anything like that; if anything I'm anti-Maoist". The album addresses several different esoteric topics. "Burning Airlines Give You So Much More" is inspired by a 1974 crash near Paris of a Turkish Airlines DC-10, one of the worst air crashes in history. "The Fat Lady of Limbourg", described by Eno as a "Burroughs-type song" about an asylum in Limbourg, Belgium, where the residents of it outnumber the population of the town. "The Great Pretender" describes the rape of a suburban housewife by a crazed machine.

Release
Taking Tiger Mountain (By Strategy) was released in November 1974 in a gatefold sleeve. No singles were released from the album, and it failed to chart in either the United Kingdom or the United States.

In 2004, Taking Tiger Mountain was reissued by Virgin Records in remastered digipak form.

Critical reception
Like Here Come the Warm Jets, Taking Tiger Mountain received a mostly positive reception from critics. Writing for The Village Voice, Robert Christgau gave the album a rating of A−. "Every cut on this clear, consistent, elusive album affords distinct present pleasure," he said. "Admittedly, when they're over they're over — you don't flash on them the way you do on 'Cindy Tells Me' and 'Baby's on Fire'. But that's just his way of being modest." Wayne Robbins of Creem lauded Eno for the way he "grafts seemingly disparate elements in any way that might be useful to his flow". Robbins explained, "It sounds like it might be pretentious; it's not, because Eno is comfortable with those pretensions." He concluded that "a man who can write songs like 'Burning Airlines Give You So Much More' has seen the future, and the future is a sonic Disney named Eno, who makes music you can live with". Circus magazine described the album as "Sick! Sick! Sick! But, oh-h-h, it feels so good! [...] guaranteed to be put on the 'Most Wanted' list by psychopaths everywhere [...] [Eno] takes you on a dada-ists tour-de-force, lampooning and integrating every type of music conceivable". Critic Ed Naha, writing in Crawdaddy!, gave the album a negative review, writing "Much of the Wonderlandish magic found on Eno's first LP is lost on this rocky terrain, being replaced by a dull, repetitive aura that is annoying as all hell." In 1975 Taking Tiger Mountain (By Strategy) was voted one of the best albums of the year in the Village Voice ' s Pazz & Jop critics poll for 1975.

Recent assessments of the album have been mostly positive, with AllMusic and Blender giving the album 5 stars, their highest ratings. AllMusic's Steve Huey compared it to Eno's first album, writing "not quite as enthusiastic as Here Come the Warm Jets, Taking Tiger Mountain is made accessible through Eno's mastery of pop song structure". Douglas Wolk of Blender rated it more highly than Here Come the Warm Jets, calling it "more immediately likeable". Select gave the album a four-out-of-five rating, calling it "excellent". He described the songs "Mother Whale Eyeless," "Put a Straw under Baby," and "Third Uncle" as highlights. Chris Jones of BBC Music called Taking Tiger Mountain (By Strategy) "a work of genius because it didn't know the meaning of repetition" and "merely took Warm Jets and refined it into a smoother lump of oddness."

Track listing
Note
 * Side A of early vinyl copies ends with the sound of chirping crickets locked into the inner groove.

Personnel

 * Eno – vocals, electronics, keyboards, snake guitar, treatments
 * Phil Manzanera – guitar
 * Brian Turrington – bass guitar, piano (track 10)
 * Freddie Smith – drums
 * Robert Wyatt – percussion, backing vocals

Guest musicians
 * The Simplistics – chorus on tracks 2 and 10
 * Andy Mackay – brass on track 3
 * Phil Collins – extra drums on track 4
 * Polly Eltes – vocals on track 4
 * Portsmouth Sinfonia – strings on track 7
 * Randi and the Pyramids – chorus on track 8

Production
 * Brian Eno – production
 * Phil Manzanera – production assistance
 * Rhett Davies – engineering
 * Robert Ash – engineering assistance
 * Denny Bridges (AIR)? – audio engineering
 * Jon Walls (AIR)? – engineering assistance
 * Nicholas Pearson – special aide
 * Bill Kelsey – special equipment
 * Simon Heyworth – mastering
 * David Hill – Ampex ATR 2Ch Tape playback with ARIA electronics
 * John Bonis – typography, lettering
 * Peter Schmidt – cover art

title: Taking Tiger Mountain (By Strategy)