text:
Talk:OpenBSD

Merger discussion
you should probably put the details of your proposal here at the beginning of the section, including the rationale for the merger, and an indication of which direction the merge should be done - OpenBSD Foundation into OpenBSD, or OpenBSD into OpenBSD Foundation - or an indication that you're leaving that as part of the discussion. didn't indicate into which direction the merger should be done; you should probably do that, or indicate that you're leaving that as part of the discussion. If you have a direction in mind, you should replace the Merge template in OpenBSD}] with a Merge from template, and replace the Merge template I put into [[OpenBSD Foundation (to let people reading that article know that a merger was proposed) with a Merge to template. Guy Harris (talk) 05:10, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
 * See WP:MERGEPROP for the process of proposing a merger. Guy Harris (talk) 05:21, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

oppose since the OpenBSD Foundation is parent of other projects, its own entity, and OpenBSD is well notable on its own, it makes little sense to me to shoehorn this established article into that stub. (updated 2 Aug 2021 to reflect Foundation->OpenBSD merge) that the foundation be mentioned here in brief passing, but the OpenBSD Foundation article itself remain separate, of course depending on notability outcome Strangerpete (talk) 03:58, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose Just close this. The user has opened numerous bad merge discussions in their short editing career and they are indefinite blocked for CIR, refusal to communicate, and continuing to make disruptive edits following several previous blocks. -- ferret (talk) 14:36, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
 * While you're not wrong, not every edit they made was disruptive; I get the feeling that its a kid with good intentions who just wasn't getting it (either way, irrelevant)...and even though I'm not exactly on board with with merger proposal, I'm having vague second thoughts on whether or not the Foundation should in fact be merged here, and as Guy Harris pointed out that may have been their original intention (my prior oppose being based on the openbsd->foundation move specifically.) I think it would be just fine to let this discussion take the normal course. Strangerpete (talk) 14:47, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I didn't say every edit they made was disruptive. I still oppose this on the simple grounds of OpenBSD and the foundation being different topics. -- ferret (talk) 16:21, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Sorry I didn't mean to imply that you said that, I only wanted to balance your (correct) statement for others who may read this, as not to gain the impression that this was only a malicious editor...in that case I'd have agreed totally to revert the whole proposal Strangerpete (talk) 17:03, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

 * Support Does not meet WP:GNG on its own for a standalone article. Merge into OpenBSD. PhotographyEdits (talk) 13:54, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

 * Oppose per 's reasons  17:28, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

 * Comment: I think the question about whether OpenBSD Foundation should be merged into this article really boils down to whether the OpenBSD Foundation is sufficiently notable like the FreeBSD Foundation to warrant its own article, or whether its notability as a standalone subject is dubious enough to warrant it being subsumed into the corresponding OS article as is the case for the NetBSD Foundation.  —PowerPCG5 (talk) 14:57, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

 * Placing the foundation within the OpenBSD article is not appropriate imho; notability is another issue. The foundation is the parent of multiple projects, with OpenSSH arguably more popular than OpenBSD itself...so why would we put the foundation under one of it's random projects? Strangerpete (talk) 17:25, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
 * IMHO the OpenBSD operating system is a little more substantial than just another “one of it[]s random projects”; while I personally don’t have a strong opinion either way, if a consensus emerge that the OpenBSD Foundation doesn’t meet Wikipedia’s notability guidelines to warrant having its own article, I personally would prefer that it at least be covered in its own subsection under the OpenBSD article than not be mentioned at all on Wikipedia  —PowerPCG5 (talk) 02:47, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

(1) when I started to merge them there was no notice template at the articles and the last comment was written on 10 August, so I assumed that the discussion is over (2) I don't see, the first oppose vote which is yours, can't be counted because per what you have stated , the second oppose vote can't be counted because it is just personal judgment about the merger opener without any comment about the discussion/merge itself, the third oppose vote is  (the first oppose vote, your vote) can't be counted same as the first vote; I see a support vote with a good reason , and the last one is a "Comment" by user:PowerPCG5 which has no opposition about the merge; at the end, if you count my actions (merging) as "Support" you will see that the claim  is invalid. -- FMM-1992 (talk) 02:29, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

 * 12 hours earlier both articles had the merger banner removed with the summary, Removed "Merge with OpenBSD Foundation template" due to lack of support for the Merge, it had seemed unlikely to me at the time that you wouldn't have noticed that prior to merging. That on top of the discussion below where it was requested that you discuss merges first.
 * As for the votes, fair enough - my oppose wasn't clear stated since the original proposal wasn't clear, I should have updated my opposition later. The second vote was definitely valid at the time since the user was making random merge requests; but either way this discussion was never closed, though i'm in no rush to - discussion is certainly welcome Strangerpete (talk) 02:59, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

 * on second thought, I'll change to support for the following reasons: most people probably won't understand the difference between Openbsd and the Foundation due to the name, and end up here anyway; while the foundation article has some sources now, you're probably correct that it won't stand as notable - though I don't think it should be here, still it makes more sense than the alternatives. It couldn't hurt you to make some attempt at discussion first though in the future, your edit summary for this merge was unnecessarily confrontational; and a stub is far from harmful to anyone.

 * 's vote is still based on my original oppose which was worded for the original OpenBSD->Foundation merge, so they should revisit their position. Sorry for the noise and confusion! Strangerpete (talk) 03:55, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

thanks for changing your vote, I just want to help the readers and editors, and also improving the article; as I said in the edit summary of the merge: perhaps using the word "harmful" was wrong, it was better to use the word "unhelpful" and the phrase "time-wasting", in any way, as I said in the following section for OpenBSD version history, WP:Article size says:

also Merging says:

user:Onel5969 has labeled the article as which says, when I read that Wikipedia's notability guidelines I found that OpenBSD Foundation fails in all aspects, just see it. I think VideoLAN can be considered as a notable organization, it is very famous and has "291 revisions since 2003-07-07, 217 editors, 75 watchers, 5,165 pageviews (30 days)" (XTools), compare it with OpenBSD Foundation which had "63" pageviews from 1 April 2021 to 1 May 2021 (see Pageviews Analysis) before the merge banners increasing its pageviews.

One important note, OpenBSD Foundation is not the only unnotable, short and stub article that should be merged, The Fedora Project (my main OS) and The openSUSE Project have the same problems and I will merge them into their main articles.

Currently 8 days passed from your comment, and it seems you was the only major oppose which of course you have changed your vote, so I will restore my merge edits manually without reverting.

Regards. -- FMM-1992 (talk) 02:12, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:08, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Puffy mascot openbsd.gif

Understanding cited Security criticisms
Two main criticisms are made of BSDs in general and of OpenBSD in particular, the first apparently from year 2017: "Bugs are still easy to find in those kernels, even in OpenBSD". and the other: "Two years later, in 2019, ... that while OpenBSD has some effective mitigations, a significant part of them are "useless at best and based on pure luck and superstition", arguing for a more rational approach when it comes to designing them.[64]

BSD kernel function bugs shown appeared less as manifestly incorrect software(1) than as potentially troublesome edge use conditions that belong more to calling routine checks. The [64] citation did not quite relate to the second criticism which seemed to come from an off the record discussion not found in the cited slide presentation. The citation suggests nevertheless a level of futility "useless mitigation" (maybe the Xorg root exploit??) for whichever OpenBSD one the presenter had in mind but readers here shall not know which or know of.

(1) unless for say the TCP stack ipsec example the comparison (<) of xisr->sadb_x_ipsecrequest_len to sizeof(*xisr) is not of like-to-like quanitites in the struct secpolicy *key_msg2sp function 'bug' example. Mkhomo (talk) 12:59, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:OpenBSD


text:
Catti-brie

Catti-brie (spelled in later publications as "Cattie-brie") is a fictional character in the Forgotten Realms setting, based on the Dungeons & Dragons role-playing game. The creation of American author R.A. Salvatore, she is primarily known as the love interest of the drow ranger Drizzt Do'Urden and has appeared in multiple media alongside Drizzt.

Development
R.A. Salvatore named Catti-brie after his daughter Caitlin Brielle after the editor suggested The Crystal Shard would be better with a strong female character. Salvatore ended the 1996 novel Passage to Dawn with "Drizzt and Catti-brie riding off into the sunset" as he had envisioned it to be his final book about Drizzt and his companions after falling out with his then-publisher, TSR, Inc. On the decision to kill off Catti-brie as a direct consequence of the Spellplague event in the Transitions trilogy, which begins with 2007’s The Orc King and concludes in 2009’s The Ghost King, Salvatore explained that Dungeons & Dragons publisher Wizards of the Coast had issued the mandate to advance the timeline of the Forgotten Realms by 100 years. Salvatore suggested that his "hand was forced” as the time jump conflicts with Catti-brie's natural human lifespan; although he had made plans to take the character in an "interesting direction", Salvatore concluded that being forced into an uncomfortable space had prompted him to become more creative with his writing in response to the revised setting. Salvatore drew from his personal experiences in his approach to portray the ignominious deaths of Catti-brie and her halfling friend Regis.

Salvatore later found a way to bring Catti-brie back into the story canon along with Drizzt's other companions. He recalled feeling nervous about potential negative fan reception, but felt that he had a sensible and justifiable reason for his approach, and thought he could "make a point". Salvatore emphasized that many readers are emotionally attached to Drizzt and his companions after following the stories he wrote about them for several years.

Fictional biography
Catti-brie is a beautiful auburn-haired and blue-eyed woman with a kind, tolerant, and pragmatic personality. Catti-brie is a member of the Companions of the Hall, and often serves as the emotional compass for her adventuring companions, guiding both Drizzt and Wulfgar into wise action with her common sense and clear insight. Catti-brie was the first person from the Icewind Dale that accepted Drizzt, and she was very young when Drizzt got to know her.

The mother of Catti-brie died in childbirth, and then her father moved with Catti-Brie from Mirabar to Termalaine, which is one of the Ten Towns. He was very successful for three years, until a goblin killed him. Termalaine was threatened by a goblin onslaught until the dwarves of clan Battlehammer rushed from their valley to defeat the goblin horde. Bruenor saved the life of the orphaned girl and adopted Catti-brie as his daughter. Catti-brie has no recollection of her life before Bruenor adopted her, but she did have a pleasant childhood living with the dwarves. As a result of her upbringing, Catti-brie has a stubborn and tough dwarven personality like that of her foster-father.

During the five years that Wulfgar spent in the service of Bruenor, Catti-brie helped him overcome his barbarian upbringing to highlight the compassion and intelligence inside of him. Catti-Brie and Wulfar developed a bond which grew stronger while they adventured with Bruenor, Regis, and Drizzt Do'Urden, and they were ultimately betrothed. A drow seeking to kill Drizzt attacked Mithral Hall, and Wulfgar was captured by Errtu during one of the battles, ending their relationship tragically. She would then have a tentative, on-again-off-again romance with Drizzt through the novels which culminates in The Two Swords.

The assassin Artemis Entreri was chasing Regis, and Artemis held Catti-brie prisoner. After Mithral Hall was found, Catti-Brie discovered the weapon Taulmaril the Heartseeker, Gift of Anariel, Sister of Faerûn, which was lost in the destroyed Hall of Dumathoin. Catti-Brie additionally carried the sentient sword Khazid'hea for several years, also known as "Cutter", which she took from Dantrag Baenre, after Drizzt killed him.

Shortly after beginning her training as a Wizard, Catti-brie was struck by a falling strand of the Weave during the Spellplague. Catti-brie's body remained on the material plane, though her mind and spirit is pulled into the plane of existence known as Shadowfell. Her patron goddess Mielikki eventually retrieved her spirit but she could not be returned to the world of the living in her state, instead remaining in a pocket dimension created by Mielikki. In the 2013 book The Companions, it is revealed that Mielikki offered Catti-brie the choice of being reincarnated as a mortal newborn of the same race and sex as her first mortal form. She reemerges as a Bedine tribeswoman named Ruqiah who is born in 1463 DR, long after the original Catti-brie died in 1385 DR.

Weapons
Catti-brie used Taulmaril in combat and had a limitless arrow supply. She would charge into melee combat armed with Khazid'hea confident that she could dominate the blade. She was wounded by a boulder thrown by a giant while defending Mithril Hall from the orc legions of Obould Many-Arrows, and this lasting injury limited her ability to fight using melee weaponry. She studies magic under the wizard Alustriel Silverhand.

Taulmaril the Heartseeker
Taulmaril was a gift to the Mithral Hall dwarves by Lady Anariel, Sister of Faerûn. The bow is made of wood enspelled not to break or scratch, and the quiver held 20 silver arrows (which can magically teleport back to the quiver); when one was used the quiver magically replaced it. The bow was used by Catti-brie. Part of the weapon's enchantment (passed to the arrows when they're fired by it) is that the arrows are imbued with crackling energy in flight that causes them to deal far more damage than would be typical for a normal arrow. The energy is probably electrical in nature, as it scorches targets, can set flammables alight, but does not seem to have any particularly enhanced effect upon cold-based creatures.

Another property of Taulmaril the Heartseeker is that the arrow, when fired from the bow, travels at super high speeds compared to a normal bow, allowing it to blast through enemies even when they have armor.

Khazid'hea (Cutter)
Khazid'hea was the evil sentient blade she wielded during The Legacy period, the blade with a wicked design all of its own and with the ability to communicate with its user and the ability to change the shape of its own hilt; furthermore the super sharp blade could cut through solid stone. Khazid'hea could easily take over the minds of others in its search to be wielded by the dark elf ranger Drizzt Do'Urden, by its measure the greatest fighter in the world. Catti-brie, however, was able to overcome the sword and put it to deadly use, though soon after this Khazid'hea left the hands of Catti-brie and after some time led to the death of Delly Curtie, Wulfgar's wife, and after that fell into the hands of another drow elf. Khazid'hea's ego, it seems, could not stand Catti-brie's use of Taulmaril.

Later in the Legacy of the Drow series, specifically Starless Night, after Drizzt killed Dantrag Baenre his sword, Khazid'hea, came into Catti-brie's hands when Drizzt refused, saying, "I favor the scimitar", because the sword's hilt took the shape of a unicorn's head, the symbol of Mielikki.

The sword's name, Khazid'hea, literally means cutter in the drow language.

The Blade itself is sentient in nature, wishing for only the best to wield it. Or it will take over the mind of the "owner", as evidenced by the use of Delly Curtie, Wulfgar's wife, and subsequently several Orcs, to get to Drizzt Do'Urden in the book The Two Swords.

In other media

 * Catti-brie makes a cameo appearance along with the other Companions of the Hall in 2000's Baldur's Gate II.
 * She appears in 2021's Dungeons & Dragons: Dark Alliance as one of the four playable characters.
 * She appears in the 2021 Magic: The Gathering expansion set Dungeons & Dragons: Adventures in the Forgotten Realms as a "Legendary Creature" card in the Aura Of Courage commander deck.

Reception
In the Io9 series revisiting older Dungeons & Dragons novels, Rob Bricken commented that "The Crystal Shard's biggest crime by far is its scarcity of female characters; only one has a name and dialogue. That would be Bruenor’s adopted human daughter Cattie-Brie, who, even though Drizzt calls her his soulmate in chapter one, gets only a few dozen lines", although he noted that "I know for a fact that Salvatore's writing—included his female characters; thankfully, Cattie-Brie even eventually joins Bruenor, Drizzt, and Wulfgar on their adventures in later books—improved over time." In reviewing the sequel, Bricken commented that "this time Cat is a real protagonist and needs a reason to stay part of the story, with as well-rounded a personality and as much development as the other main characters. This is a massive improvement, although her character arc starts out rough. Basically, despite being a very proficient warrior herself, she’s so terrified of the assassin she can't do anything, to the point she occasionally doesn't even need to be tied up. Finally, she gets ahold of herself and starts doing the "sow seeds of distrust among the captors" shtick. However, when she does escape, she becomes a badass equal to the others (well, not Drizzt, only Artemis is on par with Drizzt). She manages to trap the golem under a rock pile during her flight, catching up with the others right before they enter Mithral Hall for the final act."

Recalling the divisive reception over the death of Wulfgar in earlier instalments of The Legend of Drizzt series, Salvatore noted that the response to the deaths of Catti-brie and Regis from fans was more subdued.

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

title: Catti-brie


text:
Talk:Fibonacci sequence/Phyllotaxis

People make much of the way φ pops up everywhere. Probably the Greeks put it into the Parthenon on purpose. Probably a lot of the appearances people cite are coincidental. For example, your belly button divides your height into two parts, of which the larger is about φ times the smaller. That might be mysterious, or it might just be that a lot of things in the world are about one and three-eighths as big as a lot of other things.

But one place place φ really does appear is in botany. Suppose you're a plant. You have a central stalk, and you're going to put out leaves (or branches) on the stalk. Each leaf will be a little higher than the previous one because your stalk is always growing upwards and you put out new leaves at the tip of the stalk. But you don't want to put the leaf out pointing in the same direction as an earlier leaf, because then the upper leaf will block all the sun from the lower leaf. You'll put out the new leaf at an angle to the previous leaf.

If you picked an angle like 90 degrees, you would be making a mistake, because then when the time came to put out leaf #5, you would have gone all the way around your stalk and leaf #5 would point in the same direction as leaf #1 and keep the sun from reaching it. So 90 degree angles is not the way to go.

You could avoid this by picking a small angle, like say 5 degrees, because then you won't repeat your leaf position until leaf #37. But that is risky for another reason. If you put out 36 leaves, 5 degree angles is great. You get 36 leaves evenly spaced around the whole stalk. But you might not get to put out 36 leaves. You might put out only 18 leaves, and then you'll look like a dork with all your leaves on one side of the stalk. More to the point, you wasted half your stalk space, and you are only getting half as much sun as you could have gotten if you had used a 10-degree angle. The problem is that you do not know in advance how many leaves you will be able to put out. Even if you do get to put out 36 leaves, you have no good place to put leaf 37.

What you want is a simple strategy for putting out leaves that leads to a good leaf distribution regardless of how many leaves you actually put on the stalk. It turns out that if you pick an angle of 360/φ degrees, which is about 222 degrees, you will do very well. The first leaf comes out in direction 0, and then the second leaf comes out at an angle of 222 degrees. If you were going to have only two leaves, 180 degrees would be optimal, but you might want to put out a third leaf, and having two leaves in opposite directions would not leave a good space for the third leaf. 222 degrees is not too far off of 180, and it leaves a nice big space for leaf 3, which you put at an angle of 85 degrees (720/φ), in between leaves 1 and 2. It's not as good as if you spaced them evenly, with 120 degrees between each pair of leaves, but it is pretty good, and it leaves you in a better position for leaf 4, which comes out at about 307.5 degrees. This leaves a wide gap between leaves 2 and 3, but leaf 5 goes right in the gap. (I put illustrations of this at http://plover.com/~mjd/misc/leaves/ .)

It turns out that if you're a plant that doesn't know in advance how many leaves you will put out, and you want to put each one out at the same angle from the previous one, 360/φ is the best angle you can choose. There are some gaps between your leaves where the sun can get through, especially if you have only a few leaves. But every time you put out a new leaf, it happens to go almost in the middle of the widest gap you have, which means it's getting as much sun as it can get. It doesn't go exactly in the middle of the gap, but it's close. (It turns out that of the two parts of the gap on either side of the new leaf, the larger is φ times as big as the smaller.)

This might seem like more planning than plants can accomplish, but it's actually very easy for plants to execute this plan. There's some chemical in the stalk which promotes the growth of a new leaf or branch. The plant manufactures this chemical uniformly, and it builds up in the stem over time. The leaf comes out where the concentration is greatest. But when the leaf comes out, it uses up the supply of the chemical in its vicinity, so that the next leaf or branch comes out somewhere else. most likely far away from the previous one, because the chemical is still at a high concentration on the other side of the stalk.

This simple model results in leaf growth in exactly the pattern we just saw.

Because this growth pattern is simply achieved and leads to optimal leaf placement, it is very common. The centers of daisies and sunflowers have spiral structures in which the spirals have 8 components in one direction and 13 in the other (Fibonacci numbers again), or, in larger specimens, 13 in one direction and 21 in the other, or 21 and 34, or 34 and 55, or even 55 and 89. This is the result of the φ-related growing process. Many other plants, such as pineapples, show similar structures.

title: Talk:Fibonacci sequence/Phyllotaxis


text:
Ælfwine (Tolkien)

Ælfwine the mariner is a fictional character found in various early versions of J. R. R. Tolkien's Legendarium. Tolkien envisaged Ælfwine as an Anglo-Saxon who visited and befriended the Elves and acted as the source of later mythology. Thus, in the frame story, Ælfwine is the stated author of the various translations in Old English that appear in the twelve-volume The History of Middle-earth edited by Christopher Tolkien.

Frame story: early links with Britain

In The Book of Lost Tales, begun early in Tolkien's writing career, the character who becomes Ælfwine was named Ottor Wǽfre (called Eriol by the Elves), and his tale serves as a frame story for the tales of the Elves. He set out from what is today called Heligoland on a voyage with a small crew but was the lone survivor after his ship crashed upon the rocks near an island. The island was inhabited by an old man who gave him directions to Eressëa. After he found the island the Elves hosted him in the Cottage of Lost Play and narrated their tales to him. He afterwards learned from the Elves that the old man he met was actually "Ylmir". He was taught most of the tales by the old Elf named Rúmil who is the lore master living on Eressëa. Eriol became more and more unhappy as a man and yearned constantly to be an Elf. He eventually finds out that he can become an elf with a drink of Limpë which he is denied by the leader of Kortirion on multiple occasions.

In these early versions, Tol Eressea is seen as the island of Britain, near a smaller island of Ivenry (Ireland). He earned the name Ælfwine from the Elves he stayed with; his first wife, Cwén, was the mother of Hengest and Horsa; his second wife, Naimi, bore him a third son, Heorrenda, a great poet of half-Elven descent, who in the fiction would go on to write the Old English epic poem Beowulf. This weaves together a mythology for England, connecting England's geography, poetry and mythology with the Legendarium as a plausibly reconstructed (though probably untrue) prehistory.

A presented collection
The first title for The Book of Lost Tales was

The Golden Book of Heorrenda

being the book of the

Tales of Tavrobel

The stories were thus, in the fiction, told to and transmitted by Eriol/Ælfwine, via Heorrenda's written book.

The Tolkien scholar Gergely Nagy writes that Tolkien "more and more emphatically thought of his works as texts within the fictional world" (his emphasis). Tolkien felt that this complex "double textuality" was critically important, giving the effect of being a real mythology, a collection of documents assembled and edited by different hands, whether Ælfwine's or Bilbo's or those of unnamed Númenóreans who had transmitted ancient Elvish texts, over a long period of time. Nagy notes that Tolkien's friend C. S. Lewis, like him a scholar of English literature, jokingly responded to Tolkien's 1925 The Lay of Leithian by writing a philological commentary on the text complete with invented names of scholars, conjectures as to the original text, and variant readings, as if the text had been discovered in an archive. One likely source for such a treatment, remarked by scholars including Tom Shippey, Flieger, Anne C. Petty, and Jason Fisher, is Elias Lönnrot's Finnish epic Kalevala, admired by Tolkien, which had been compiled and edited from a genuine tradition. Another such is Snorri Sturluson's Prose Edda, something that Tolkien studied intensively.

Time-travelling elf-friend

The Old English name Ælfwine means "Elf-friend", as does the later Quenya name Elendil. Ælfwine is a well-attested historical Germanic name, alongside its Old High German and Lombard equivalents, Alwin and Alboin, respectively.

All of these names were to be used in the unfinished novel The Lost Road, written around 1936–1937; it was intended as a tale of time travel, where descendants of Ælfwine experience racial memories or visions of their equivalently-named ancestors, connecting the present time (with the protagonist Alboin Errol) with the mythological. The time-series was to run all the way back to the fall of Númenor, envisaged as a lost island civilisation similar to Atlantis. The later unfinished novel The Notion Club Papers, written in 1945–1946 and published posthumously in Sauron Defeated, picks up the time travel and the "Elf-friend" names. The protagonist is Alwin Lowdham.

The Hobbit Frodo Baggins, a central figure in The Lord of the Rings, is given the informal title "Elf-friend" by an Elf, Gildor, whom he meets and addresses in Elvish. The Tolkien scholar Verlyn Flieger notes that this associates him with Ælfwine; she comments further that in the discussion between him and Sam Gamgee, Aragorn, and Legolas about the nature of time in the Elvish realm of Lothlórien, it endows him with a special authority as someone "unusually sensitive" to its mood, and in particular its "timeless quality". This is in the context of her analysis of how time differs between Lothlórien and what Frodo calls the "mortal lands" outside it. She writes that Ælfwine is what the engineer J. W. Dunne in his book An Experiment with Time described as a "Field 2 observer", effectively able to look down on observers in the lower dimension of time, Field 1, from their higher time dimension like someone in an aircraft seeing the situation of people on the ground below; and by association with Ælfwine, perhaps Frodo too is able to see Elvish time from a certain perspective.

In the later Legendarium
The Ælfwine frame story is not present in the published version of The Silmarillion, but Tolkien never fully abandoned a framework akin to the Ælfwine-tradition. Even after he had introduced the Red Book of Westmarch, supposedly compiled and translated by the Hobbit Bilbo Baggins as a framing concept, Ælfwine continued to have some role in the transition of The Silmarillion and other writings from Bilbo's translations into modern English. For example, the Narn i Hîn Húrin, which Christopher Tolkien dates to the period after the publication of The Lord of the Rings, has this introductory note: "Here begins that tale which Ǽlfwine made from the Húrinien."

Tolkien never fully dropped the idea of multiple 'voices' (such as of Rumil or Pengolodh in their "Golden Book") who supposedly collected the stories of both Mannish and Elvish sources over the millennia of the world's history. According to Christopher Tolkien, the Akallabêth, which was written in the voice of Pengolodh, in a version that his father had entitled "The Downfall of Númenor", begins "Of Men, Ælfwine, it is said by the Eldar that they came into the world in the time of the Shadow of Morgoth ..." He admits in the History of Middle-earth series that removing this destroyed the whole story's anchorage in the lore of the Eldarin elves, and led him to make changes to the end of the paragraph that would not have met with his father's approval. He points out that the last paragraph of Akallabeth as published in the Silmarillion, still contains indirect references to Ælfwine and other 'future mariners'.

This later Ælfwine was from England, and travelled west to reach the Straight Road, where he either visited the Lonely Island (Tol Eressëa) or only saw its Golden Book with the stories about the Elder Days, the time before the rule of Man, at a distance, or dreamed about the Outer Lands (Middle-earth). He was born in either the 10th or 11th century, and in some versions was connected to English royalty.

title: Ælfwine (Tolkien)


text:
Eriol

Eriol may refer to:

 * Ælfwine of England, a character of J. R. R. Tolkien that the Elves call Eriol
 * Eriol Hiiragizawa, character from the manga and anime of Cardcaptor Sakura
 * Eriol Merxha (born 1979), KS Kastrioti Krujë footballer

title: Eriol


text:
Friedrich Amelung

Friedrich Ludwig Balthasar Amelung (23 March 1842 – 20 March 1909) was a Baltic German cultural historian, businessman and chess endgame composer.

Amelung was born at Võisiku (Woiseck) manor in Governorate of Livonia of the Russian Empire (present-day Jõgeva County in Estonia). 1862–1864 he studied philosophy and chemistry at the University of Dorpat. 1864–1879 and 1885–1902 he was the director of the Rõika-Meleski mirror factory which he inherited from his father. Amelung published writings about the culture and history of Estonian localities like Viljandi, Tallinn and Põltsamaa.

Amelung was known as a chess player and a famous chess quiz's author. 1879–1885 he lived in Reval (now Tallinn) and studied the chess history of the Baltics. Between 1888 and 1908 he edited the chess magazine Baltische Schachblätter. In 1898 he established the Baltic Chess Society. Amelung published about 230 endgame studies, making him the first chess historian in the Baltic States.

He played a few games with Adolf Anderssen, Gustav Neumann, Carl Mayet, Emil Schallopp, Andreas Ascharin, Emanuel Schiffers.

He died in 1909 in Riga and is buried at the Kolga-Jaani cemetery in Estonia.

title: Friedrich Amelung


text:
Template talk:Provinces of Sweden

A special variant for the historical provinces in Finland has been created at Template:Landskap_Finland. -- Mic 15:37, Mar 11, 2004 (UTC)

Consistency
Lack of consistency, not particularly the inclusion of a flag, was the main reason for reverting the implemented changes. The redeming value of the template currently implemented is essentially its consistency. On the layout and style of the footer I think there is still some work do be done, but in three or four generations maybe we will get there, or likely sooner if there is a project. What is important is that each round of changes is applied consistently and comprehenvively. I don't mind the changes being implemented, but unless it is done thoroughly it will be necessary to restore at least to the consistency of the old format. Meaning, that if really want to you implement it you need to take a look at all the geographical footers, not just the odd ones out. -- Mic 08:57, Apr 19, 2004 (UTC)

Names of provinces
The names of the provinces were changed in February 2015 to the pseudo-Latin form. English Wikipedia does not use this form for the provinces, preferring (with the exception of Scania/Skåne the modern-day Swedish version, which is how the individual articles are titled. It is not helpful to link to names which are simply not used in the encyclopaedia (in many cases, the pseudo-Latin form is not even mentioned at the article page), and does not help users to find the names they are familiar with.  It appears to be something of a minority obsession, which is unsupported by most readers or editors, or indeed by most of the English speaking world.  Skinsmoke (talk) 10:25, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Bizarre template
This template is rather strange. Called "Provinces of Sweden", but including Finland. This is typical for a former user, Mic, who has not been active here since 2004!

Peculiarities:

The so called "Lands of Sweden (a terminology created by him in 2003), normally just called "landsdelar" ("parts of the country") in Sweden are not the "normal" ones. The coat of arms are also his own "invention". Theese areas have no arms. For Götaland he uses a lion taken from the "stora riksvapnet" for Svealand he uses the three crowns (lilla riksvapnet) and for Norrland the MUNICIPAL ARMS OF BODEN!. This is not official in any way, but just phantasy. He also added "Skåneland" which is NOT one of the "landsdelar" (the arms he uses is that of Scania).

This is not serious in any way! --Muniswede (talk) 21:43, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

 * This is so terrible. Have not thought of it before.I must change it immeadeatly! --Muniswede (talk) 21:49, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

 * You might wanted to wait for a moment to discuss this. We Finns have been content with the template. Indeed, the old provinces of Sweden date are a historical phenomenon dating from the time when Finland was part if the realm proper. As such, the list makes sense. It does not reflect the current status but the pre-1634 situation. The Finnish provincial coats of arms feature on Gustav Vasa's grave. Scanian coat of arms does not. --MPorciusCato (talk) 10:19, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

 * I made the changes so quick, because I found the template it so appalling. Non-existing arms (espacially the BODEN arms representing Norrland!) We have three of this "parts of the country". I even think that "Lands of Sweden" was "Mic invention", but I accept it, for no better name. The whole thing was anachronistic. --Muniswede (talk) 11:17, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

title: Template talk:Provinces of Sweden


text:
Template talk:Historical provinces of Finland

Comments
This is a variant of Template:Provinces of Sweden. -- Mic 15:37, Mar 11, 2004 (UTC)

 * Template:Provinces of Sweden is Swedish landskap.
 * This template [Template:Provinces of Sweden Finland} is a mix of swedish and finnish landskap.

These are swedish: Blekinge | Bohuslän | Dalarna | Dalsland | Gotland | Gästrikland | Halland | Hälsingland | Härjedalen | Jämtland | Lappland | Medelpad | Norrbotten | Närke | Skåne | Småland | Södermanland | Uppland | Värmland | Västerbotten | Västergötland | Västmanland | Ångermanland | Öland | Östergötland

These are finnish: Åland | Finland Proper |Karelia | Laponia | Nylandia | Ostrobothnia | Satakunda | Savonia | Tavastia |

Lands of Sweden is: | Götaland | Norrland | Svealand Lands of Finland is: Österlanden 81.234.119.136 01:35, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Suggested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Tyrol5  [Talk]  02:41, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Template:Landskap Finland → Template:Historical provinces of Finland – English name for English Wikipedia? CsDix (talk) 22:50, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Survey

 * Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with  or  , then sign your comment with  . Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.

 * Support for a meaningfully descriptitve name -- 70.24.248.246 (talk) 06:01, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Support per WP:USEENGLISH and matching the article Historical provinces of Finland. Note that Template:Historical provinces of Finland already exists, though it's identical to this template, which is older and has many more uses. --BDD (talk) 18:52, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I hadn't noticed that template – thanks for spotting. CsDix (talk) 08:03, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

 * Any additional comments:
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.


text:
Talk:Phyllotaxis

Fibonacci numbers and phyllotaxis
I put some discssuion of the appearance of Fibonacci numbers and the golden ratio in phyllotaxis at Talk:Fibonacci number/Phyllotaxis. Some of it might be useful here once this article is fleshed out a little more. -- Dominus 15:40, 11 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I'm new but having read Talk:Fibonacci number/Phyllotaxis, I don't know why the arrangement of leaves on a stalk isn't just one more example of those things that are .618... of another or 1.618 times the other.

 * There are going to be a lot of appearances of φ in the world. Some of these are coincidences, where it seems that there is no particular reason why it should be 1.6 rather than 1.7 or 1.5 or 23.    For example, is your navel really 1/φ of the way up your body?  Not so far as anyone can tell.  Maybe it is about three-fifths of the way up, but there's no reason to identify that 3/5 with anything related to φ.

 * Other appearances of φ, however, are not coincidences; there will be some reason why they appear, and when the number that is actually measured differs from φ, we can view that as a deviation. The distribution of leaves on the stem is one of these, because there's a simple mechanism that leads to favorable leaf placement.  Leaf placement is more favorable for certain angles than for other angles, and the optimal leaf placement is achieved when the angle is 360/φ.  So it seems clear that the appearance of φ here is not a coincidence, because plants that distribute their leaves with the 360/φ angle will tend to outcompete plants that distribute their leaves in some other way, and the closer the plant can get to the uniform 360/φ angle, the more successful it will tend to be. -- Dominus 14:34, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * I don't know what anyone else thinks, but I personally am grateful to you for including all the useful and interesting information on the Golden Ratio and its abundance in nature—in this case in the study of phyllotaxy. If anyone else is interested, I'd be happy to supplement the information with a lot that I have, although I thought it better to ask first on the Talk page, as there is a small number of people (that I'm aware of, at least) who would ironically find any discussion of the Golden Ratio "controversial". I am a computer science/maths student, so naturally have a strong love of them, along with the study of fractals, another area in which the Golden Ratio pops up. — Froszthamr (talk) 08:03, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

 * You are right that it is controversial, because it has been taken up for non-mathematical reasons and made too much of, on this and other pages, supported by unreliable sources. It is probably adequately covered on this page already. The mathematics of Fibonacci is not in dispute, but its applicability to plant biology is - the presence of spirals does not prove that a particular mathematical approach is the right one. I note that you've joined a discussion that is more than 10 years old! There might be a hint in that figure. Perhaps best to drop this one. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:32, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Question about the last paragraph of this article
"In modern times, researchers such as Snow and Snow have continued these lines of inquiry."

Who are "Snow and Snow"? I think that the article ought to cite this. That way, people could read more about the research being done on this topic. InAJar 16:39, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

 * Yes, it's annoying when you see that sort of thing. I've requested the person who added it provide a citation. They're still active, so it might happen. Richard001 02:26, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

 * Well... if the author meant Richard and Mary Snow's papers, like "Experiments on phyllotaxis. I. The effect of isolating a primordium" (Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London), which was published in... 1932, then I'll have to redefine my notion of "modern times".
 * If anyone's interested in more recent research, I can recommend reviews like Didier Reinhardt's "Phyllotaxis - a new chapter in an old tale about beauty and magic numbers" (Curr.Op.Pl.Biol. 2005) or Cris Kuhlemeier's "Phyllotaxis" (Tr.Pl.Sc. 2007). One of the key research papers being e.g. D. Reinhardt's "Regulation of phyllotaxis by polar auxin transport" (Nature, 2003). All of them focus more on the biochemical regulation of phyllotaxis, though...

I. ADLER*, D. BARABE and R. V. JEAN in "A History of the Study of Phyllotaxis", Annals of Botany 80: 231-244, 1997 gives a great account of Snow and Snow's contributions. By modern times, they mean taking an experimental approach to discovering the rules that govern appearance of new primordia, in combination with an attempt at mathematization of the process, which formalizes the inquiry. For example:

"Some readers may find that the mathematical aspects of the history of the study of phyllotaxis are given more importance than the botanical aspects. It is rather that over the years botanists (such as Church, 1904; van Iterson, 1907; Richards, 1951) found that in order to improve our understanding of phyllotaxis it was necessary to elaborate mathematical models based on botanical hypotheses (such as those put forward by the botanists Hofmeister, 1868; Schwendener, 1878; Snow and Snow, 1962). Over the years these pioneers have promoted a global scientific approach where mathematics were finally permitted to take their place in the concert of the disciplines concerned by the challenges of phyllotaxis study...

Mary and Robert Snow initiated an experimental phase of the study of phyllotaxis. They studied the effect of isolating a leaf primordium of Lupinus albus. They concluded (Snow and Snow, 1931) that the position at which a new leaf primordium is initiated is influenced by the pre-existing leaf primordia adjacent to the site of initiation. They, and others after them, showed that the phyllotaxis of a growing plant can be altered by surgical or chemical intervention."

In Douady and Couder's "Phyllotaxis as a Dynamical Self Organizing Process Part II: The Spontaneous Formation of a Periodicity and the Coexistence of Spiral and Whorled Patterns", J. Theor. Biol., 1996, they state:

"The conditions for the appearance of a new primordium put forward by Snow + Snow (1952) are shown to form the rules of a dynamical iterative system more general than that based on Hofmeister's hypotheses (1868)...The transition between a whorled type of phyllotaxy and a spiral one can result from botanical experiments of the type initiated by Snow & Snow (1935). They showed that by breaking the symmetry of an apex with a diagonal cut a usually decussate plant (Epilobium hirsutum) could form spiral patterns.  Revisiting the drawing of Snow & Snow, Richards (1951) showed that the formation of these spiral modes was obtained even though the plastochrone ratio was unchanged. This experiment was a demonstration of the fact that both the whorled modes and the spiral ones could result from the same dynamics with differences in the initial conditions only."

In summary, they were early contributors who helped construct the practice of the "most venerable" mathematical biology, which allowed us to predict some surprising results very precisely. (best, gahnett) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gahnett (talk • contribs) 05:11, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Phi reference wrong
Here's what the article says:

A repeating spiral can be represented by a fraction describing the angle of windings leaf per leaf. Alternate leaves will have an angle of 1/2 of a full rotation. In beech and hazel the angle is 1/3, in oak and apricot it is 2/5, in poplar and pear it is 3/8, and in willow and almond the angle is 5/13.[2] The numerator and denominator normally consist of a Fibonacci number and its second successor. The number of leaves is sometimes called rank, in the case of simple Fibonacci ratios, because the leaves line up in vertical rows. With larger Fibonacci pairs, the ratio approaches phi and the pattern becomes complex and non-repeating.

If we try a few examples, we can see that the ratio does not approach phi. For example, 13/5 = 2.6, while phi is about 1.618. Or we can try fib(30)/fib(28) = 832040/317811 = 2.6180339887543225. Clearly this is not converging on phi.

If you want numbers that approximate phi, you can try a Fibonacci number and its successor. For example, fib(30)/fib(29) = 832040 / 514229 = 1.61803398874820362134. Therefore, the article appears to be incorrectly claiming that dividing a Fibonacci number into that number's second successor will approximate phi. In fact, to approximate phi you should divide a Fibonacci number into its successor, not its second successor. 13:09, 17 October 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.253.81.139 (talk)

The 'rule' produces convergence to phi, not the actual numbers - see e.g. Ian Stewart and Douady and Couder's work - implies that the underlying dynamics of the system are involved in formation of a phi-compatible pattern (and convergence to phi)79.70.229.86 (talk) 22:36, 17 March 2012 (UTC)lofthouse79.70.229.86 (talk) 22:36, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

 * lofthouse, his point was that it DOESN'T converge to phi, when you use a Fibonacci number and its SECOND successor. And he's absolutely right.  Uporządnicki (talk) 12:53, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

 * Just a quick look-and-think suggests to me that the sequence might be converging on the square of phi. That comes to about 2.617924.  Uporządnicki (talk) 13:58, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

 * Without going into general details, the examples given necessarily converge to the square of phi, because the numerators and denominators given are alternate Fibonacci numbers (1,1,2,3,5,8,13...) Note that phi^(n+1)=phi^(n-1)+phi^(n), so that phi^2=phi^0 + phi^1 (2.61803... = 1 + 1.61803...). But without explanatory details concerning the underlying mechanisms, that amounts to numerology. Maybe someone with access to some of the more recent publications could supply some helpful material? JonRichfield (talk) 09:12, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

More mechanisms please
This page provides a good description of the patterns but little as to why or how they occur. Auxin plays a part but if anyone could add more that would be great. Smartse (talk) 14:32, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Should also state that the pattern is not confined to plants - see e.g.  - it appears in animal cells too.79.70.229.86 (talk) 22:39, 17 March 2012 (UTC)twl79.70.229.86 (talk) 22:39, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

The mechanism under the "Determination" heading appears to be completely wrong. It states that "Leaves become initiated in localized areas where auxin is absent" but in the paper that is cited (and to my own knowledge) it is areas of high auxin concentration that induce formation of leaf primordia. Indeed, in the Smith 2008 paper that is cited, he states that "Experimental evidence suggests that organs initiate in this zone in response to auxin maxima, which are created by the coordinated transport of auxin to convergence points." Hopefully someone with some more knowledge in this area can fix this glaring mistake. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7F:2807:5C00:E098:E705:C168:F9EE (talk) 18:45, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

 * Excellent comment. This chapter is totally wrong -- auxin is key to initiate leaf; preventing auxin transport/ or using auxin inhibitor is totally blocking the induction of new leaf; while, following those drug inhibition, application of a patch of auxin resume the formation of leaf (canonical experience from DOI: 10.1105/tpc.12.4.507 ; for review DOI: 10.1016/s1360-1385(01)01894-5)
 * The paper used a reference here is rather talking about an auxin minima being required to initiate the polarization of the organ (not the organ itself) (mainly from Yulin Jiao team effort, several paper). But, more recently, it was shown that this auxin depletion is rather related to the onset of the boundary between the SAM periphery and the newly formed organ than being required for leaf initiation/organ polarization (DOI: 10.1038/s41477-022-01111-3) This recent paper as well clarify the contribution of auxin maxima into leaf inception (leaf initiate on auxin MAXIMA) and polarization (polarization is set at a time where the auxin maxima is high and homogenous across precursor leaf cell but the transcriptional response to auxin is ad-ab polarized due to a prepattern of 'polarity' gene at the meristem periphery) (DOI: 10.1038/s41477-022-01111-3). 134.2.55.134 (talk) 12:19, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

Larger Fibonacci pairs--really non-repeating?
Under the section Repeating Spiral, discussing successive plant leaves along a branch spiraling until a leaf finally lines up with the first leaf in consideration, and the pattern repeats, it says "With larger Fibonacci pairs, the pattern becomes complex and non-repeating."

I'm not an expert--neither a mathematician or a botanist. But it seems to me that that might be true only in practical terms, not mathematical. When I think it through, it seems to me that mathematically, with ANY Fibonacci pair "m/n", after "n" leaves, the spiral will get back to its starting point--having gone around the branch "m" times. So it seems to me that if "[w]ith larger Fibonacci pairs, the pattern becomes complex and non-repeating," this would only be due to the practical point that with larger Fibonacci pairs, you'll never find a branch with enough successive leaves.

If I'm wrong, I'd be grateful if someone could explain it to this layperson. But if I'm right, I think the statement in the article could do with clarification. Uporządnicki (talk) 13:28, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Without going back to the source you quote, what you say is quite correct, and the quoted text is wrong, or at least a misstatement. M/N is necessarily rational. However, if you take the sequence 1,1,2,3,5,8,13,21,34,55... and successively divide each number by its predecessor, you will find that they converge rather quickly on (1+Sqrt(5))/2, (roughly 1.61803...) which is demonstrably necessarily irrational. The convergence goes successively from below then above, 1,2,1.5, 1.666..., 1.6, etc. It does not reach the actual value at any particular Fibonacci number, but you can in principle find any digit in the expansion by dividing large enough Fibonacci numbers. In lazy or lay speech, one may say that it reaches phi at infinity (which is only arguably meaningful), or one might say that it converges on phi, which is correct, because there is no point either larger than phi or smaller, that does not have a larger error than an infinite number of such divisions. To speak of "larger pairs" and non-repetition etc, is simply wrong. However, as you correctly reflect, the plant doesn't know its maths all that well, and reality is only a rough approximation to the maths of the abstract Fibonacci structure. JonRichfield (talk) 17:58, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Repeating spiral section
The article says that Alternate leaves will have an angle of 1/2 of a full rotation. But this assertion is not qualified at all. If it applies to a specific example, that is not mentioned. If this is a general rule, it is not explained further, and the examples that follow (which are specific) give different rotation values. Aboctok (talk) 23:48, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Good catch! I've changed it to "Alternate distichous leaves will have an angle of 1/2 of a full rotation." Sminthopsis84 (talk) 01:18, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Phyllotactic Architecture
Phyllotaxy Towers are kind of Phyllotactic Architecture. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.187.98.165 (talk) 11:15, 4 November 2012 (UTC)
 * This is listed in the See also section. Where that was recently added is a section about plants, not clearly written, but probably intended to refer to "plant architecture", a sub-discipline of botany. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 14:55, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

and can be used as an example for Phyllotaxy Towers.--2.187.113.14 (talk) 22:06, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

 * The article on P. Towers was recently deleted at AfD. I believe the references there would be useful in a new article on either Biomimetic architecture or Phyllotactic architecture, to cover (actual) domes as well as (putative) towers. There would then be a place for links in either direction with Phyllotaxis. There could also be a place for a properly-cited paragraph here about the application of phyllotaxis to the architecture of buildings. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:24, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Case Studies

 * URBAN CACTUS HIGH-RISE
 * ‘Mangal City’ Skyscrapers
 * Phyllotaxy Towers — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.187.120.8 (talk) 07:28, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
 * BAMBOO SUNFLOWER TOWER
 * FIBONACCI TOWER

External links on Phyllotaxy

 * Star Cage
 * phaselab
 *
 * MathWorld
 * math.smith
 * Phyllotaxis: The Fibonacci Sequence in Nature
 * Twig and Leaf Phyllotaxy
 * Phyllotaxis Spirals in 3D

Heres the links from that article. Some are enough to support a section on Phyllotactic art or Phyllotactic in construction.--Salix (talk): 10:10, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for explaining here
Thank you Chiswick Chap and Salix for explaining what happened, I was starting to think that I'd left this page with a red link in See also! Is it really the case that once a page has been deleted there is no way to recover the text that was there? In any case, this is so discouraging that I don't intend to put any effort into researching the topic in order to create a page about it that would just be attacked once again by deletionist forces. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 13:48, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Admins can see deleted content, and if you request it I can make a user space copy of the article.--Salix (talk): 13:56, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
 * There is the germ of an article here, probably along the line of biomimetic architecture. The problem with the delete article was that there is very little literature on the subject, indeed the only place the term is used is in the authors own thesis. biomimetic architecture has a much greater amount of supporting literature and would not be at risk of deletion.--Salix (talk): 14:07, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I don't think I have time right now to be the prime builder of such an article, but could help out if someone else wants to take the lead. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 14:17, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Evolution
Mention which pattern appeared on earliest plants, etc. Jidanni (talk) 07:53, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

title: Talk:Phyllotaxis


text:
Harold Robert Steacy

Harold "Hal" Robert Steacy (June 7, 1923 – April 7, 2012) was a Canadian mineralogist who was the curator of the Canadian National Mineral Collection at the Geological Survey of Canada in Ottawa. The mineral steacyite is named for him.

Literature cited

 * Dunn, P.J., Fleischer, M., Burns, R.G. and Pabst, A. 1983. New mineral names. American Mineralogist 68:471–475.

title: Harold Robert Steacy


text:
Wikipedia:Requests for de-adminship/Old proposal

 * As per Edit this proposal, you should be bold and [ edit it] if you see room for improvement.

 * See WP:RFC to report a specific problem with an administrator, or with any user.

[ Purge the cache to refresh this page]

 is a page to request removal of Wikipedia administrator status, recipients of which were formerly known as "sysops" but nowadays known as "administrators". This process is almost always intensely controversial and participants on this page are expected to act with civility. Please read and understand the rules before proceeding.

Removal of administrator status carries no other consequence and is not permanent. A former administrator is still considered an editor in good standing, and may later be reinstated following a successful vote at Requests for adminship.

Rules
Administrator status is granted to known and trusted members of the community who are familiar with Wikipedia policies. Administrators have no special authority on Wikipedia, but are held to higher standards, because they are perceived by many, particularly new, users as the official face of Wikipedia; therefore they should take care to be courteous and exercise good judgment and patience in dealing with other users. Nominees for de-adminship should be those that may no longer have these qualities.

Becoming an adminstrator initially is difficult because of these high standards. Appropriately, removal of adminstrator status is equally difficult.

Participants in this process are expected to act calmly and respectfully, even towards those with whom they have had disagreements. All comments which explain reasons for making the request and all responses are restricted to the Talk page of the request sub-page. This is not a forum for presenting evidence which belongs in one of the other steps of the dispute resolution process, though links to such existing evidence is appropriate on the request talk page. Users unwilling to accept these terms are asked to avoid participating.

Anonymous users (including "sock puppets") cannot initiate or endorse a petition; nor are they allowed to vote. They are allowed to comment on the talk page.

Step 1: Petition
In order to prevent abuse of this process, it is desirable that the request have wide agreement. Before a vote can begin on this page, the requestor must provide proof of this general agreement. At least ten users must be in agreement that a vote is necessary by signing a petition within the space of one week.

In order to begin a petition, a requestor must create a new sub-page of :, named for the administrator, by copying the content of the /Template. In the first section, marked "Petition", the requestor should edit this to add his or her name, along with a timestamp. The requestor will then return to this page and add a link to the subpage to the "Open petitions" section.

Petitions which do not reach acceptance within one week are subject to de-listing and deletion of the subpage. If a petition fails to garner enough support, please wait a reasonable period of time before submitting again (at least one month is generally expected).

Step 2: Voting
Once the initial petition has enough signatures, anyone may remove the listing from the "Open petitions" section, and move it to the "Current votes" section. This is done by transcluding the discussion, rather than simple linking.

Voting will then be open for seven days so the community can vote and comment on the request. Bureaucrats may extend this when consensus is unclear (because consensus is subjective, bureaucrats have some discretion, but the threshold on this page is roughly 80 percent support).

If the request passes, a bureaucrat should inform a steward, either directly or via Requests for permissions, and provide a link to the closed vote. Only stewards have the necessary access to remove sysop status.

If a request is rejected, please wait a reasonable period of time before submitting again (at least one month is generally expected).

Open petitions
''Please add new petitions at the top of this section immediately below. The current time is , 29 July 2024 (UTC).''

 * none open at present - this page is still in the proposal phase and is not in use.

Current votes
''Please add open requests at the top of this section immediately below. The current time is , 29 July 2024 (UTC).''

To add your vote, use the edit section or "Vote here" link. You may add a short comment to your vote, but discussion and responses to other voters belong on the talk page of the nomination. When voting, please update the vote tally of the nomination that you are voting in. The vote tally format is as follows: (Support/Oppose/Neutral).

none open at present - this page is still in the proposal phase and is not in use


text:
Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Plant

Vermont Yankee was an electricity generating nuclear power plant, located in the town of Vernon, Vermont, in the northeastern United States. It generated 620 megawatts (MWe) of electricity at full power. The plant was a boiling water reactor (BWR), designed by General Electric. It operated from 1972 until December 29, 2014, when its owner Entergy shut down the plant. In 2008, the plant provided 71.8% of all electricity generated within Vermont, amounting to 35% of Vermont's electricity consumption. The plant is on the Connecticut River, upstream of the Vernon, Vermont Hydroelectric Dam and used the reservoir pool for its cooling water.

In March 2012, the plant's initial 40-year operating license was scheduled to expire; in March 2011, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) extended its license for another 20 years. Vermont Yankee's continued operations were complicated by the Vermont state legislature's enactment of a law providing the state legislature authority to determine the continued operation of the plant, in addition to the federal government. Entergy requested a new state certificate of public good (CPG), but the Vermont legislature voted in February 2010 against renewed permission to operate. In January 2012, Entergy won a court case, invalidating the state's veto power on continued operations. In August 2013, Entergy announced that due to economic factors Vermont Yankee would cease operations in the fourth quarter of 2014. The plant was shut down at 12:12 pm EST on December 29, 2014.

Since the 1970s, there have been many anti-nuclear protests about Vermont Yankee, including large protests after the Fukushima nuclear disaster in March 2011, and on the date of the original operating license expiry in March 2012. The plant's initial operating license from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission was the subject of a lawsuit that produced the U.S. Supreme Court's 1978 decision Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., in which the Supreme Court set forth a significant doctrine in American administrative law.

Design and function
Vermont Yankee was a BWR-4 Boiling water reactor that used a Mark I containment structure. It provided 71.8% of all electricity generated in Vermont in 2008 and met 35% of the overall electricity requirements of the state.

It was originally designed and constructed for 500 MW electrical output. In 2006, it was upgraded to 620 MW electrical output. The reactor produces 1912 MW of heat which is converted to electricity at 32% efficiency. In comparison, the average residential power demand for all of Vermont in 2012 was 239 MW. The nearby Northfield Mountain hydroelectricity facility was built to balance the supply from Yankee.

The reactor core held up to 368 fuel assemblies and 89 control rods. The spent fuel pool is licensed to contain up to 3353 spent fuel assemblies.

Ownership and operational license
In 1978, the Vermont Yankee reactor was the subject of Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., an important United States Supreme Court administrative law case which ruled that courts cannot impose procedures upon the NRC as this exceeds their power of judicial review.

On July 31, 2002, Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee, LLC (EVY) purchased the plant from Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corporation (VYNPC) for $180 million. Entergy received the reactor complex, nuclear fuel, inventories, and related real estate, as well as the liability to decommission the plant and related decommissioning trust funds of approximately $310 million. The acquisition included a 10-year power purchase agreement (PPA) under which three of the former owners committed to purchase a portion of the electricity produced by the reactor at a cost of approximately 4.5 cents per kilowatt hour.

On May 6, 2006, Vermont Yankee achieved its power of 1,912 MWth (120% of its original licensed thermal power of 1,593 MW-thermal) because of an NRC approved Extended Power Uprate. The power increase was carried out in steps to allow collection of data on the reactor's steam dryer at various power levels, in accordance with the NRC imposed power ascension test plan.

As of 2008, Vermont Yankee employed about 600 people including those in the corporate office on Old Ferry Road in Brattleboro, Vermont.

Cooling water
Vermont Yankee used the Connecticut River as its source of cooling water for its two major water systems: the circulating water system and the service water system. The circulating water system removed heat from the power generation process of the plant by cooling the plant's main condenser. The service water system cooled both safety and non-safety related auxiliary components in the nuclear facility and the turbine facility of the plant, and absorbed decay heat from the reactor's cooling systems in emergencies or in times when the reactor was shut down.

Closure/extension planning
Entergy Vermont Yankee applied to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for a license extension of 20 years on January 27, 2006. In early 2010, the Vermont State Senate voted 26–4 to block the Vermont Public Service Board (PSB) from considering continued operation of Vermont Yankee.

On March 10, 2011, the NRC voted to conclude proceedings regarding renewal of the operating license for the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station near Brattleboro, Vermont, for an additional 20 years. On March 21, 2011, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission issued their renewal of the operating license for the Vermont Yankee plant for an additional 20 years.; the renewed license will expire March 21, 2032.

On April 14, 2011, Entergy, the owner of Vermont Yankee, sued the state of Vermont to stay open despite the Senate's blocking vote.

On August 14, 2013, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ruled, upholding a lower court's decision that allowed the Vermont Yankee plant to keep running despite a seven-year effort by the Vermont Legislature to close it, finding that states are "pre-empted" from regulating safety by the Atomic Energy Act of 1946, which made safety a federal responsibility.

On August 28, 2013, Entergy announced that due to economic factors, notably the lower cost of electricity provided by competing natural gas-fired power plants, it would cease operations and schedule the plant's decommissioning in the fourth quarter of 2014. Vermont Yankee was shut down at 12:12 pm EST on December 29, 2014. All fuel in the reactor was transferred to the spent fuel pool by January 12, 2015. By August 2018, all VY's remaining spent nuclear fuel was relocated from the spent fuel pool into in dry fuel storage casks.

In December 2014, Entergy submitted the Post Shutdown Decommissioning Report to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. This report estimated that the total cost for decommissioning the reactor would be $1.24 billion. The same document reported that only $665 million had been collected in the 42 years of operations of this plant for this purpose. Entergy hopes to raise some of the shortfall funds through "external financing".

On September 28, 2016, Entergy began auctioning off more than 1,000 lots of goods in Brattleboro, Vt.

Two cooling towers were demolished in July 2019.

2007
Cooling for the plant's steam condenser was provided by circulating water through it, drawn from the adjacent Connecticut river. This water did not come in contact with the nuclear reactor and was not radioactive. The cooling towers were used to cool water returning from the condenser before it was discharged back into the river at times when it was too warm to comply with the environmental discharge permit. In 2007 the fourth cell of the west cooling tower collapsed, spilling some of the non-radioactive, cooling water. The collapse was an "industrial safety event," which did not threaten the integrity of the reactor or release any radiation into the environment. The NRC stated that the remaining cooling tower had enough capacity to allow the plant to operate at full output, however, until September 16, 2007, the reactor was kept at 50% power.

The cause of the collapse was found to be corrosion in steel bolts and rotting of lumber. Entergy asserted that future inspections would be much more stringent in order to prevent further problems.

2008
The cooling tower collapse caused Vermont's then governor, Jim Douglas, to question the reliability of the power station: In March 2008, a State Senate committee recommended that the Legislature appoint a panel to oversee an independent review of the plant's reliability. The panel gave Vermont Yankee a generally positive review. "What this report suggests to me is there is not a cause or reason to seek the closure of the plant because of operational or safety concerns," said Public Service Commissioner, David O'Brien.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission performed a tri-annual inspection July–August 2008. It found three "minor faults." An Associated Press report said that it had won "high marks."

2009
In May 2009, the vice-president of operations at Vermont Yankee told the PSB during the reliability review that he did not believe there was any radioactively contaminated underground piping at the plant, but that he would check and respond to the panel. In October 2009, Arnold Gundersen, a member of a special oversight panel convened by the Vermont General Assembly, confirmed that radioactive contamination had been detected in underground pipes. An Entergy spokesperson told Vermont Public Radio (VPR) that the earlier testimony was a "miscommunication." On June 4, 2010, VPR reported that, because they had provided misleading information, Entergy Nuclear would be liable for legal expenses incurred by certain parties.

2010
In January 2010, the Vermont Department of Health reported that tritium, a radioactive isotope of hydrogen, had been discovered in a sample of ground water taken from a monitoring well the previous November. The level of the isotope was initially below the acceptable limit for drinking water set by the Environmental Protection Agency. By mid-January, however, the level had risen to 20,000 picocuries per liter (pCi/L), the federal limit for drinking water. The head of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission told Vermont's congressional delegation that the agency would devote more resources to addressing concerns about Vermont Yankee, and that he expected the source of the tritium leak would be located within the next several weeks.

On February 4, 2010, Vermont Yankee reported that ground water samples from a newly dug monitoring well at the reactor site were found to contain about 775,000 pCi of tritium per liter (more than 37 times the federal limit). On February 5, 2010, samples from an underground vault were found to contain 2.7 million pCi/L. On February 14, 2010, the source of the leak was found to be a pair of steam pipes inside the Advanced Off-Gas (AOG) pipe tunnel. The pipes were repaired, stopping the leak.

Samples taken from the river and other drinking water sources by the Vermont Department of Health showed no detectable levels of tritium. The New Hampshire Department of Health and Human Services made a similar statement after several tests of the river.

During the search for the source of the tritium leak, other radionuclides were found in the soil at the site. Levels of cesium-137 were found to be three to ten times higher than background levels. Silt in a pipe tunnel contained 2,600 picocuries/kg, but contamination outside the pipe tunnel was limited to a small volume, about 150 ft3 of soil. According to the Vermont State Department of Health, there was no health risk from the cesium, as the quantities were small and it had not migrated.

Since cesium-137 is a fission product, it is an indicator of a nuclear fuel leak, but the consensus was that the cesium-137 probably leaked from defective fuel assemblies during or prior to 2001, when the last leak of that type was reported by Vermont Yankee. (Problems with fuel rods were common in the 1970s and 1980s.)

On May 20, 2010, the NRC released a report on Vermont Yankee:

"Based on the results of this inspection, the NRC determined that Entergy-Vermont Yankee (ENVY) appropriately evaluated the contaminated ground water with respect to off-site effluent release limits and the resulting radiological impact to public health and safety; and that ENVY complied with all applicable regulatory requirements and standards pertaining to radiological effluent monitoring, dose assessment, and radiological evaluation. No violations of NRC requirements or findings of significance were identified."

In early November 2010, a water leak caused by a faulty weld caused a "conservative" four-day shutdown while the pipe involved was repaired. A company spokesman said that "if plant managers had known on Sunday night what they knew on Monday, they might have tried to fix the leak while the plant kept running."

In 2010, Vermont Electric Power Company constructed a new substation, designated as the Vernon Substation, on the Vermont Yankee site to serve as the site's new main transmission facility and to connect a new 345 kV transmission line to Central Vermont as part of its Southern Loop project. The aging Entergy-owned Vermont Yankee substation could not handle the additional line or any additional transformers and VELCO desired to have a utility owned and controlled substation for what is probably the state's most important interconnection point. Additionally, the local 115 kV system was relying exclusively on Entergy's single 345 kV to 115 kV transformer. The construction of the Vernon substation included a second 345 kV to 115 kV transformer to supplement the existing Entergy owned transformer. The additional transformer also provided redundancy for Vermont Yankee's source of offsite power. The four transmission lines that formerly connected directly to the Vermont Yankee substation now connect to the Vernon substation, and three tie-lines, one at 115 kV and two at 345 kV, connect the Vermont Yankee substation to the Vernon substation. Each 345 kV tie line is capable of carrying the full power output of the plant.

2011
During the week of January 17, 2011, tritium was detected at a level of 9,200 picocuries per liter (below the federally required reporting level) in an area 150–200 feet north of the location where it was detected a year earlier. According to the State's radiological health chief at the Vermont Health Department, Bill Irwin, and Vermont Yankee spokesman, Larry Smith, the source of the leak was not yet known. Irwin and Governor Peter Shumlin expressed concern about the discovery.

2012
On January 19, 2012, Judge J. Garvan Murtha of United States District Court in Brattleboro ruled that the state of Vermont could not force Vermont Yankee to close down, as the legislation that attempted to do so was based on radiological safety arguments that are the exclusive concern of the NRC. The judge also held that the state cannot force the plant's owner, Entergy, to sell electricity from the reactor to in-state utilities at reduced rates as a condition of continued operation.

2013
On June 7, 2013, Vermont's Public Service Board issued Entergy a Certificate of Public Good to install an outdoor diesel generator to replace a tie line from the nearby hydroelectric station as its station blackout power source. The outdoor generator would only operate if the plant's main emergency diesel generators located inside the turbine building were to fail. The outdoor generator is a self-contained unit that does not require cooling water from the plant's cooling water systems. The new generator would power instrumentation in the control room and would be capable of providing emergency AC power to one train of each of the plant's emergency cooling systems. On August 27, 2013, Entergy announced in a press release that it would close Vermont Yankee by the end of 2014. Among the reasons cited for the closure were ongoing low energy prices resulting from increased shale gas production, and the high operating costs of the plant.

Protests and politics
In 1971, Esther Poneck led the New England Coalition on Nuclear Pollution in opposing construction of Vermont Yankee. In the 1970s and 1980s there were many anti-nuclear protests at Vermont Yankee which attempted to block access to the plant. More recent protests include:
 * January 2006: 100 anti-nuclear supporters demonstrated at the front door of Entergy Nuclear, and eleven people were arrested for trespassing.
 * April 2009: About 150 activists marched from Montpelier's City Hall to the State House to urge lawmakers to back development of clean energy sources such as wind power and solar power; the marchers had gathered 12,000 signatures in support of closing Vermont Yankee.
 * January 2010: A coalition of anti-nuclear activists participated in a 126-mile walk from Brattleboro to Montpelier in an effort to block the re-licensing of Vermont Yankee. About 175 people took part in the March, some joining for the day and some for longer stretches.

In February 2010, the Vermont Senate voted 26 to 4 against allowing the PSB to consider re-certifying the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Plant after 2012, citing radioactive tritium leaks, misstatements in testimony by plant officials, a cooling tower collapse in 2007, and other problems. Some businesses in Vermont were concerned there was an absence of a clear plan to replace the electricity generated by the plant. A spokesman for IBM, the largest private employer in the state, and the state's largest consumer of electricity, said "we have to be smarter than this". Larry Reilly, president of Central Vermont Public Service Corp., Vermont's largest utility, stated in 2011 that he was untroubled by the prospect of closure: "There's plenty of power out there"." Analysis by researchers at the University of Vermont estimated that an increase of "slightly more than 3 percent" in the retail price of electricity in Vermont would result from closing Vermont Yankee.

Ex-Governor Peter Shumlin was a prominent opponent of the Vermont Yankee. Two days after Shumlin was elected governor in November 2010, Entergy sought offers to purchase the plant. The company withdrew the plant from consideration for sale in late March 2011.

In March 2011, 600 people gathered for a weekend protest outside the Vermont Yankee plant, in the wake of the Fukushima I nuclear accidents. On March 22, 2011, the day after the NRC issued Vermont Yankee's license extension, Vermont's congressional delegation, Senator Patrick Leahy (D), Senator Bernie Sanders (I), and Representative Peter Welch (D), issued a joint statement decrying the NRC's action and noting the similarity of Vermont Yankee to units then in partial meltdown at the Fukushima Daiichi power station, Japan.

In March 2012, more than 130 protesters were arrested at the corporate headquarters of the Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant, on the first day of the plant's operation after the expiration of its original 40-year license.

In March 2013, more than 500 people, carrying banners and chanting "shut it down", marched through downtown Brattleboro in protest against Vermont Yankee.

Seismic risk
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission's estimate of the risk each year of an earthquake intense enough to cause core damage to the reactor at Vermont Yankee was 8.1 per year, or a chance of one incident occurring on average every 123,000 years, according to an NRC study published in August 2010, based upon a 2008 USGS survey.

Surrounding population
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission defines two emergency planning zones around nuclear power plants: a plume exposure pathway zone with a radius of 10 mi, concerned primarily with exposure to, and inhalation of, airborne radioactive contamination, and an ingestion pathway zone of about 50 mi, concerned primarily with ingestion of food and liquid contaminated by radioactivity.

The 2010 U.S. population within 10 mi of Vermont Yankee was 35,284, an increase of 1.4 percent in a decade, according to an analysis of U.S. Census data. The 2010 U.S. population within 50 mi was 1,533,472, an increase of 2.9 percent since 2000. Cities within 50 miles include Brattleboro (6 miles to city center); Keene, N.H., (16 miles to city center); Fitchburg, Mass., (38 miles to city center), Greenfield, Mass., and Northampton, Mass.

From April 2016, due to the continuing decommissioning process, the emergency planning zone was reduced to the site boundaries.

title: Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Plant


text:
MTP

MTP may refer to:

Economy, politics and society

 * Mouvement pour la Tolérance et le Progrès (Movement for Tolerance and Progress), a political party in Burkina Faso
 * Międzynarodowe Targi Poznańskie (Poznań International Fair), a trade fair in Poland
 * Marseille Trop Puissant, an Olympique de Marseille supporters group
 * Meet the Press, an American television program
 * Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade
 * Mid Term Plan(ning), a firm's business plan for the next 2 or 3 years, usually based on quantitative risk management
 * Movimiento Todos por la Patria, an Argentine guerrilla movement active from 1974 to 1976
 * Motion to Proceed, a procedural tool sometimes used in the United States Senate during the development of legislation
 * Sơn Tùng M-TP, a Vietnamese singer

Geography

 * Mount Pleasant (Amtrak station), Iowa, United States, Amtrak station code
 * Mount Pleasant, South Carolina, United States
 * Montpellier, France

Science and medicine

 * Massive transfusion protocol, a form of blood transfusion
 * Medial tibial plateau, at the upper end of the tibia
 * Medical termination of pregnancy, the termination of a pregnancy by the removal or expulsion of an embryo or fetus from the uterus
 * Metatarsophalangeal joint, the joint between the foot and the toe
 * Methadone treatment program, a form of treatment for heroin addiction
 * Microsomal triglyceride transfer protein, a liver protein linked to LDL release
 * Mitochondrial permeability transition pore
 * Mitochondrial trifunctional protein, a protein which catalyzes several reactions in beta oxidation
 * Microtiter plates or Microtitre plates, as defined by the SBS standard, used in biopharmaceutical applications
 * Mussel toxic peptide, a marine biotoxin

Technology

 * Meteosat Transition Program, the EUMETSAT programme responsible for the Meteosat system of geostationary meteorological satellites
 * Missile Test Project, a US Air Force program for tracking missiles on the Eastern Test Range
 * Mail Transfer Protocol, an obsolete network protocol that has been replaced by SMTP
 * Media Transfer Protocol, a Microsoft protocol for transferring images, music, etc. between a computer and a portable device
 * Message Transfer Part, part of Signaling System 7 (SS7) used for communication in the public switched telephone network (PSTN)
 * Micro Transport Protocol (μTP), a UDP-based reliable and ordered BitTorrent peer-to-peer file sharing protocol designed to mitigate poor latency and other congestion control issues vs. TCP-based BitTorrent
 * "Multi-fiber Termination Push-on", a type of fiber cable terminator optical fiber connector
 * Multipurpose Transaction Protocol, a proprietary data transport protocol produced by Data Expedition, Inc.
 * Multi-Terrain Pattern, military camouflage developed for the British military
 * Methanol To Propylene, which is a technology for production of Propylene using Methanol as feedstock.
 * Move To Production, installation of a new or modified program for general use
 * Multi-time programmable, a type of non-volatile memory (NVM), as opposed to one-time programmable (OTP) and few-time programmable (FTP)

Gaming

 * Miles "Tails" Prower, a character in the Sonic the Hedgehog series
 * Magic Tea Party, a derogatory term which tabletop RPG power gamers apply to freeform roleplaying.

title: MTP